(04-04-2026 10:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Seems logical. They better get with it.

We aren't really trying to solve all the world's problems. We're looking out for America First. Which means nuclear capabilities. We are helping out the Gulf states by decimating Iran's missile-firing capability, but that can eventually be built back. much easier than nukes.

At some point, the Arabs, just like the Europeans, need to learn to fend for themselves.

To be fair—the importance of Petro-dollar to the dollars position as the world’s reserve currency needs to factor into that equation. Our relationship with the ME oil producers is significant to US interests whether we need the oil or not. That said, we should not be alone there. It’s in the interests of the ME oil producers to help get this handled as quickly as possible.

(04-03-2026 07:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 02:42 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:32 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Please point out the falsehoods.

Hey Clarence, this is an opinion message board, not a court of law, and you sure as hell aren't in charge.

Sorry to corner your empty opinion with asking you to say what is false. Cool cool.

Let’s restate — your opinion is that it is a crock of ****, and when asked, can’t be bothered to state what is incorrect about it, then throw a temper tantrum about being asked why it is a crock of ****. Good look, pardner. Lolz.

It takes one of the dumbest SOB's on earth to believe Iran is "winning it"


I'll let you decide if that's you....

The terms winner and loser often may or may not have anything to do with whose cities are being bombed and everything to do with relative strategic advantage.

If we look at the scorecard for this conflict, the results might be surprising.

Im not going to call a country a winner when its air defenses are in pieces and its leadership is hiding in bunkers to avoid assassination. So the best we can say for Iran is that it's a survivor.

And, for the Islamic Republic, mere survival against the combined might of the US and Israel counts as a victory of sorts.

Further, Iran has successfully demonstrated that it can hold the global economy hostage using nothing more than asymmetric tools, cheap drones, missiles, and the
credible threat of underwater mines.

Finally, it will be this week that the toll *really* starts to elevate. LNG and oil shipments are finishing their transport leg -- that is the last tankers out of Hormuz are porting soon. At that point, the 20% deficit in oil and LNG physically takes place.

Wash rinse and repeat for helium --- fully 30% of the worlds supply of helium has now been shut down. And for you all, in addition to 'no more funny voices with party balloons' --- helium is a core and key component in semiconductor foundry operation.

So, to repeat -- anyone with half a brain would realize the vast importance of Hormuz, and would have taken prophylactic steps to minimize any potential reaction from Iran. That didnt happen. And now this.

Oh, but of course, shoot first, and make the entire Western alliance clean up the shitstorm we put into motion.

And yes, Iran by choing the fk out of that supply bottleneck certainly has not lost in a strategic sense. They very well have lost in a military sense -- F4s vs F-35s is bad matchup, and we have bombed them to bejesus. Yet -- they still have throttled the crap out of the worlds most important route. And, they are still there after a month.

Quite the fing win for us and the rest of the world. And a great deal of the world, who are similarly suffering the closure, dont just hold Iran at fault -- they jointly hold the US at fault for instigating the ****. Again -- quite the fing win for the US.

Maybe if we had *actually* put together an *iota* of effort *before* we pulled the trigger we would actually be on the better side of Spain, Italy, and France. Let alone the UK and Australia. But, we didnt. So now we are the lone ranger who triggered this thing, and now at a governmental level whining that no one is helping clean up the garbage dump that we started started.

That is just amazing to me.

What is more amazing is the amount of ignorance you can spew on any subject.

To absolutely think our Western Allies who want spend a nickel on defense would actually step up when we have bottle fed them since 1945 is beyond laughable.

I would only engage the Germans because the UK is a withering on the vine dead man walking country waiting to fall. Look how their educated class has been fleeing for years and the influx of unskilled third world muslims who dont integrate will only further erode them.

They also have no defense and their defense minister after a 15 second stuttering event said they have 17 ships. Great help if you need to defend Rhode Island.

Get a clue for once in your life and understand who actually is your ally and not a petulant child who demands you take care of it and bites your hand at the same time

(04-04-2026 09:41 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 08:53 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 07:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 02:42 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Sorry to corner your empty opinion with asking you to say what is false. Cool cool.

Let’s restate — your opinion is that it is a crock of ****, and when asked, can’t be bothered to state what is incorrect about it, then throw a temper tantrum about being asked why it is a crock of ****. Good look, pardner. Lolz.

It takes one of the dumbest SOB's on earth to believe Iran is "winning it"


I'll let you decide if that's you....

The terms winner and loser often may or may not have anything to do with whose cities are being bombed and everything to do with relative strategic advantage.

If we look at the scorecard for this conflict, the results might be surprising.

Im not going to call a country a winner when its air defenses are in pieces and its leadership is hiding in bunkers to avoid assassination. So the best we can say for Iran is that it's a survivor.

And, for the Islamic Republic, mere survival against the combined might of the US and Israel counts as a victory of sorts.

Further, Iran has successfully demonstrated that it can hold the global economy hostage using nothing more than asymmetric tools, cheap drones, missiles, and the
credible threat of underwater mines.

Finally, it will be this week that the toll *really* starts to elevate. LNG and oil shipments are finishing their transport leg -- that is the last tankers out of Hormuz are porting soon. At that point, the 20% deficit in oil and LNG physically takes place.

Wash rinse and repeat for helium --- fully 30% of the worlds supply of helium has now been shut down. And for you all, in addition to 'no more funny voices with party balloons' --- helium is a core and key component in semiconductor foundry operation.

So, to repeat -- anyone with half a brain would realize the vast importance of Hormuz, and would have taken prophylactic steps to minimize any potential reaction from Iran. That didnt happen. And now this.

Oh, but of course, shoot first, and make the entire Western alliance clean up the shitstorm we put into motion.

And yes, Iran by choing the fk out of that supply bottleneck certainly has not lost in a strategic sense. They very well have lost in a military sense -- F4s vs F-35s is bad matchup, and we have bombed them to bejesus. Yet -- they still have throttled the crap out of the worlds most important route. And, they are still there after a month.

Quite the fing win for us and the rest of the world. And a great deal of the world, who are similarly suffering the closure, dont just hold Iran at fault -- they jointly hold the US at fault for instigating the ****. Again -- quite the fing win for the US.

Maybe if we had *actually* put together an *iota* of effort *before* we pulled the trigger we would actually be on the better side of Spain, Italy, and France. Let alone the UK and Australia. But, we didnt. So now we are the lone ranger who triggered this thing, and now at a governmental level whining that no one is helping clean up the garbage dump that we started started.

That is just amazing to me.

I read one line, scrolled, saw that book over a simple statement....

"it takes a dumb sob to believe Iran is winning"

I guess since we are on leader 946, he's winning over the previous 945. But if we want to compare this before the first bomb dropped....

"only a dumb SOB thinks Iran is winning" and once again I'll let you make that judgement on if that fits you. If it takes you more than a few words...no they aren't or yes they are....

I'll answer that question for you

Im sure you dont understand that you have made the point that that N. Vietnam lost the Vietnam war above. Multiple scopes of 'winning' -- but that doesnt seem to cross your mind.

I always thought Viet Cong won until recently I read a book wrote by a NV who was fighting for the VC.

He laid out the cost and devestation and isolation that followed. China immediately abandoned them and to the rest of the world they were a plague.

For more than three decades the wore torn country lived as if they were in stone age with no modernization or trade partners just squalor.

He came to realize it was all a lie and doesn't believe the VC won anything but the right to murder those who disagree and the loss of the US influence in the region cost them a fortune in trade and standard of living.

He went on to say he watched how the US moved on how nice the standard of living was for all Americans when the wealthiest Vietnamese might what a person on food stamps has.

In retrospect sometimes winning the war has adverse costs that are more than the actual victory.

(04-04-2026 12:48 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 07:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 02:42 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-03-2026 01:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey Clarence, this is an opinion message board, not a court of law, and you sure as hell aren't in charge.

Sorry to corner your empty opinion with asking you to say what is false. Cool cool.

Let’s restate — your opinion is that it is a crock of ****, and when asked, can’t be bothered to state what is incorrect about it, then throw a temper tantrum about being asked why it is a crock of ****. Good look, pardner. Lolz.

It takes one of the dumbest SOB's on earth to believe Iran is "winning it"


I'll let you decide if that's you....

The terms winner and loser often may or may not have anything to do with whose cities are being bombed and everything to do with relative strategic advantage.

If we look at the scorecard for this conflict, the results might be surprising.

Im not going to call a country a winner when its air defenses are in pieces and its leadership is hiding in bunkers to avoid assassination. So the best we can say for Iran is that it's a survivor.

And, for the Islamic Republic, mere survival against the combined might of the US and Israel counts as a victory of sorts.

Further, Iran has successfully demonstrated that it can hold the global economy hostage using nothing more than asymmetric tools, cheap drones, missiles, and the
credible threat of underwater mines.

Finally, it will be this week that the toll *really* starts to elevate. LNG and oil shipments are finishing their transport leg -- that is the last tankers out of Hormuz are porting soon. At that point, the 20% deficit in oil and LNG physically takes place.

Wash rinse and repeat for helium --- fully 30% of the worlds supply of helium has now been shut down. And for you all, in addition to 'no more funny voices with party balloons' --- helium is a core and key component in semiconductor foundry operation.

So, to repeat -- anyone with half a brain would realize the vast importance of Hormuz, and would have taken prophylactic steps to minimize any potential reaction from Iran. That didnt happen. And now this.

Oh, but of course, shoot first, and make the entire Western alliance clean up the shitstorm we put into motion.

And yes, Iran by choing the fk out of that supply bottleneck certainly has not lost in a strategic sense. They very well have lost in a military sense -- F4s vs F-35s is bad matchup, and we have bombed them to bejesus. Yet -- they still have throttled the crap out of the worlds most important route. And, they are still there after a month.

Quite the fing win for us and the rest of the world. And a great deal of the world, who are similarly suffering the closure, dont just hold Iran at fault -- they jointly hold the US at fault for instigating the ****. Again -- quite the fing win for the US.

Maybe if we had *actually* put together an *iota* of effort *before* we pulled the trigger we would actually be on the better side of Spain, Italy, and France. Let alone the UK and Australia. But, we didnt. So now we are the lone ranger who triggered this thing, and now at a governmental level whining that no one is helping clean up the garbage dump that we started started.

That is just amazing to me.

What is more amazing is the amount of ignorance you can spew on any subject.

To absolutely think our Western Allies who want spend a nickel on defense would actually step up when we have bottle fed them since 1945 is beyond laughable.

I would only engage the Germans because the UK is a withering on the vine dead man walking country waiting to fall. Look how their educated class has been fleeing for years and the influx of unskilled third world muslims who dont integrate will only further erode them.

They also have no defense and their defense minister after a 15 second stuttering event said they have 17 ships. Great help if you need to defend Rhode Island.

Get a clue for once in your life and understand who actually is your ally and not a petulant child who demands you take care of it and bites your hand at the same time

Funny, after all your sputtering about how Europe has never done anything, I guess you have overlooked that in response to the *largest* military action by the *basic common foe* of NAT0, Europe has done far more to counter Russia in Ukraine than the United States has. Amazing that.

Thats the problem with arguing with shallow rhetoric, my friend.

As fo blue water navies. I suggest you direct your attention to the basic underpinnings of the Breton Woods accords. But please wail and gnash some more.

ANd even if/ when we pay more than a certain share in NATO, *much* better to have an active counterweight there. I guess in your world not so much. Cool cool.

And even in that light, they have ZERO obligation to join us on a war of *our* choice. If they want to join -- they have every ablity to do so. Last I saw a 'defense treaty' wasnt an open obligation to join every piece of a member's adventurism. Imagine that. Perhaps in BlueDragonburg it is a requirement.

(04-04-2026 12:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 10:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Seems logical. They better get with it.

We aren't really trying to solve all the world's problems. We're looking out for America First. Which means nuclear capabilities. We are helping out the Gulf states by decimating Iran's missile-firing capability, but that can eventually be built back. much easier than nukes.

At some point, the Arabs, just like the Europeans, need to learn to fend for themselves.

To be fair—the importance of Petro-dollar to the dollars position as the world’s reserve currency needs to factor into that equation. Our relationship with the ME oil producers is significant to US interests whether we need the oil or not. That said, we should not be alone there. It’s in the interests of the ME oil producers to help get this handled as quickly as possible.

Okay, let me know when they actually start helping.

Hey Tanq. Ukraine is not part of NATO. We have zero obligation to help them at all.

I have no major issue helping them to some degree (not $350B worth), but we have no obligation, and the fact that Europe is helping more is exactly how it should be.

(04-04-2026 01:34 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey Tanq. Ukraine is not part of NATO. We have zero obligation to help them at all.

I have no major issue helping them to some degree (not $350B worth), but we have no obligation, and the fact that Europe is helping more is exactly how it should be.

Didnt say NATO did, nor does any of the members thereof. But it is very worthy of the primary goal of NATO. And of the security of both Europe and the Unted States.

And Europe has taken up the cause of that effort *against* Russia. To degree that overshadows the efforts of the US -- even more so in the last year.

ANd if we are going to ***** about members of NATO, the members have gone well beyond those commitments when the common enemy is the one playing around.

The issue is that the US in now tying NATO to Iran. If anything, the cause against Russia in Ukraine is far more tied to the goal of NATO than joining our special military operation of choice in Iran.

(04-04-2026 01:47 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 01:34 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey Tanq. Ukraine is not part of NATO. We have zero obligation to help them at all.

I have no major issue helping them to some degree (not $350B worth), but we have no obligation, and the fact that Europe is helping more is exactly how it should be.

Didnt say NATO did, nor does any of the members thereof. But it is very worthy of the primary goal of NATO. And of the security of both Europe and the Unted States.

And Europe has taken up the cause of that effort *against* Russia. To degree that overshadows the efforts of the US -- even more so in the last year.

ANd if we are going to ***** about members of NATO, the members have gone well beyond those commitments when the common enemy is the one playing around.

The issue is that the US in now tying NATO to Iran. If anything, the cause against Russia in Ukraine is far more tied to the goal of NATO than joining our special military operation of choice in Iran.

Hey look, we're having a substantive debate.

I disagree about Ukraine being critical to our security. Ukraine was part of the USSR for decades. Made no difference. If Russia took them over now, it still wouldn't matter to us.

And I disagree that we have any obligation to them, unlike their Euro neighbors, perhaps.

As for Iran, I don't think the Euros have any obligation at all to help us. I agree with you on that one.

NATO is a defensive org. Nobody in NATO was attacked. We sure as hell aren't joining Germany if they attack France again.

As for the Strait though, we again disagree. We didn't close the Strait. Iran did. You claim cause and effect. I don't.

Iran has been running that Strait like it's own personal piggy bank, and disrupting traffic there at times, on and off for 47 years now.

Btw, on opening the Strait, Tanq, didn't you say we didn't take that into consideration before starting this war?

Actually, the US Navy has been doing planning and training on exactly that for over 40 years now. That's a fact. Look it up. It under no circumstances caught us by surprise.

My theory is it's a dangerous mission that we don't care much about, and Trump apparently is fine leaving that to others.

I am not endorsing that strategy, but I bet that's the issue, not that they overlooked it. That's impossible.

The Navy has known that, whether Trump did, or not, but he has been talking about taking the Strait since the 1980s, as well.

(04-04-2026 03:11 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, on opening the Strait, Tanq, didn't you say we didn't take that into consideration before starting this war?

Actually, the US Navy has been doing planning and training on exactly that for over 40 years now. That's a fact. Look it up. It under no circumstances caught us by surprise.

My theory is it's a dangerous mission that we don't care much about, and Trump apparently is fine leaving that to others.

I am not endorsing that strategy, but I bet that's the issue, not that they overlooked it. That's impossible.

The Navy has known that, whether Trump did, or not, but he has been talking about taking the Strait since the 1980s, as well.

There is a big difference between having paper plans and putting plans into motion to be even marginally effective.

So your theory is that Trump decided to jump, knowing full well the potential economic impact, decided he didn’t care if it happened, decided to offload that issue to others without cluing those others in. Quite foresightful.

Most people would give a rats ass on worldwide economic impact of closing *the most* important and valuable trade route the world has ever seen. And according to your theory, Trump doesnt give a fk.

All you’ve done is make a pure dumb*** issue into creating massive intentional harm on the world economy with that theory. Not much better in judgement I would say if so. And transforms an act of sheer neglect into a worldwide intentional bad act. Again, if that is what you think, I don’t see the upside.

Most leaders of the free world would have second thoughts about creating a massive economic and energy shock as an intentional act. Kind of an upside not to do it intentionally fr9m my viewpoint.

I’m positive the US military has paper plans. New Orleans had paper plans for hurricanes. I’m saying that despite plans in the files, Trump didn’t consider them. I would prefer he do that more as a dumbfk assumption that no effort be taken in accordance with them. But if you want to posit he intentionally clobbered the world economic system, then that is whole level of other problems,

I didn't say I agreed with it. Trump does a lot of things where he doesn't worry about the consequences outside America First. Most of them I'm okay with. This one, I see both sides.

The only thing I'm sure of is that Trump was not caught unaware of the possibility of Iran closing the Strait when we attacked. I mean, they have done that over and over for 47 years. Why would this time be any different?

But that fact wasn't about to deter Trump from the main goal, which was to obliterate Iran's nuclear program. He's doing that. I can guarantee he was not going to abort the mission b/c Iran might close the Strait.

So what it boils down to is that you see it as his obligation to reopen it. I say that's potentially dangerous, and not worth the risk.

Once we leave, the issue will resolve itself. The regime will be gone, or it will be back to the old status quo without anybody doing anything additional.

(04-04-2026 03:45 PM)TripleA Wrote:  I didn't say I agreed with it. Trump does a lot of things where he doesn't worry about the consequences outside America First. Most of them I'm okay with. This one, I see both sides.

The only thing I'm sure of is that Trump was not caught unaware of the possibility of Iran closing the Strait when we attacked. I mean, they have done that over and over for 47 years. Why would this time be any different?

But that fact wasn't about to deter Trump from the main goal, which was to obliterate Iran's nuclear program. He's doing that. I can guarantee he was not going to abort the mission b/c Iran might close the Strait.

So what it boils down to is that you see it as his obligation to reopen it. I say that's potentially dangerous, and not worth the risk.

Once we leave, the issue will resolve itself. The regime will be gone, or it will be back to the old status quo without anybody doing anything additional.

Im satisfied that we have bombed the shite out of them

We have definitely done that. But Trump has more bombing to do, starting in 48 hours, for 2 or 3 more weeks.

Back to the Stone Ages you go, Iran!

Surprise! Trump started early! Just announced that, along with Israel, we just took out 50 of Iran's remaining top leaders, including some we were negotiating with.

I guess negotiations weren't going that well, huh?

I saw the truth post, but where you get the 50 leaders from?

(04-04-2026 05:12 PM)otown Wrote:  I saw the truth post, but where you get the 50 leaders from?

Fox News live. Breaking News. Right before I posted that.

(04-04-2026 05:13 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:12 PM)otown Wrote:  I saw the truth post, but where you get the 50 leaders from?

Fox News live. Breaking News. Right before I posted that.

I would've seen it, too, but I switched over to TBS to watch the Final Four.

(04-04-2026 05:33 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:13 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:12 PM)otown Wrote:  I saw the truth post, but where you get the 50 leaders from?

Fox News live. Breaking News. Right before I posted that.

I would've seen it, too, but I switched over to TBS to watch the Final Four.

I'm watching basketball, too. Just flipped over for a few seconds and saw the bit about the bomb strike.

Believe it or not, it's always sports over politics for me. I only took up politics a few years ago in my old age and long into my retirement, for something else to keep me busy, besides shooting, traveling, eating out, etc.

(04-04-2026 05:37 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:33 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:13 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-04-2026 05:12 PM)otown Wrote:  I saw the truth post, but where you get the 50 leaders from?

Fox News live. Breaking News. Right before I posted that.

I would've seen it, too, but I switched over to TBS to watch the Final Four.

I'm watching basketball, too. Just flipped over for a few seconds and saw the bit about the bomb strike.

Believe it or not, it's always sports over politics for me. I only took up politics a few years ago in my old age and long into my retirement, for something else to keep me busy, besides shooting, traveling, eating out, etc.

I originally joined CSNbbs because of sports, like most people did. Also, I've got UConn and 'Zona winning. What about you? And here's a fun fact: One of the players on UConn has the same last name as I do. One of the guards, actually. (That's all I'm gonna say.)

(04-04-2026 05:06 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Surprise! Trump started early! Just announced that, along with Israel, we just took out 50 of Iran's remaining top leaders, including some we were negotiating with.

I guess negotiations weren't going that well, huh?

"Kill 'em all; let God Sort 'em". The place needs a good douche.