Originally Posted by
tartare
I think a few posters are missing a point on the `Congress seeking to limit Trump's war powers' angle.
Who says he's looking to go to war? A few MOPs dropped on Fordo and Natanz is not war. He doesn't need Congressional approval to do so - just needs to tell them within two days of doing it and wrap it up within 60 days.
I think the positioning of US forces in the region may be to help shoot down a furious Iranian ballistic missile response if he does so, and to protect US bases from any retaliation.
Were he to want to respond medium term if Iran does target US forces and bases in the region - might be a different story - that's looking more like war.
Anyways, I think we'll see TACO rather than any decisive action - I hope I'm wrong.
He's just loving the drama and being the centre of attention - but this isn't an episode of The Apprentice.
Instead, it's another episode of The Prince. Here's your Machiavelli:
Jan 24, 2025
From a purely selfish point of view - one of my great regrets is that I cannot yet visit Iran to learn more about the country and culture, and may not be able to for another 10-15 years at least, because it is so dangerous for westerners.
Tehran looks fascinating, surrounded by beautiful mountains, great food, literature, history. And a vibrant society, elements of which still defy the despots who rule them.
I suppose the best fitting response is almost literally that you can't have your cake and eat it too. That is, we will never enjoy what Iran has to offer if we subscribe (submit) to Machiavellianism.
I fully believe that you genuinely wish the best for the Iranian people, and that we share a similar ordinary understanding of Iranian history. The thing is, I cannot ignore that, if/when the Iranian regime topples, either a new bad regime will take over, or Iran will be greatly weakened. With a new bad regime, practically nothing changes. If a weakened Iran emerges, what will happen to Iran is what happens to every other weak country on the globe, what has happened for centuries: pilots (boats, airplanes, spaceships, whatever) will deliver those with deep pockets to Iran to gain "rights" to as much of Iran's resources as can be had. Rinse and repeat.
Taking a step back, in the big picture, it is deficit spending outside Iran that afforded military buildup outside Iran that first threatened Iran and later is being used to topple Iran, deficit spending that causes leaders of debt-ladened nations to seek money from whomever . Those profiting from the deficit spending are the ones with deep pockets in the first place. Thus, all along those in the military are tools of, and subservient to, those in the banking/finance industry. Right out of a wealthy prince's play book.