Trump on the march.

[Blaze]

The speech that was given such a build up doesn't seem to say anything new : the US would hit Iran extremely hard in the next 2 or 3 weeks.
If Trump really wanted to hit Iran hard, why hasn't he gone for Karg Island ? During the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Iraq inflicted considerable damage on it. As 90% of Iran's exports depend on their export of oil, hitting the refineries and ports on the island gave Iraq huge leverage. The war ended without the Iranians closing the Straits of Hormuz.

It must be remembered the Trump has huge investments in the Middle East. When the price of oil drops because of something he says the US will do or not do, you can bet he buys more shares. So when he says he will hit Iran hard, oil prices go up and he rubs his hands with glee. He doesn't give a toss that the rest of the world, particularly Asian countries, are dependent on Middle Eastern oil. Everyone is feeling the effects of his recklessness.

Making war is nothing more than a Machiavellian act for Trump. The world is a board game with deals to be made and he plays the host. Thank goodness Europe seems to be showing some backbone in refusing to be sucked into the illegal mess he has caused. If the US does pull out and leaves everyone else to sort out Hormuz, Iran's civilians will have suffered huge losses, and the US, virtually nothing. Many Americans are against this war, considering it totally unnecessary. It remains to be seen whether Trump will actually send troops into Iran itself. If he does, and troops are killed, he will probably lose support at home ...

As for Trump's boasting about having changed the regime in Iran, apart from the son of the former leader (who has not actually been seen since being placed in charge), what has changed in how the country is run ? Iranians are still repressed, no free press, the repression of women's rights as human beings .... the US attacks are making people think that a repressive regime is preferable than living a life under the threat of bombs.

[exile]

The speech that was given such a build up doesn't seem to say anything new : the US would hit Iran extremely hard in the next 2 or 3 weeks.
If Trump really wanted to hit Iran hard, why hasn't he gone for Karg Island ? During the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Iraq inflicted considerable damage on it. As 90% of Iran's exports depend on their export of oil, hitting the refineries and ports on the island gave Iraq huge leverage. The war ended without the Iranians closing the Straits of Hormuz.

Despite giving the impression that he is a complete numbskull, I suspect that Trump does realise that taking Kharg would have major consequences or at least been strongly advised.

Whether such an invasion resulted in damage to the terminal or Iran just stopped pumping oil, the impact on a number of Far East countries would be immense. There are very limited supplies getting out of Kharg and I suspect China will be getting the lions share. While Trump may have great antagonism against China, he would not want them to accuse the US of cutting off vital supplies and use this as an excuse to attack Taiwan. So giving the US 2 wars or arguably 3 depending which side you think they are on regarding Ukraine.

A further issue is would you want to station troops in the midst of millions of tons of highly flammable oil just waiting for a successful incoming drone or missile? And of course always supposing the Iranians haven't set explosives to destroy everything should an invasion occur.


As for the rest, I am sure he and his chums are making a mint as you suggest.

[Blaze]

@exile Yes, taking Kharg would be no easy matter and could have devastating consequences. Despite Trump's "I'm gonna do this and I'm gonna do that", it's likely that his armed forces advisors are strongly advising against it.
I agree, if Trump sent troops into Kharg, they'd be lucky to get out alive and the backlash in the US would not do him any favours.

Trump's rhetoric on social media is just to puff himself up. It's possible that his threats and deadlines are not being carried out because some of his advisors have learnt how to deal/cope with him.

[Bayleaf]

tRump (or the Tangerine Turd as I'm calling him this week) has a Spiritual Advisor. Of course he has. She has stated, in public, on stage, for the world to see, that she regards tRump as a modern day Jesus. WTAF? Of course, the comments on that are gold, but the best one being "let's nail him to a Cross then".

[Hotrodder]

If the story of Trump and his followers was written up as a film production it would be considered too ridiculous to be credible. Pardoning criminals as a whim, surrounding himself with "yes" men, banning journalists that don't show him im a favourable light, insulting long-time allies of America, blocking the complete unredacted Epstein files, making fortunes in insider trading, displaying the mood swings of a psychopath, and sucking up to Putin, I am surprised and disappointed none of his armed to the teeth US patriots haven't yet taken him out. It's not like there aren't any highly skilled hit men out there keen for the cash.

[curtis]

Oh dear, a US fighter shot down it seems.

[MAD87]

One pilot safe, the other missing with Iran offering a reward for his capture.
Meanwhile, the French have slipped a cargo ship through the Straits and the Japanese a gas tanker.

[Hotrodder]

Despite Trump's "I'm gonna do this and I'm gonna do that", it's likely that his armed forces advisors are strongly advising against it.

I have read that Trump has been getting rid of quite a few high ranking generals, etc. that have been openly critical of him. Supposedly telling them it is time for them to retire. Any opposition to his whims seems to be met with this tactic. ie. department heads, judges, journalists, etc.

[Blaze]

Hegseth's comment on the placing of General Randy George by General Christopher LaNeve says it all :

LaNeve is "a battle-tested leader with decades of operational experience and is completely trusted by Secretary Hegseth to carry out the vision of this administration without fault."

So the US military has become politicised - unbelievable, though is it surprising with the current circus there ? It's not usually the job of politicians to put people in military positions. So now, instead of having military advisors who are experienced in the field, the US will have a load of Yes Men.
I imagine the fired military personnel had dared to advise against war with Iran.

Stalin did pretty much the same thing in Russia, except that he had all the top military personnel killed off after removal.

[curtis]

Another aircraft downed and helicopter (s) hit.

Not bad for stoneage defence.