Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Here's an excellent (relatively short) piece on strategy considerations wrt Iran.
thefederalist.com
Here's an excellent snip wrt "thinking it through":
In all three cases (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya) U.S. national leadership failed to think it through.
(As an aside, I was "for" Iraq, but only if we had a solid post-Phase III (active combat) plan. We didn't and we continue to see the results of that 15+ years later. I was "for" Afghanistan, but only as "punishment" in response to 9/11 (of both AQ and its Taliban hosts). The Bush administration blew it by succumbing to "mission creep" (e.g., counter-narcotics, nation-building, women's rights, etc.) while the Obama administration blew it by using Afghanistan as "The Good War" to justify its decision to leave Iraq. Both administrations made horrible decisions (and not just in hindsight) and we continue to see the results of these decisions 18+ years later. I was NEVER "for" Libya. Misguided and utterly foolish. If Iraq in 2003 was about "unfinished business," then Libya was all about "woke foreign policy.")
Back to Iran. Here's a snip regarding the thought process of what to do next (with Iran):
Here's why Trump's approach (in response to Iran's "dumb missile" launch) is the correct one. He's resisting the temptation the Bush administration succumbed to wrt Iraq 2003:
WRT "How It's Done," here's the penultimate paragraph:
"Conservative realism" might be a bit redundant, but that's a quibble. Anyway, this is what Trump is thinking. No, I'm not mind-reading; Trump, in both statements and actions (since, forever), is doing just this. There IS a coherent, mature approach to The Trump Doctrine (at least, up until this point) wrt Iran. The same maturity also comes through loud and clear wrt Russia, China, NoKo, NATO "allies," trade, the southern border, etc. It ain't perfect (because we're not perfect and mistakes happen), but Trump is "winning" FAR MORE often than not. Don't fall for the criticisms of the MSM rank amateurs and other Statlers and Waldorfs.*
I highly recommend you click over to read the entire article. The article's title and sub-title are alone worth the click-over. Further, these snips don't do justice to the piece. If you want to begin to understand how mature foreign policy is conducted (as opposed to the wishful/magical thinking type practiced by Bush II and Obama) this is a good place to start.
Back to the author. If you ever stumble across anything this guy writes, stop what you're doing, and spend a few minutes reading.
*Let's add this:
babylonbee.com
--- End of line (MCP)
Iran’s Attack On U.S. Bases Is A Face-Saving Gesture From The Ayatollahs
The details of the Iran attack suggest it is a targeted towards regime stability. Whether it leads to further escalation is a political call.
thefederalist.com
Here's an excellent snip wrt "thinking it through":
In all three cases (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya) U.S. national leadership failed to think it through.
(As an aside, I was "for" Iraq, but only if we had a solid post-Phase III (active combat) plan. We didn't and we continue to see the results of that 15+ years later. I was "for" Afghanistan, but only as "punishment" in response to 9/11 (of both AQ and its Taliban hosts). The Bush administration blew it by succumbing to "mission creep" (e.g., counter-narcotics, nation-building, women's rights, etc.) while the Obama administration blew it by using Afghanistan as "The Good War" to justify its decision to leave Iraq. Both administrations made horrible decisions (and not just in hindsight) and we continue to see the results of these decisions 18+ years later. I was NEVER "for" Libya. Misguided and utterly foolish. If Iraq in 2003 was about "unfinished business," then Libya was all about "woke foreign policy.")
Back to Iran. Here's a snip regarding the thought process of what to do next (with Iran):
Here's why Trump's approach (in response to Iran's "dumb missile" launch) is the correct one. He's resisting the temptation the Bush administration succumbed to wrt Iraq 2003:
WRT "How It's Done," here's the penultimate paragraph:
"Conservative realism" might be a bit redundant, but that's a quibble. Anyway, this is what Trump is thinking. No, I'm not mind-reading; Trump, in both statements and actions (since, forever), is doing just this. There IS a coherent, mature approach to The Trump Doctrine (at least, up until this point) wrt Iran. The same maturity also comes through loud and clear wrt Russia, China, NoKo, NATO "allies," trade, the southern border, etc. It ain't perfect (because we're not perfect and mistakes happen), but Trump is "winning" FAR MORE often than not. Don't fall for the criticisms of the MSM rank amateurs and other Statlers and Waldorfs.*
I highly recommend you click over to read the entire article. The article's title and sub-title are alone worth the click-over. Further, these snips don't do justice to the piece. If you want to begin to understand how mature foreign policy is conducted (as opposed to the wishful/magical thinking type practiced by Bush II and Obama) this is a good place to start.
Back to the author. If you ever stumble across anything this guy writes, stop what you're doing, and spend a few minutes reading.
*Let's add this:
Everyone On The Internet Awarded Honorary Degree In International Affairs
U.S.—All Americans on the internet have been awarded an honorary degree in international affairs for their expert opinions on foreign policy, sources confirmed Thursday.
babylonbee.com
--- End of line (MCP)
Last edited:
