Trump Bucked Advisers on Proposed Iran Attack (WSJ)

[corbe]

Trump Bucked Advisers on Proposed Iran Attack

Michael C. Bender, Gordon Lubold
 
1 hr ago
 
WASHINGTON—President Trump bucked most of his top national-security advisers by abandoning retaliatory strikes in Iran on Thursday. In private conversations Friday, Mr. Trump reveled in his judgment, certain about his decision to call off the attacks while speaking of his administration as if removed from the center of it.
 
“These people want to push us into a war, and it’s so disgusting,” Mr. Trump told one confidant about his own inner circle of advisers. “We don’t need any more wars.”

In these conversations, Mr. Trump bemoaned the costs of a drone shot down by Iran—about $130 million before research and development—but told people the dollar figure would resonate less with U.S. voters than the potential casualties. The president has said estimates provided to him showed as many as 150 people could have been killed. He noted to confidants that each one of those Iranians had families, which would mean that hundreds more would be affected.

“I don’t want to kill 150 Iranians,” he told reporters on Saturday, adding that he has Iranian friends back home in New York. “I don’t want to kill 150 of anything or anybody, unless it’s absolutely necessary.”

<..snip..>

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/trump-bucked-advisers-on-proposed-iran-attack/ar-AADijlk?ocid=ientp

[catfish1957]

I am trying to think back how long ago that a POTUS did not strike back after a foreign power destroyed one of our military targets.

Carter maybe?

Trump the Feckless.......

[Bill Cipher]

Trump made the right decision. 

This is precisely why unmanned drones are so valuable:  they are eminently replaceable in the way that a human being is not.  We can tolerate much greater damage to them than we could have to a manned aircraft. 

[catfish1957]

Trump made the right decision. 

This is precisely why unmanned drones are so valuable:  they are eminently replaceable in the way that a human being is not.  We can tolerate much greater damage to them than we could have to a manned aircraft.

So you are okay on potential foreign enemeies having open season on our drones?

[Bill Cipher]

So you are okay on potential foreign enemeies having open season on our drones?

Stop playing with idiotic straw man arguments.

If this wasn’t one of the points of using unmanned aircraft, then why are we wasting time flying them?

[catfish1957]

Stop playing with idiotic straw man arguments.

If this wasn’t one of the points of using unmanned aircraft, then why are we wasting time flying them?

You still didn't answer my f'n question.   Pretty typical of you.

[Bill Cipher]

You still didn't answer my f'n question.   Pretty typical of you.

You didn’t ask a question that deserved an answer.  You leveled a false accusation disguised as a question. 

Why don’t you try, just once, to have a discussion with people with whom you disagree rather than flinging false accusations in a passive-aggressive manner?

[catfish1957]

You didn’t ask a question that deserved an answer.  You leveled a false accusation disguised as a question. 

Why don’t you try, just once, to have a discussion with people with whom you disagree rather than flinging false accusations in a passive-aggressive manner?

Baloney.....

Fact 1- Iran downed a military target
Fact 2- DJT did not respond.
Fact 3- You downplayed it, since it was unmanned
Fact 4- Given Facts 1 & 2 how does Iran not have any incentive not to repeat Fact 1, or escalate to manned military targets.

That's not a strawman, that's a real life geopolitical scenario right now.  And it sounds like to me, you are okay with treating our unmanned aircraft as analgous  clay pigeons.

I might be wrong, but it has been at least near 50 years since a POTUS hasn't responed to an adverseral attack on a miltrary target.  So how does not providing a measured response not promote more bad behavior?

[conservativevoter]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz.............

[Cyber Liberty]

When I make a decision, and things change before I carry it out, I often change my mind.  What do you do?  Bulldoze forward as if nothing changed?

[corbe]

   His problem was rambling through or tweeting his discombobulated thought process.  IOW it appears he stepped on his d*ck, again, IMHO.

[jpsb]

I am trying to think back how long ago that a POTUS did not strike back after a foreign power destroyed one of our military targets.

Carter maybe?

Trump the Feckless.......

Beruit booming over 200 Marines killed, US Cole, US Liberty, Benghazi, Navy Patrol air craft taken out by China, U2 shot down by Russia, I could go on.

[Bill Cipher]

Baloney.....

Fact 1- Iran downed a military target
Fact 2- DJT did not respond.
Fact 3- You downplayed it, since it was unmanned
Fact 4- Given Facts 1 & 2 how does Iran not have any incentive not to repeat Fact 1, or escalate to manned military targets.

That's not a strawman, that's a real life geopolitical scenario right now.  And it sounds like to me, you are okay with treating our unmanned aircraft as analgous  clay pigeons.

I might be wrong, but it has been at least near 50 years since a POTUS hasn't responed to an adverseral attack on a miltrary target.  So how does not providing a measured response not promote more bad behavior?

Maybe so, but you didn’t ask me a question, you leveled a false accusation against me.  Why don’t you go back and try asking a question of me instead of making false accusations?

[TomSea]

Boo-Hoo, so Trump isn't destabilizing a region like Boy Jorge or Bath-house Barry where thousands get killed.  For shame.

It's about time, we had some responsible foreign policy, is a downed drone worth one drop of American blood?

What warmongering but if one can get at Trump, why not?

Supposedly, Iran could have downed some plane too. And those marines in Beirut and I think security measures the UN or someone had in place were a failure, picture that happening today.

[berdie]

   His problem was rambling through or tweeting his discombobulated thought process.  IOW it appears he stepped on his d*ck, again, IMHO.

Agreed!

[jpsb]

I might be wrong, but it has been at least near 50 years since a POTUS hasn't responed to an adverseral attack on a miltrary target.  So how does not providing a measured response not promote more bad behavior?

I gave you a half dozen examples, but you just ignored them.

War with Iran would not be pretty. It would be long and hard and likely cost Trump the presidency. Then some Marxist rat would be CiC
and most likely we would lose (AGAIN). All in all not a very smart play. And then there is China, with the USA tried down in Iran, China
would be free to do whatever it wanted. Thank goodness you are not CiC.

[catfish1957]

I gave you a half dozen examples, but you just ignored them.

War with Iran would not be pretty. It would be long and hard and likely cost Trump the presidency. Then some Marxist rat would be CiC
and most likely we would lose (AGAIN). All in all not a very smart play. And then there is China, with the USA tried down in Iran, China
would be free to do whatever it wanted. Thank goodness you are not CiC.

WTF?????  Being off line for 12 hours is not ignoring you.  I do have a life too outside this keyboard.

I am not saying waging all out war.  I am leaning toward measured response that Iran knows that we will not accept attacks.  Plus as far as war.....   We are almost energy independent, so we really don't even need ME oil.  Its time for the EU/ NATO to step up and pull their weight.  They have much more to lose with an unstable Persian Gulf.