Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Personnel may have changed, but the regime didn’t. Trump may not have explicitly stated “regime change” as a goal, but taking out multiple layers of Iranian leadership begs otherwise. Again, his lack of concrete goals offers the ability to claim any result a “success”.
But like any endeavor, you can learn more in losing than winning. Hopefully Trump learns some lessons from this campaign. Probably not.
Trump claiming regime change...
Honest question, do you think this outcome justified the loss of 13 service members lives?
It’s really only a yes or no question.
And if this all unfolded under the Biden Administration, would you be happy with the outcome?
Expect his answer to be...
"Your ability to comprehend is beyond my ability to explain."
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Lie/Deny/Deflect.
I wonder where he got those tactics from?
Says the guy that only knows what he reads in The Mercury News. 🤣
The stupidity stated here-in is mind numbing.
But, I digress.
"I've heard a lot of criticism and praise. Too much ambiguity to believe one or the other at this point."
Your last point stands.
The absolute major objective was to keep Iran from developing a nuke and how that will be accomplished is not yet decided. As far as destroying their military assets, those are relatively easy to replace and certainly will be.
“But, I deflect.” 😂
Trump campaigned on not going to war because all the costs associated with it.
it’s embarrassing how it gets defended and lapped up by his supporters. And be already broke the MOU by threatening further bombings.
I think all lives of good people lost are a tragedy. Some people are bad people and I am in favor of the death penalty (for disclosure). But in the context of 13 service members lost, how do we gauge that against future lives not lost because this happened. I hear people claim "the mullahs said it's against their religion to have a nuclear weapon". Well if that were true, Iran would not have been enriching nuclear material. So we know that's not true. Would the JCPOA have expired? Why did it have a sunset clause if Iran truly did not want a nuclear weapon? And do I believe they would have used it? I believe it's highly more likely they would have used it before Putin used one. So how the final agreement reads will be the true arbiter of your question. Were those service members lives worth the way we left Afghanistan and left all that military equipment which is likely to have already killed our people since then and in the future? So if you were to put Iran on a dumb scale, it is nowhere near the bottom, even for you. But in the context of history, if Iran is kept from a nuclear weapon, I believe the historians will conclude the answer to be yes. If the final agreement has ambiguity and loop holes, then historians will conclude not. Keep in mind, the leaders of just about every civilized nation agreed Iran should never have a nuclear weapon but nobody could do anything about it. No matter what, any road to stop them would have a lot of things to criticize.
TM
Do you think the chances of Iran using a nuclear weapon against the United States has decreased materially in the last 6 months? I don't think an Iranian nuclear strike against the US was likely to begin with.
But we probably have created another generation of young Iranians to be angry at the United States.
Nukes are a defensive weapon, especially in the hands of a nation with a limited nuclear arsenal. A nuclear-armed Iran dissuades countries like the US and Israel from launching attacks.
The power of the nuke is the threat, not its actual use. The goal is security, and proactively launching a weapon negates that security. Only time atomic weapons were used in warfare is when the US had monopoly power. Ever since it’s been a tense but chain reaction-free existence.
I think you like to state your opinions in the form of a question to get it out there.
TM
I disagree, they lost and the lost BIG TIME!
I'm asking you a specific question based on your post. You think it's possibly worth losing 13 military personnel to save future lives. I'm trying to get an idea if you think future lives have actually been saved.
What did they lose?
Pit Row
Sure
Not sure how one replies to such a clever retort. The halls of academia must feel empty without the presence of such a notable intellect. Alas, yet another great scholar lost to the perils of Non-Moto
No, no you're not. You're posing a "question" that you believe you can sit in judgement of an answer. And quite frankly you're not worthy of that.
TM
K
I was looking at the agreement and I know its not the official final wording. But the wording makes me wonder how open-ended that number is. The way it's worded sounds like the $300B is a minimum number and that it could be higher. At least it doesn't say that the US is solely responsible for that $300B. But the way it's worded makes me wonder if they are leaving room to ask for more later on ? or why it's worded that way if there wasn't some possibility of that number being higher?
"The United States of America undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least USD 300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran. "
With Trump making a threat that breaks the agreement. I've wondered if he has been involved in this deal much at all. The way he talks about it sometimes makes it sound like he's not really involved. He's always talking about construction projects and seems like he's doing more of a VP role than the President role. Is he purposely distancing himself because it's not a great deal? Or have the people around him started to involve him less for some reason ?
Okay, I LOL’d at that! Not gonna deny: it was good. And I’m serious! Replying with even fewer letters was genius. Well played, sir. Well played.
If trump can get Ukraine the same deal Iran got I would gain a lot of respect for him.
It seems like trump isn’t the deal master he told the world he was. He is about 514 days overdue on having the Ukrainian war done on day one.
But the ones who aren’t under his thumb knew he wouldn’t.
Ukrainian Sanctions are proving highly effective though.
To me it seemed like Obama was able to reach basically the same deal without the loss of 13 service members lives, billions in wasted and destroyed equipment, without damaging the worlds economy and without pissing the Iranians off even more.
Why couldn’t Trump do the same instead of going in guns blazing and no plan? Incompetence or arrogance?
Israel has tapes of him raping kids. Duh.
Post a reply to: Trump says "Iran agreed to everything"