Plan B Forum

If any American leader falls for Iran's request for talks, they're too stupid to be in politics. Anyone can see what Iran is doing—they're stalling for time. They want to rebuild their air defense systems so they can take down more advanced and expensive Israeli jets.

No, it's Israel that's being smart here. They have the advantage, so keep the pressure on. Iran is at the disadvantage in this trade-off. Their economy is almost entirely dependent on oil, and their infrastructure is huge and nearly impossible to protect. The Israelis should systematically dismantle the entire thing and leave the regime impoverished and unable to carry on its aggressive programs, which have destroyed so many lives across the Middle East.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... c885&ei=15

Or they may want to institute talks to legitimately avoid destruction and suffering; you can do both, enter into discussions and keep aware of the progress on whatever you think Iran may be doing (and respond to it if necessary. But it doesn't make sense to reject talks out of hand.

liberty wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 2:07 am

If any American leader falls for Iran's request for talks, they're too stupid to be in politics. Anyone can see what Iran is doing—they're stalling for time. They want to rebuild their air defense systems so they can take down more advanced and expensive Israeli jets.

No, it's Israel that's being smart here. They have the advantage, so keep the pressure on. Iran is at the disadvantage in this trade-off. Their economy is almost entirely dependent on oil, and their infrastructure is huge and nearly impossible to protect. The Israelis should systematically dismantle the entire thing and leave the regime impoverished and unable to carry on its aggressive programs, which have destroyed so many lives across the Middle East.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... c885&ei=15

Big RR wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 1:08 pm

Or they may want to institute talks to legitimately avoid destruction and suffering; you can do both, enter into discussions and keep aware of the progress on whatever you think Iran may be doing (and respond to it if necessary. But it doesn't make sense to reject talks out of hand.

The only thing worth discussing is how quickly Iran can give up its enriched nuclear material and how quickly it can dismantle its processing centers. Everything else is just chatter. But since they won’t do that, there’s no other option—it has to be destroyed. They cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. They're just too extreme and too fanatical.

When I was at NCO Academy, we had a guest speaker, an expert on the Islamic world and an Air Force officer. The point he made that stuck with me most was this: he said he’d much rather fight a godless communist than a fanatical Islamist, because at least the godless communist didn’t want to die.

Perhaps, Liberty, but then Iran has shown itself to be pretty pragmatic and not have a death wish over the years. If they "wanted to die", they could easily do senseless things like start a ground war against Israel or refuse to ship oil to the west (or the US), but we don't see that, do we; wouldn't those with a death wish want to do things like increase the amount of damage they cause without concern for themselves? sure, religion can be used to delude some to sacrifice themselves--it has been so with most religions through the centuries, but those are not the negotiators, and the leaders have no real death wish, but they do want to exploit their strategic positions. Again, I see no real downside to talking, it makes a lot more sense than a death wish of our own.

Most Iranian Jews - a substantial minority group - left at the revolution and went to Europe, Israel and the US. Something like 10,000 remained and although I don't think one could say life is pleasant for them, Ayatollah Khomeini said they were a protected and recognized group.

Dear Iranian Revolutionary Guard:

If you feel a need to retaliate, and honestly who could blame you, may I suggest the following list of regional targets (after issuing warnings and evacuation notices, of course):

Trump Tower Kolkata
Trump Towers Istanbul
Trump Towers Pune
Trump Towers Mumbai
Trump Towers Delhi
Trump Tower Jeddah
Trump Tower Dubai

I think it will make your point. You're welcome.

Sue U wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 23, 2025 6:34 pm

Dear Iranian Revolutionary Guard:

If you feel a need to retaliate, and honestly who could blame you, may I suggest the following list of regional targets (after issuing warnings and evacuation notices, of course):

Trump Tower Kolkata
Trump Towers Istanbul
Trump Towers Pune
Trump Towers Mumbai
Trump Towers Delhi
Trump Tower Jeddah
Trump Tower Dubai

I think it will make your point. You're welcome.

I concur wholeheartedly, but you left out the ones in Ireland, Scotland, and New York.

Outside their target range

Crackpot wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 23, 2025 9:04 pm

Outside their target range

Missiles are not their only weapon. It would be tough to get into the country now; however, if they did not take advantage of Biden's open border to place a battalion of sleepers in the country, they are not as smart as I thought they were.

Regime change would have been nice, but only the Iranian people can make that happen. Still, at least the war is over, maybe things will be better now.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tr ... 07fd5&ei=8

The Trump-brokered ceasefire between Iran and Israel has, for now, brought an abrupt and extraordinary end to one of the Middle East's most explosive confrontations in decades.

Why it matters: The 12-day war sent shockwaves through a region already reeling from nearly two years of historic volatility and violence, beginning with Hamas' Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel.

From the AP (Reuters has also published a similar artice):

A new U.S. intelligence report suggests that Iran’s nuclear program has been set back only a few months by U.S. strikes, according to two people familiar with the early assessment who were not authorized to address the report publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

This makes sense, since Iran knew the US capabilities and would take care to keep its facilities (or some of them) intact, even if only as a bargaining chip. We'll have to see what develops.

liberty wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 24, 2025 6:00 pm

Regime change would have been nice, but only the Iranian people can make that happen. Still, at least the war is over, maybe things will be better now.

. . . .

The Trump-brokered ceasefire between Iran and Israel has, for now, brought an abrupt and extraordinary end to one of the Middle East's most explosive confrontations in decades.

Why it matters: The 12-day war sent shockwaves through a region already reeling from nearly two years of historic volatility and violence, beginning with Hamas' Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel.

So much to unpack here, lib. Regime change. How different would Iran now be if the US had not actively changed the Mossadegh regime in 1954? We'll never know.

Trump brokered ceasefire??!!! This is all part and parcel of Trump's attempt to get a Nobel Peace Prize just like Obama. (And, for the record and BTW - I was against Obama being awarded that and his accepting it. It was probably a knee jerk reaction from Oslo to 8 years of GWB, so understandable at the time. If only we had known what a true statesman Bush2 was . . . ) Anyway - get your buddy to start a war, then get him to stop. You have plenty of $$$ to bribe him with. Paint yourself as the peacemaker.

And your last sentence, lib. Do you really think this started on October 7, 2023?

If only we had known what a true statesman Bush2 was

that's a joke, right? (I hope)

Compared to what came after? Yes.

CP--I was never the most enthusiastic supporter of Obama and Biden, having significant differences with them in some areas (another thread), but they were aa big improvement on W's policies. Trump and his idiocy is in a class by itself, but it does not make W a statesman (or even desirable as a president). Bad and worse is not the same as good and bad.

I think my tongue was a little way into my cheek with that remark. However, if someone came up and offered me the choice, Bush2 or Trump, I know who I would go with.

So do I, but it's kind of like saying would you rather eat shit or drink piss. I'd first choose neither.