And now influential Shia leader Al Sadr has declared this crisis to be over, and sent his militia fighters home that just days ago he had reactivated and called onto the streets.

My Dad was to be part of the invasion force if the bomb didn't work. :yep: Stalin wasn't a part of that discussion.

But no Americans were injured and no American assets were damaged. Leveling their oil fields or cities would be a tad over reactive don't ya think?
Apparently he has instituted more economic sanctions. What else or instead should he have done in response?

A question about your local politicians acting in this crisis.

Here mostly those politicians who belong to the left is suddenly expert on middle east and American politics.

They are critic against Trump(as always) and his politics or lack of politics against Iran/Middle east.

So how is your politicians acting..?

Markus

True, but the next logical retaliation would have been to hit military targets inside Iran which would mean an actual war. No one wants war, not Trump or ayatollah Khamenei.

I actually think of this as a win for Trump. Now the Iranians know that if they push too much, Trump will hit back hard.

There used to be a saying here that "politics end at the waters edge" meaning that we may squabble among ourselves over domestic issues but present a united front when it comes to foreign policy. That is pretty much dead now.

Well kinda but the Soviets already knew the potential power of an atomic bomb and their spies had kept them informed as to our progress in making them so our use of a nuke against Japan might have had a proof in the pudding benefit to it but I think the edge that the writer you quoted was really talking about was just our possession of them.

Biggest threat I see to the USA right now is the Dems.

It's looking more and more like the Iranians accidentally shot down that Ukrainian airliner.




https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...-plane-in-iran

I think it was Aliens!

There are no solid facts! Do you really want to contaminate a perfectly good
good thread of non facts with even more speculation of non facts?
OOPS! Forgot that is what is done here!
:haha:

Yes. Things are a bit cray cray what with all the Impeachment stuff and now the 'We killed your Boy in the Hood' thing.
More people are whacked in Detroit over turf then over there when you do the averages.
Why make it a bigger deal then it is?
Cause it sells.
Yeah. You all buy it and think it's a big deal. Once you think about it with an honest look?
It's business as usual. Not a damned thing has changed since WWII.

I've seen that argument and it supposes that the US leadership was omnipotent in terms of Russia while it was fighting a war in the Pacific.
If I had to guess, 99.999% of the US strategy was aimed at Japan and not at Russia. :)

The US had experience with Russia in terms of Lend/Lease so I think they had a good idea of who they were dealing with. The US didn't "want" Russia involved with the Japanese invasion in their over-all strategy. The US also understood why Germany failed to invade Russia (massive land mass where casualties weren't that important to the Russians) and that the Russian presence in the western Pacific was marginal, to say the least.

Also consider what happened to the USAAF/USAF between 1945 and 1950. If the US was concentrating on Russia that much, why did they "build down" the force?

I'd sleep better at night if I didn't know someone actually believes that!
:har:

Here's the challenge now.
Try to post without ignorance of facts.

I'd say we get 3 responses with actual proven facts before it breaks down.
Tick Tok people! I ain't stay up all night to see nonsense.