Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - mod warnings in OP, Updated 06/06/25

1864865866867869

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    Personally I think they'll be invaded and the regime changed if they take that strategy.

    Look's like they've decided to attack American bases instead. Personally I think it's within their right from their point of view but I don't think the Qatari's will be happy about this. And with Trump in charge you might have the USAF joining the Israeli's. Could be a tough future for Iran.

    Surely they won't be stupid enough to target Saudi territory?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,743 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Iran fired missiles at US bases in Qatar and Bahrain. Missiles were intercepted.

    https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/israel-iran-us-strikes-06-23-25-intl-hnk



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,095 ✭✭✭newhouse87


    All coordinated No soldiers will be hurt on us side. Posturing from the Iranians for there people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,264 ✭✭✭✭briany




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    Popcorn at the ready! Isn't it great being from a country that doesn't invade others or try building nuclear weapons 😎



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,847 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    I think that “attack” shows that Iran have been neutered and there won’t be any large scale retaliation /escalation. Trump and the right will be claiming his attack on Iran as a major win.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,069 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    It's a long running sore with members of the UN general assembly that the select members of the UN security council can veto resolutions voted on at the UN. Earlier this year, the US ambassador and the Russian ambassador to the UN had, with their home Govts permission, cobbled together a plan to scuttle the Ukraine delegation's 3rd anniversary resolution condemning the Russian invasion of their country and demanding a full withdrawal.

    However, the plan, like a lot of human plans, went wrong. The US Ambassador [a seasoned diplomat] allegedly told the UK and French ambassadors that Ukraine should withdraw its resolution. Both those Govts took the issue up separately with the security council and the general assembly and the US/Russia resolution had to be amended by the US to include language affirming Ukraine's territorial integrity.

    In Feb this year, the US voted against Ukraine’s own resolution that clearly condemned the Russian invasion, further fuelling tensions among allies. The US ambassador was promoted in Jan from the deputy ambassadorship there, having got the deputy's job in 2024 after serving as the US ambassador in Lebanon from 2020 to 2023, meaning she served both Biden and Trump admins without a bother to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,039 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Invaded by who? Its a country of 92 million people with a terrain nearly entirely composed of mountains or incredibly difficult terrain. Thats 3 times the population as Iraq in 2003, with a landmass also 3 times the size of Iraq and impossible to simply drive across like was possible in the Iraqi desert. Invasion on the scale you are suggesting to enact a military victory, cause a regime change and maintain order is unfeasible.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭yagan


    Trump is like that pigeon you try to play chess with. They knock over all the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like they won.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    When the majority of the nation want the regime gone it's easier then it sounds. Could end up Very messy though and a civil war. Iran isn't one homogeneous tribe.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,039 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Regime change for a country that size in population and landmass will only be effective from within. An invasion by other countries and specifically the US will cause the exact opposite reaction and push support towards the current regime which is already pretty unpopular however the US is still hated more.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭yagan


    Could say the same about the USA and it's MAGA regime.

    In another indictment of the Trump regime the USD did not get the traditional bump as in the past in times of geopolitical uncertainty.

    Not that that matters to Trump as he wants to crater the USD.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,264 ✭✭✭✭briany


    In Henry Kissinger, realpolitik, New American Century terms, Iran descending into civil war isn't a bad outcome. We ordinary people look at it as a bad outcome because of the humanitarian consequences and so on, but military strategists just see it as another country that can no longer antagonise its allies because it's too busy fighting with itself, a la Syria.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭dmcdona


    His choices of locations for his hollybops is also limited for fear of ending up having to snuggle up in a cell with Duterte in The Hague.

    And god forbid that even after choosing a "sympathetic" destination that his aircraft develops a technical fault and has to make an emergency landing en route…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,248 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Ahahahah..

    1000011983.jpg

    You see.. Anderson is gay, so... Get this! Trump calls him "Allison". Ahahaha! Isn't that absolutely hilarious?? Even Oscar Wilde would be envious of his sharp wit.

    He is a petty, pathetic, weak f**king bully.

    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    And like Syria the powers that be will try to manipulate a desirable outcome after the civil war.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,856 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It's just a simple test by Iran to see what they are up against in my opinion.

    I said yesterday that Iran will attack all gulf states with ties to the US.

    They'll definitely do that.

    Lots of people really underestimate countries in other parts of the world. Iran have been at war with somebody or something all through the centuries and they've won most of them.

    They've got three of the worst terrorist organisations in the world on their side in the Houthis, Hamas and the Hezbollah.

    If they can't get there through the air or by sea then you'll see important buildings blowing up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,467 ✭✭✭halkar


    This was the outcome of replacing a dictator with a terrorist. This happened yesterday. Iraq and Libya still haven't recovered from democracy west brought them. No point commenting on Afghanistan



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,955 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Will this be openly admitted by both sides? Was it re Iran's 'retaliation' over Solemani? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose from Iran's POV, even though most of their people would probably suspect this anyway?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,264 ✭✭✭✭briany


    The US/Israel have shown that they have the potential to hit any prominent Iranian at any time they wish with the targeted strikes they've already done. I'm not sure the tippy top of the Iranian government want to continue with their antagonism and put that crosshair on themselves.

    As for trying to find out what they're up against, they should know by now that the US and allies are in possession of air defence of a quality sufficient to protect against Iranian rocket attacks.

    If the Iranians want to get even, they'll have to box a bit more cleverly than lobbing rockets around.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭yagan


    Israel is using starvation right now as a weapon, and they don't make your terror list?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,917 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    He was naming terrorist groups who are on the same side as Iran. Israel are obviously not on the same side as Iran.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭yagan


    Interesting piece of maths. Everyone 1 Million dollar missile Iran launches Israel spends 4 Million worth of interceptor missiles. Interestingly the maths is even more stark for the US carrier that was stationed off Yemen when the cost of simply being there is also factored in on a per day basis. They were using expensive interceptor missiles at such a rapid rate that they had to pull their aircraft carrier out of range of cheap drones.

    That Ukranian attack from the back of a truck deep within Russia that destroyed so much of the Russian bomber fleet has every expensive military in the world sitting up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,296 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Some people think Israel are the only terrorists now, all the other classical terrorist groups got an amnesty since they want to destroy terrorist Israel.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭yagan


    Some people define a terrorist as being the side with the smaller arsenal, Putin against Ukraine, Israel against Palestinian civilians, the USA against Afghanistani goat herders etc…

    The Brits no doubt called Washington and his lot terrorists. Coincidently those in the 13 colonies that continued to fight for Britain were called Loyalists by the republicans.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,263 ✭✭✭✭J Mysterio




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,377 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    They were always neutered. The idea they were a legitimate threat to Israel was nonsense never mind taking on America.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 231 ✭✭Maxface


    It is unreal how one person can literally ruin the entire reputation of a country in such a short space of time. I saw an article today about the EU concerned that the US could turn off our internet, another that countries in the EU are looking to bring their gold back to their own countries due to concerns around it being withheld, a different one about requests for social media handles for previous 5 years, if you want to head over there and one about the US contacting companies in Ireland about DEI practises. All very negative and all very Un-American.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,185 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    The idea they were a legitimate threat to Israel was nonsense

    Israels whole reason for starting this was that they were. I tend to agree with you though, this was just Israel playing Trump to get them to bomb Iran and try tempt them into a proper war.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,856 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I'm of the opinion that the smart move is to keep assassinating the leaders of Israel until some guy comes along who decides that peace is the way forward.

    I despise Israel and all the despicable, atrocious things they've done. I'm not sure atrocious and despicable are strong enough words for a lot of what they've done.

    I didn't call them a terrorist organisation because it's actually a country.

    Of course the United Nations are responsible for this, coming up with the great idea that taking over Arab territory and making it a Jewish country was a good idea.



Advertisement