Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. The Iran War (was Nuclear Program) thread

The Iran War (was Nuclear Program) thread

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
1.3k Posts 20 Posters 135.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • MikM Offline
    MikM Offline
    Mik
    wrote on last edited by
    #1209

    Now then there is no more morning dew

    "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

    1 Reply Last reply
    • RenaudaR Offline
      RenaudaR Offline
      Renauda
      wrote on last edited by
      #1210

      I guess it doesn't matter anyway

      Elbows up!

      1 Reply Last reply
      • RenaudaR Offline
        RenaudaR Offline
        Renauda
        wrote on last edited by
        #1211

        The money quote:

        “One of the limits of madman theory is that you always have to be the craziest man,” Miller told Stein. “And right now, he's in a game of chicken with ... the craziest sons of b—— in the world. And so it's like, 'okay. So now... now what?' And you can see what happens, which is he says, ‘Oh, I'm gonna end their civilization,’ or, ‘Oh, I'm not gonna extend the ceasefire,’ or, ‘We're gonna go back at their power plants.’ And then when push comes to shove, it's like he doesn't want to do it.”

        While the “madman theory” was popularized by another controversial Republican president, Richard Nixon, Trump’s predecessor used this approach only sporadically, only after deliberately plotting his implementation — and could point to achievements like ending the Vietnam War, preventing nuclear war in the Middle East and opening up relations with China. By contrast, as Stein and Miller noted, Trump seems to act impulsively.

        The difference being that Nixon understood foreign policy, diplomacy and with whom he was dealing. Trump has no clue of any of any of the three.

        https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/trump-trapped-as-his-game-of-chicken-backfires-report/ar-AA21xWij?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=NMTS&cvid=69e9757800c94432a4d2c5d38d00edc6&cvpid=b7fdb46c1386461faa29e6f40bf55ac2&ei=22

        Elbows up!

        1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #1212

          So Donald Trump is threatening NATO allies for not helping enough in a war they weren’t even consulted on, while Russia helps Iran target U.S. forces and gets waivers on oil sanctions.

          Make that make sense

          https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/22/trump-nato-allies-consequences-list-00883619

          Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • taiwan_girlT Offline
            taiwan_girlT Offline
            taiwan_girl
            wrote last edited by
            #1213

            Iran refuses to come to more talks in Pakistan. President Trump cancels US personnel (Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner).

            Was a bit surprised that VP Vance was not scheduled to go this time. Should I read more into that than I should?

            1 Reply Last reply
            • bachophileB Offline
              bachophileB Offline
              bachophile
              wrote last edited by
              #1214

              Vance wasnt on the agenda because Ghalibaf wasnt going. Steve and Jared are at the Aragchi level.

              taiwan_girlT RenaudaR 2 Replies Last reply
              • bachophileB bachophile

                Vance wasnt on the agenda because Ghalibaf wasnt going. Steve and Jared are at the Aragchi level.

                taiwan_girlT Offline
                taiwan_girlT Offline
                taiwan_girl
                wrote last edited by
                #1215

                @bachophile Ah okay. Thanks!!!

                1 Reply Last reply
                • bachophileB bachophile

                  Vance wasnt on the agenda because Ghalibaf wasnt going. Steve and Jared are at the Aragchi level.

                  RenaudaR Offline
                  RenaudaR Offline
                  Renauda
                  wrote last edited by Renauda
                  #1216

                  @bachophile said:

                  Steve and Jared are at the Aragchi level.

                  More like Rubio is on the Aragchi level. Putin has demonstrated that at most, Witkoff is on the Dmitriev level- that of a favoured nobody. Witkoff has yet to meet Lavrov outside of being seated at the table during the fleeting Alaska Love-in.

                  Elbows up!

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote last edited by
                    #1217

                    Interesting.

                    "A Chinese businessman puts Trump’s blunders in perspective. 'Trump’s attack on Iran is less consequential than his threat to attack Greenland. When he did that, to America’s oldest allies, I knew Europe would not follow America’s approach to China.'”

                    Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • Tom-KT Offline
                      Tom-KT Offline
                      Tom-K
                      wrote last edited by
                      #1218

                      Here's an interesting analysis by Ryan McBeth explaining why America may just be doing the right thing in taking out Iran's nuclear capability. The real reason is more religious than political.

                      Link to video

                      Ego similis habere bonum et non curat nunquam accipere malum.

                      RenaudaR 1 Reply Last reply
                      • taiwan_girlT Offline
                        taiwan_girlT Offline
                        taiwan_girl
                        wrote last edited by
                        #1219

                        Interesting to see what happens. Will the republicans do something or just do nothing?

                        The Trump administration is on course to blow past an initial deadline for congressional approval for the Iran war on the grounds that the ongoing cease-fire stopped the clock on a 60-day deadline—an assertion met with outrage from Democrats and skepticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill.

                        Under a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution, the president is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and withdraw U.S. troops 60 days later, unless lawmakers declare war or authorize the use of force. The expectation on Capitol Hill was that the 60-day deadline expires on Friday.

                        In testimony Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the current cease-fire with Iran, which began April 8, stopped the countdown.

                        https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-iran-congress-approval-deadline-ff546611

                        jon-nycJ AxtremusA 2 Replies Last reply
                        • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                          Interesting to see what happens. Will the republicans do something or just do nothing?

                          The Trump administration is on course to blow past an initial deadline for congressional approval for the Iran war on the grounds that the ongoing cease-fire stopped the clock on a 60-day deadline—an assertion met with outrage from Democrats and skepticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill.

                          Under a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution, the president is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and withdraw U.S. troops 60 days later, unless lawmakers declare war or authorize the use of force. The expectation on Capitol Hill was that the 60-day deadline expires on Friday.

                          In testimony Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the current cease-fire with Iran, which began April 8, stopped the countdown.

                          https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-iran-congress-approval-deadline-ff546611

                          jon-nycJ Online
                          jon-nycJ Online
                          jon-nyc
                          wrote last edited by
                          #1220

                          @taiwan_girl said:

                          Interesting to see what happens. Will the republicans do something or just do nothing?

                          To ask the question is to answer it.

                          Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • Tom-KT Tom-K

                            Here's an interesting analysis by Ryan McBeth explaining why America may just be doing the right thing in taking out Iran's nuclear capability. The real reason is more religious than political.

                            Link to video

                            RenaudaR Offline
                            RenaudaR Offline
                            Renauda
                            wrote last edited by Renauda
                            #1221

                            @Tom-K

                            Interesting analysis. Another compelling argument pointing out the futility of attempting to negotiate with religious fanatics.

                            Elbows up!

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                              Interesting to see what happens. Will the republicans do something or just do nothing?

                              The Trump administration is on course to blow past an initial deadline for congressional approval for the Iran war on the grounds that the ongoing cease-fire stopped the clock on a 60-day deadline—an assertion met with outrage from Democrats and skepticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill.

                              Under a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution, the president is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and withdraw U.S. troops 60 days later, unless lawmakers declare war or authorize the use of force. The expectation on Capitol Hill was that the 60-day deadline expires on Friday.

                              In testimony Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the current cease-fire with Iran, which began April 8, stopped the countdown.

                              https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-iran-congress-approval-deadline-ff546611

                              AxtremusA Offline
                              AxtremusA Offline
                              Axtremus
                              wrote last edited by
                              #1222

                              @taiwan_girl said:

                              Interesting to see what happens. Will the republicans do something or just do nothing?

                              https://apnews.com/article/iran-congress-war-powers-republicans-trump-authorization-41ef029df176a6486422e9d68aa6d872

                              Republicans say they will defer to Trump on Iran war despite arrival of 60-day deadline

                              ... Congress made no attempt at enforcing that requirement, leaving town for a week on Thursday ...

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • MikM Offline
                                MikM Offline
                                Mik
                                wrote last edited by
                                #1223

                                As I said, this should have been done while W was in office. I supported it then and i support it now.

                                "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • RenaudaR Offline
                                  RenaudaR Offline
                                  Renauda
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #1224

                                  In principle, I support the stated objective to put an end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and reduce its overall military threat to the region. What I don’t support is how it is being presented and executed.

                                  Elbows up!

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ Online
                                    jon-nycJ Online
                                    jon-nyc
                                    wrote last edited by jon-nyc
                                    #1225

                                    I think there’s much more of a case for regime change in Iran than there was for Iraq in 2003. And it comes down to its jihadist nature and ambitions. I don’t think we (the civilized world) can coexist long term with that regime.

                                    So yeah, regime change must be the goal.

                                    My fear is that Trump will leave them intact but wounded and very pissed off and all the more determined, in the fullness of time, to take over the world for Shia Islam in which case it would have been better to not have attempted it at all.

                                    I was cautiously hopeful on March 1st. Now I’m more pessimistic.

                                    Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                                    RenaudaR 1 Reply Last reply
                                    • jon-nycJ Online
                                      jon-nycJ Online
                                      jon-nyc
                                      wrote last edited by jon-nyc
                                      #1226

                                      That’s not to say I think they’d ever be successful in taking over the world, but their strategy of creating armed proxies in many neighboring states can be globalized, and there’s evidence they are trying or have tried to do it in Europe and Latin America.

                                      Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                        I think there’s much more of a case for regime change in Iran than there was for Iraq in 2003. And it comes down to its jihadist nature and ambitions. I don’t think we (the civilized world) can coexist long term with that regime.

                                        So yeah, regime change must be the goal.

                                        My fear is that Trump will leave them intact but wounded and very pissed off and all the more determined, in the fullness of time, to take over the world for Shia Islam in which case it would have been better to not have attempted it at all.

                                        I was cautiously hopeful on March 1st. Now I’m more pessimistic.

                                        RenaudaR Offline
                                        RenaudaR Offline
                                        Renauda
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #1227

                                        @jon-nyc

                                        Agree. Unless there is regime change in Iran, I do not see any of the stated objectives being realized in the long term. As I have already stated back in March, the Israelis understand that regime change is fundamental to achieving any of the short term military and long term political objectives. Likewise, I would think, in the US but that realisation is subordinated to other factors related to personalities and limited competencies at the very top of its civilian chain of command.

                                        Elbows up!

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • AxtremusA Offline
                                          AxtremusA Offline
                                          Axtremus
                                          wrote last edited by Axtremus
                                          #1228

                                          In the US, the general population also does not support regime change as the ultimate goal, regardless of who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress.

                                          I suspect that is true also for most EU and NATO countries.

                                          RenaudaR 1 Reply Last reply

                                          Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                                          Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                                          With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                                          Register Login
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups