get your fucking head on straight

  • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
    hexagon
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 years ago

    He killed Soleimani! How the fuck is that not escalation? It's way more than anything Obama did.

    • russianattack [he/him]
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 years ago

      it's not though. trump is shutting down military bases and criticizing his generals because they're getting into wars for profit. trump is detached from that entire blood machine in a way that obama wasn't and biden won't be

      • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
        hexagon
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 years ago

        You don't think assassinating the top general of a sovereign nation, a man who was a literal war hero and one of the staunchest and most effective enemies of imperialism, is escalation?

        • russianattack [he/him]
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 years ago

          i think trump has ignored advisors pleas to escalate, it's documented, and was particularly shocking to some of them like bolton. killing soleimani was stupid and wrong, but my argument is that trump would do fewer of those dumb and wrong things than his predecssors

          • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
            hexagon
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 years ago

            He did not ignore please to escalate. If he did he would not have assassinated Soleimani. Do we not understand that that is the most aggressive action taken by the US against Iran since, I dunno, the coup?

            • Bread_In_Baltimore [he/him]
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 years ago

              It was definitely an aggressive action, but it wasn't one rooted in a coherent imperialist plan of action. I'm Trump's mind it was dick swinging, and he didn't follow up with major aggression. He didn't build up troops in Iraq and ships in the strait of Hormuz to threaten Iran. He likes to flex but not follow through with a fight. The flexing is disrespectful and he's not trying to improve relations with Iran in any way, but he's not planning on invading either. No one is saying Trump is a peacenik, he just doesn't have the stomach for major conflict which is what the imperial project kinda needs right now since it's softer instruments are failing.

              • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
                hexagon
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                4 years ago

                I would argue that no US president has the stomach for war with Iran because they know we would lose. Everything is posturing and flexing to an extent. Trump has increased ships in the Hormuz (or at least aggression from the ships already there), with the seizing of oil tankers and weapons shipments.

                Trump's incoherent plan is just as dangerous as it is helpful.

                • the_river_cass [she/her]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  I would argue that no US president has the stomach for war with Iran because they know we would lose.

                  I don't think this is true. the military, intelligence community, etc. clearly believes they'd prevail (against a mountain of evidence over the last 60 years) and the neolibs defer to the military on these matters. american military superiority is practically a religious belief at this point. the empire won't survive another war but I'm not sure the democratic party actually knows that.

                • Bread_In_Baltimore [he/him]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  Trump's incoherent plan is absolutely not as dangerous and harmful as a competent and dedicated imperialist project would be. Like nobody is saying Trump is an anti-imperialist lol. Just that he isnt completely submissive to a broader imperialist power structure like Biden would be. When people make this observation they aren't dating Trump is "good" for the world, just that by comparison he isn't as bad as people who have an ideological commitment to the Imperial project

                  • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
                    hexagon
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Trump has surrounded himself with people who have that ideological commitment and the history of carrying it out.

      • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
        hexagon
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 years ago

        The claim in this thread is that Hillary would've just marched the military into Iran, apparently unprovoked.

          • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
            hexagon
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            4 years ago

            Take a look through and you will see plenty of "Hillary would've started a war with Iran." Which I'm sure she would've tried to, but she also would've failed, because Iran has the sense to do everything they can to avoid that.

              • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
                hexagon
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                4 years ago

                Do what shit? I'm not buying the absolutely preposterous lie of Donald the Dove. Everyone here is ignoring Soleimani, ignoring the expansion of every single war and bombing campaign, ignoring the most anti-Palestinian administration in decades, ignoring the coup in Bolivia, ignoring the trade war with China, all so they can own the libs.

                  • jack [he/him, comrade/them]
                    hexagon
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Someone literally said he's not a war hawk. And yeah, I'm feeling pretty agitated by the responses in this thread.