4 ms·

I've been hearing for almost 20 years now that "we're going to war with Iran <soon>". What's different now?

A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
Umm. We barely avoided war with Iran when Suleimani was killed. Thankfully, Trump saw no benefit in it ( for better or worse, he does seem responsive to his base, that is not super thrilled about dying there ). But if you do not see the steady push of the drums of war, or worse, choose to actively ignore it, it is difficult for me to say anything that would change your mind. To me it seems apparent. It certainly should have been apparent after Iraq.
- lostapathy 6y ago
  Again, though, what's different about the current situation than the last 20 years? There's constantly been a "steady push of the drums of war" over that time.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
    In a sense, it hard not to agree with you. The trajectory was set a good while ago. The destination did not change in any real way. From that perspective, you are right. It has been the case for 20 years and US did not attack Iran. There is a difference though. For example, with Vietnam, the press was largely careful not ruffle administration's feathers. With Iraq, there was some mild questioning, but few of the established media questioned the narrative pushed by the administration. Now look at the response of the press to even a possibility of another full out war in ME ( at best divided along partisan lines ). That was one of the few times, I actually agreed with Tucker. The change you are thinking of is that the war of Iran did not happen yet ( and it likely would have based on the publicly available information [1],[2]). If left to Washington alone, I am willing to bet good money, it would have happened already. [1]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/concerns-trump-administration-laying-legal-groundwork-military-action/story?id=62360052 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/concerns-trump-administratio... [2]https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-demands-for-iran-read-more-like-a-declaration-of-war-than-a-path-to-peace https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-deman...

Umm. We barely avoided war with Iran when Suleimani was killed. Thankfully, Trump saw no benefit in it ( for better or worse, he does seem responsive to his base, that is not super thrilled about dying there ). But if you do not see the steady push of the drums of war, or worse, choose to actively ignore it, it is difficult for me to say anything that would change your mind. To me it seems apparent. It certainly should have been apparent after Iraq.

lostapathy 6y ago
Again, though, what's different about the current situation than the last 20 years? There's constantly been a "steady push of the drums of war" over that time.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  In a sense, it hard not to agree with you. The trajectory was set a good while ago. The destination did not change in any real way. From that perspective, you are right. It has been the case for 20 years and US did not attack Iran. There is a difference though. For example, with Vietnam, the press was largely careful not ruffle administration's feathers. With Iraq, there was some mild questioning, but few of the established media questioned the narrative pushed by the administration. Now look at the response of the press to even a possibility of another full out war in ME ( at best divided along partisan lines ). That was one of the few times, I actually agreed with Tucker. The change you are thinking of is that the war of Iran did not happen yet ( and it likely would have based on the publicly available information [1],[2]). If left to Washington alone, I am willing to bet good money, it would have happened already. [1]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/concerns-trump-administration-laying-legal-groundwork-military-action/story?id=62360052 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/concerns-trump-administratio... [2]https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-demands-for-iran-read-more-like-a-declaration-of-war-than-a-path-to-peace https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20989/pompeos-12-deman...