get your fucking head on straight

  • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
    hexagon
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 years ago

    Certainly, yes, if they want to do a ground war they need to secure power in all the bordering countries, and that's of course a huge reason why the US is in those countries. But if you're saying it's a matter of when, not if, then the idea that Trump would somehow stand against it strikes me as preposterous on its face.

    And I still don't agree the US would ever follow through with that threat of war. The US is extremely cowardly when it comes to war, and avoids anything but the weakest possible nations unless forced, like in WWII. Iran is not the soft target it was in the 80s, and everyone in DC is constantly furious at themselves for not following through back then when they had the chance. Iran is not going to get any weaker, because China (and Russia to a lesser extent) will keep supporting it, and the US is too weak to do anything about it. The international sanctions have failed.

    • the_river_cass [she/her]
      ·
      4 years ago

      then the idea that Trump would somehow stand against it strikes me as preposterous on its face.

      I don't think anyone is saying that he'd stand against it. they're saying that the power in the executive branch has, over the past 60 years, been incredibly focused on the president himself. a weak president who's incapable of making and holding to decisions will fail to marshal the empire into a ground war with Iran.

      that said, I think everyone in this discussion is being staked to more extreme positions than they actually hold. Trump or Biden... we're splitting hairs here and speculating on very little actual information.