• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What should be done regarding the Iranian attacks on US bases in Iraq?

What should our response be?

  • Total voters
    54
Jredbaron96 said:
Are you suggesting we nuke Iran?
Click to expand...

I'm suggesting that they have not changed their demonstrated actions or goals even a little bit in the 40 years since Ted Koppel hosted the show "America Held Hostage".

He always followed it with the number of days since the hostages were taken.

As long as Carter was in office, that number just kept rising. Then Reagan was entering the picture.

The Iranians do not respect understanding and the seeking of compromise. If the last 40 years show you nothing else, they should show you that.

Nuke Iran? There is a wide gulf between providing the leading sponsors of terror in the world $150 billion to create mischief and creating a crater where their country used be.

Making every person in Iran's government and ruling class resemble your avatar is a good place to start.

We seem to be witnessing the birth of the Trump Doctrine. It seems to say, "Order the death of an American and you will, very certainly, die".

My suggestion is that once we determine that the method of communication currently used is determined to be ineffective, we experiment to find a communication method that works.

What seems to be the "Trump Doctrine" could be an example of this experimentation.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Last night, Iranian ballistic missiles were fired at US bases in Iraq.

There are no reported casualties yet, and the damage is still being assessed.

It appears that the Iranians may have deliberately selected their targets in order to not inflict any casualties.

What should our response be?
Click to expand...

Now that we've seen the response, I'd say it was perfect.
 
code1211 said:
I'm suggesting that they have not changed their demonstrated actions or goals even a little bit in the 40 years since Ted Koppel hosted the show "America Held Hostage".

He always followed it with the number of days since the hostages were taken.

As long as Carter was in office, that number just kept rising. Then Reagan was entering the picture.

The Iranians do not respect understanding and the seeking of compromise. If the last 40 years show you nothing else, they should show you that.

Nuke Iran? There is a wide gulf between providing the leading sponsors of terror in the world $150 billion to create mischief and creating a crater where their country used be.

Making every person in Iran's government and ruling class resemble your avatar is a good place to start.

We seem to be witnessing the birth of the Trump Doctrine. It seems to say, "Order the death of an American and you will, very certainly, die".

My suggestion is that once we determine that the method of communication currently used is determined to be ineffective, we experiment to find a communication method that works.

What seems to be the "Trump Doctrine" could be an example of this experimentation.
Click to expand...

Verbosity doesn't earn you any points. To have a doctrine you actually need a coherent set of principles, not random acts done on a whim.
 
American said:
Now that we've seen the response, I'd say it was perfect.
Click to expand...

I'd be reluctant to assume Iran is done retaliating. Showing off a flashy, high profile but ultimately superficial attack, while waiting a bit before launching a serious strike fits right up with Iran's MO.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
Ah yes, swallow the lies that Iran is a bad actor Of course, ignoring the US is the worst actor in that region., Contant bombing and killing, constant sanctions. We helped overthrow government in Iran that lead to the extremism. We helped bin Laden and then just left Afghanis in crumbles which lead to taliban rise, we support a despicable country with no civil rights in Saudi Arabia that is slaughtering civilians, we supported Saddam to fight against Iran, then decide later to invade the country leading to a power vacuum and the rise of ISIS, then more war in Syria after ISIS went into that country, then renege on a deal and slap sanctions on Iran for no reason. Which is what started Iran's defiance. Then the US assassinates a top commander of that country. But Iran is the bad actor

The US is the bad actor in that region. BUt to right wing idiots, they just swallow the lies and propaganda like the unthinking morons they are



YEah, sanction on the US for assassinating a high ranking foreign official
Click to expand...

The US has a checkered past in about all of its dealings with miscreant powers. In its dealing with honest negotiating partners, we seem to have done some pretty good work with pretty good outcomes.

Japan, Germany, Italy, Korea and Viet Nam come to mind as successes. Central and South America come to mind as less successful.

The entire continent of Africa is an example of the absence of American Domination. France and Britain were the guiding lights there.

All of the Bronze Age entities of the Middle East are interesting and anomalous entries into the international scene.

The accumulated group of Middle Eastern governments is the best argument on the planet to find a power source that is not fossil fuel.

In that way, ending the governments of the Middle East is the Green Solution for the planet. ;)
 
The Democratic Party's view is that the reason we invaded Iraq was for the purpose of winning victory over Iraq for Iran, to then give Iraq to Iran. Nearly ever Democrat on this forum openly now has that position - we should leave, giving Iraq to Iran.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Last night, Iranian ballistic missiles were fired at US bases in Iraq.

There are no reported casualties yet, and the damage is still being assessed.

It appears that the Iranians may have deliberately selected their targets in order to not inflict any casualties.

What should our response be?
Click to expand...

What's the difference between option 2 & 3?
 
Moderate Right said:
What's the difference between option 2 & 3?
Click to expand...

Not retaliate would imply some statement or action to indicate that, while doing nothing is quite literally just doing nothing.

I know it seems like a kind of pedantic difference, but it can matter in international diplomacy.
 
bongsaway said:
9/11 was mostly saudi people.

Do you think that maybe folks in other countries feel exactly the same way? The evil americans are once again dropping bombs on us killing innocent people.
Click to expand...

No. The Saudi people are nice people. 911 was done by evil people like the general. The 911 killers were not peaceful people of Saudi Arabia. They were lawless thugs who just happened to start their life in that country.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Not retaliate would imply some statement or action to indicate that, while doing nothing is quite literally just doing nothing.

I know it seems like a kind of pedantic difference, but it can matter in international diplomacy.
Click to expand...

I do find it rather interesting that Iran pretty much didn't do a damn thing (even warning us that missiles were coming so there would be no deaths) and then turned around and lied to their own people how devastating their response was and that it killed many Americans. At first that kind of makes Trump look like a genius in the short term. Iraq may have promised Iran that they would do their best to get the US out of Iraq, which may be of great benefit to Iran in the long term, particularly with the US/Iran relations going down hill.
 
Last edited:
Sampson Simpson said:
Ah yes, swallow the lies that Iran is a bad actor Of course, ignoring the US is the worst actor in that region., Contant bombing and killing, constant sanctions. We helped overthrow government in Iran that lead to the extremism. We helped bin Laden and then just left Afghanis in crumbles which lead to taliban rise, we support a despicable country with no civil rights in Saudi Arabia that is slaughtering civilians, we supported Saddam to fight against Iran, then decide later to invade the country leading to a power vacuum and the rise of ISIS, then more war in Syria after ISIS went into that country, then renege on a deal and slap sanctions on Iran for no reason. Which is what started Iran's defiance. Then the US assassinates a top commander of that country. But Iran is the bad actor

The US is the bad actor in that region. BUt to right wing idiots, they just swallow the lies and propaganda like the unthinking morons they are


YEah, sanction on the US for assassinating a high ranking foreign official
Click to expand...

Why do you mourn for a terrorist?
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The sad fact is we are a major part of the world police and countries with madmen as rulers are no better than any other criminal. They must be stopped. When someone believes that the way to heaven is by killing people, well, people will die. I believe in the right to bear arms. I also believe that someone making a pipe bomb and chants death to some race of people needs to be stopped.
Click to expand...

Americans were calling for muslims head after 9/11, and we have caused 9/11 on steroids on a daily basis in many countries in the middle east, made their lives hell. So that same BS can be said about the US. And really, all those hateful right wingers weren't even attacked, it was NYC. They didn't experience nothing. Yet they want to kill. Imagine having your country continually bombed, your family killed. You'd be calling for death to that country


So who's going to stop the murdering US government?
 
RetiredUSN said:
That general deserved exactly what he got, and should have been taken out years ago.

500-600 dead American soldiers means nothing to you?
Click to expand...

Then Bush, Obama and Trump should get what they deserve, who have killed far more people,100s of thousands of not just soldiers, but innocent men, women and children. Let alone the aftermath and misery caused by those invasions and bombing, and US foreign policy.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
No. Then we have to listen to everyone cry when they pull off another 911. It is the responsibility of all good people to stop evil. Looking the other way and allowing evil people to kill Americans is beyond stupid.
Click to expand...

You are looking the other way of the 100s of thousands of innocent people the US military has killed, and that's just directly from their bombs, not even the aftermath like creating power vacuum, creating ISIS and helping them thrive.
 
Moderate Right said:
I do find it rather interesting that Iran pretty much didn't do a damn thing (even warning us that missiles were coming so there would be no deaths) and then turned around and lied to their own people how devastating their response was and that it killed many Americans. At first that kind of makes Trump look like a genius in the short term. Iraq may have promised Iran that they would do their best to get the US out of Iraq, which may be of great benefit to Iran in the long term, particularly with the US/Iran relations going down hill.
Click to expand...

I have a few theories;

Number one is that purposefully chose a high profile but ultimately superficial attack that did nothing, and is now waiting for attention to be diverted elsewhere so they can strike somewhere serious. That would be similar to what Iran did in several retaliations against Israel.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
I have a few theories;

Number one is that purposefully chose a high profile but ultimately superficial attack that did nothing, and is now waiting for attention to be diverted elsewhere so they can strike somewhere serious. That would be similar to what Iran did in several retaliations against Israel.
Click to expand...

This crossed my mind for a split second or two and then I dismissed it. While a war would be devastating to everyone, probably even the entire world, Iran is already devastated enough and can't afford to be turned into a third world country. Personally, I think they realized that THEY had been going too far. And, it's not looking too good for them regarding the airplane crash.
 
Get the nuclear deal out of the trash and relieve them of economic sanctions and apologize for being idiots.
 
Kreton said:
I am surprised by how many do nothing responses there are. The US cannot simply allow a hostile foreign government to make an attack and we do nothing. There has to be a US response even if that is just increased sanctions. Doing nothing sends a message to the world that this action by Iran is ok. That should not be the message.
Click to expand...

This 'tit-for-tat' policy is absurd. It accomplishes nothing. Its getting us nowhere.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
No. The Saudi people are nice people. 911 was done by evil people like the general. The 911 killers were not peaceful people of Saudi Arabia. They were lawless thugs who just happened to start their life in that country.
Click to expand...

Nice job of twisting that pretzel. Yeah, so nice correspondents end up dead when they enter an embassy. That's like saying americans who shoot other americans aren't america, they're just bad people.
 
RetiredUSN said:
That general deserved exactly what he got, and should have been taken out years ago.

500-600 dead American soldiers means nothing to you?
Click to expand...

Much the same was said in the wake of the toppling of Saddam Hussein. When will we ever learn.

As Trump told the family of the serviceman who was killed in Niger, "He knew what he signed up for."
 
j brown's body said:
This 'tit-for-tat' policy is absurd.
Click to expand...

It's the entire history of humanity its that dumb mentality of tit for tat. That's what dumb people still clinging to their animal evolutionary roots. Israel Palestine, same thing, for decades nothing changed. Constantly fighting isn't going to do anything except destroying lives

And Obama and the other EP nations made positives steps to stop that, and it was working until neanderthal became president. Iran moderates were winning elections, and Iran was behaving. What happens as soon as Trump puts sanction on them? They start acting up again. Just like them and NK did after Bush's axis of evil statement.

Sometimes I wish we could just throw right wingers in a region the US is bombing, since they can only seem to comprehend things when it happens to them. They may change their tune on constant bombing. It's easy to push for war and fighting when you live 1000s of miles away and the war front is never in your neighborhood
 
1. We should do nothing.

2. Obviously, the big boys in Iran realized that they had better pull back, lest they force President Trump to take more action, such as hitting targets within Iran.

3. The fanatics in Iran have had a great time for the last 40 years. They do not want to be overthrown. They do not want to get a regular job. They want to enjoy this theology gig for as long as they can.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Saddam was a wonderful person. He used chemical weapons on his people and the people of Iran. He wrote checks to the families of terrorist that killed themselves along with other innocent people. I think it was just great they way he tortured 100's of thousands of people. I like the fact that he attacked Iran and Kuwait. Sad the people of Iraq now have the right to vote and elect leaders. Pathetic. I think we should find another person just like the Butcher of Baghdad to rule over the people again. That is what the democrats think is a good leader. Need I say more.
Click to expand...


And yet, Saddam was a US ally, US provided Saddam with weapons. So whenever people try to bring up that nonsense about jsutifying invading Iraq, its so easy to squash it. And guess what? US helped overthrow the democratically elected Iranian governmetn to put the Shah in power, leading to hostilities with Iran. But head in the sand people just ignore all the garbage the US pulls off and tries to justify constant war with "oh, he was a bad guy." Iraq still is a mess. Afghanistan is a mess. There is not one country in the world that had democracy forced on them by invading party, it comes internally
 
bongsaway said:
Nice job of twisting that pretzel. Yeah, so nice correspondents end up dead when they enter an embassy. That's like saying americans who shoot other americans aren't america, they're just bad people.
Click to expand...

They have an atrocious human rights record.

One of their own soldiers just committed a terror attack in Florida.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom