Iran

Iranian Missiles Rain on Bases in Iraq

Tehran's response to the killing of Iranian military chieftain Qassem Soleimani threatens a deeper war.

|

Bases holding U.S. military personnel were hit today by multiple missiles from Iran, the Pentagon has confirmed. A base in Al-Asad in Iraq's Anbar province and a base in Irbil, Iraq, were both attacked.

Casualties, if any, have not been confirmed as of now. This is a fog-of-war situation in which the agreed-on facts will likely shift; for example, The New York Times reports that earlier today it had been believed "that rockets had been fired on Taji Air Base, an Iraqi military base where American troops are deployed," but now officials say "the reports of an attack there appeared to be false."

The Pentagon is reporting "more than dozen ballistic missiles" fired at the two bases, while the Iranians claim more than 30 were sent just to the Asad base.

According to the Times, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps says its "fierce revenge" for the U.S. assassination of Corps chief Qassem Soleimani "has begun."

Fox is reporting that the

latest U.S. intelligence assessment showed Iran had more than 2,000 ballistic missiles, Pentagon officials told Fox News.

The USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier strike group has been in the Gulf of Oman along with guided-missile destroyers, a guided-missile cruiser and at least one submarine. The Navy warships and submarine together had hundreds of Tomahawk cruise missiles with pre-planned targets locked into the missiles.

The ships would be ready to fire if given the order, two senior Pentagon officials told Fox News.

We're now closer to an all-out shooting war with Iran, with costs and consequences likely to be as wasteful and horrific as the previous Middle Eastern interventions that President Donald Trump has criticized in the past.

 

Advertisement

NEXT: CNN Settles Lawsuit With Covington Catholic Student Nick Sandmann

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Oh no! WW3! I’m so scared of big bad Iran, why can’t we just acquiesce to terrorists? I need a safe space.

    1. Mr. Laursen your wife said you can’t play here no more.

      1. Mr. Laursen your wife mom said you can’t play here no more.

        FTFY

        Reply

        1. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa

          1. Oooh you’re onto something.

    2. Ten missiles hit Al-Assad Air Base, one missile hit a military base in Erbil and four missiles failed, according to a U.S. military spokesman for Central Command, responsible for American forces in the Middle East.

      But according to Robbie we probably shouldn’t believe this.

    3. ITT,

      Jeff avoids answering a question that embarrassed him.

    4. The fucking MSM are trying to claim that the Iranians didnt want to hit the US bases to cause casualties but just “scare” America.

      HAHAHAHAHA.

      All the surface-to-surface missiles missed their targets. LOL

      1. Actually, there could be some truth to it. I suspect Iranian leaders just wanted to save face with their people but did not actually want to kill any Americans and bring the wrath of hell upon them.

  2. An all out shooting war. We’re totally in the midst of it. WW3.

    Journalism.

    1. Glad to see Brian got the memo that we need to whip this thing up into a war.

      I mean, for crying out loud it looks like it’s almost over. Without a bunch of hyper sensationalist headlines we’re never going to get people worked up enough to have a war. Somebody call John Bolton!

      1. The media and Democrats are doing exactly what Iran wants them to do. Hype up a largely meaningless attack of a few dozen low grade missiles on a regional outpost that can easily defend, but scare all the little children. This is no different than the largely pointless attacks on Israel. Yet we already have the media acting as the PR for Iran.

        1. So now you’re put a scale on what the possible lose of our military personnel should been?

          1. “should be.”

          2. What scale. We lost zero. I know you were hoping for more. Cheer harder for Iran next time.

            1. You are one pathetic piece of shit you know! Always deflecting and not seeing past your nose at the possibility that this will go south very quickly and American lives will be lost. Fucking warmongers!

              1. You Ds are so upset it appears no Americans were killed or injured

              2. Sorry I dont cower in gear like you do. I feel really badly that I have a spine.

                So I apologize.

                Now will you apologize for hoping for more troop deaths?

              3. Iran has already killed or assisted in killing 600+ Americans, but I guess they don’t count.

                1. No one is arguing that fact but the potential of loosing more is ok with you guys? JesseAZ from one side of his mouth believes the loss of an American contractor is unacceptable and then from the other side of his pie hole has no issue with a “largely meaningless attack of a few dozen low grade missiles” like the possible loss of more American is no big deal. Pathetic!

                  1. “losing”

                  2. And… What? You think there’s some discontinuity there?

                  3. Wow. You are bad at reading comprehension. And you’re also bad at being informed. Iran hasn’t killed just one US contractor.

                    You really dont comprehend the point of my comment do you? The attack by Iran appears to be largely bluster. They went for a small damage attack, easily stopped by US defenses, in order to formulate a PR campaign that they stood up to the big evil Satan. They want people to spread that narrative that you are happily doing for them. In this attack their intention was not US deaths but PR. You are so happy to oblige.

                    That or you really do wish they had killed some troops so you could get madder at trump and the US.

                    1. “All is well” JesseAz!
                      Now fuck off and die!

                    2. Oh, so you’re hoping for the troop death. Got it.

                    3. The attack by Iran appears to be largely bluster.

                      Jesse’s got the right-wing talking points down pat!

                      “Why, it’s OBVIOUS that they didn’t really TRY to hurt anyone, even though they were real missiles fired at real targets, can’t you see that? Stop reporting live missile attacks as if it were a REAL missile attack, you’re just carrying water for the Iranians!”

                    4. And at this point in time, we don’t even know (Heaven forbid) if American military were killed.

                      Even if they were or weren’t, Jesse doesn’t want the media to report it. That would be just helping Iran’s PR team!

                    5. You’re broken, jeff.
                      Seek therapy

                    6. There’s Nardz, trying to do his gaslighting impression again

                    7. ::says Jesse is mad because the headline isn’t deferential to Trump::
                      ::accuses others of gaslighting::

                    8. ::says Jesse is mad because the headline isn’t deferential to Trump::

                      Yup, he wants one that follows his “OBVIOUS” take that the missiles weren’t TRYING to hurt anyone.

                      Maybe if the headline said something like:

                      IRAN LASHES OUT IN VAIN; DEAR LEADER UNHARMED

                      ::accuses others of gaslighting::

                      Nardz has this thing where he accuses me of being mentally ill while he invents fantasies about killing dragons and ascribing them to me. It’s pretty weird actually.

                    9. Yup, he wants one that follows his “OBVIOUS” take that the missiles weren’t TRYING to hurt anyone.

                      Considering these were rockets, and not actual ballistic missiles–which Iran does possess and can be targeted for maximum damage–that’s not an unreasonable assumption.

                      But taking that into account would require some actual awareness of something beyond the latest media hot takes.

                      Nardz has this thing where he accuses me of being mentally ill while he invents fantasies about killing dragons and ascribing them to me. It’s pretty weird actually.

                      Yeah, you’ve certainly never tried ascribed false motives to anyone.

                    10. Considering these were rockets, and not actual ballistic missiles–which Iran does possess and can be targeted for maximum damage–that’s not an unreasonable assumption.

                      Oh give me a break.

                      “Because I shot at you with a pistol, and not with an AR-15, I wasn’t really TRYING to hurt you, see?”

                      Yeah, you’ve certainly never tried ascribed false motives to anyone.

                      Wait, are you implying that Nardz is lying about me? No way!

                      And I won’t say that I’ve never ascribed false motives to people, but it is pretty rare. Do you have a specific example?

                    11. chemjeff radical individualist
                      January.8.2020 at 12:34 am
                      “…Oh give me a break…”

                      Fine.
                      You’re only one of the fucking lefty ignoramuses who shows up to prove how stoooooooooooopid someone can be.
                      Do the world a favor; fuck off and die.

                    12. I’m not ascribing false motives to jeff.
                      He is psychotic.
                      Might be a functional psychotic, but still insanity.
                      That’s my conclusion.
                      It’s based on the frequency with which he argues points other than those that have been made and invents statements to attribute to them. His denial in the face of correction can only be maintained through thoroughly distorted perception.
                      Everyone here is free to read his posts and come to their own conclusions.
                      And jeff is free to disprove me through his behavior.

                    13. LOL this is what Internet disagreements have come to now. “You don’t agree with me, therefore you’re psychotic!”

                      Good heavens. Get help yourself.

                    14. Jeff continues with his idiocy. Did you purposefully wait until you knew I wouldnt be in?

                      I know you’re mad was killed Jeff. You can pull an MSNBC and air footage from Iranian government news claiming 80 deaths. Keep cheering on iran Jeff.

                  4. Whereas you seem to think ignoring the attack that killed am American civilian and the attack on the Embassy will somehow not result in more similar activity.

                  5. Why are you so intent on trying to speak a war with Iran into existence? Is your nostalgia for the mid-2000s really that deep?

                    That time period sucked, I have no idea why you want to recreate it so badly.

        2. How dare the media report on current events. Don’t they know that they are just shilling for the enemy?

          1. “chemjeff radical individualist
            January.7.2020 at 6:07 pm
            When your response consists of an insult, I know I’ve hit the mark”

            So you’re saying I’m the most correct person on this board for over a decade?

          2. We’re now closer to an all-out shooting war with Iran, with costs and consequences likely to be as wasteful and horrific as the previous Middle Eastern interventions

            I didn’t realize that all libertines had such astute precognitive powers. That’s your “reporting.” But most native speakers would call it wish-casting.

          3. There is reporting and there is hyping dummy. The use of the word rain for 15 missiles, a third that failed, is hyping. Words have emotive connotations. If your ignorance is unbounded.

            1. CHEMJEFF EMOTING!!!

              1. Better than made up scenarios of sophistry.

                1. But what if….

                  1. Just imagine if every fact I line up leads to exactly the outcome I want… imagine.

                    1. And then imagine it has anything to do with the discussion, and is actually possible and not a gross violation of every law of physics…

            2. Oh but if it had been 16 missiles, then using the term “rain” would have been appropriate…?

              The headline is perfectly legitimate and you just don’t like it because it is insufficiently deferential to Dear Leader.

              1. Rockets not missiles. There is a huge difference. And 16 rockets isn’t that many really. Hell, the standard load on a single Apache is 32 rockets.

                1. Jeff really isn’t concerned with data; he’s a fucking ignoramus that way.

                2. They’ve been reported as ballistic missiles, though I don’t know if other information has come out.
                  Previous attacks from within Iraq by militias were with rockets.
                  It doesn’t change the point specifically.
                  Especially if none hit targets…

                  http://secure.marketwatch.com/story/what-irans-missile-attack-on-us-forces-in-iraq-may-say-about-the-islamic-republics-ballistic-capability-2020-01-07?mod=MW_story_top_stories

                  1. They were unguided ballistic missiles. Low hit rates. Usually in aerospace we call unguided missiles to be rockets.

                    1. Fair enough

                  2. Yes, this morning they are saying it was ballistic missiles (albeit short range unguided missiles).

              2. You’re an emotional child jeffrey.

  3. We shall see.

  4. We can’t make more bombs until we use the ones we have.

    1. Bombs made during WWII and the Korean War were pulled out of storage and used in the Viet Nam War.

      Battleship shells and propellant charges put in storage after WWII when the battleships were mothballed were used when USS New Jersey was reactivated and redeployed in the VietNam War and USS Missouri and USS Wisconsin were deployed in the first Gulf War (1991).

      Recycling is green.

    2. Perhaps time to buy Raytheon stock?

      1. My father has Lockheed (inherited many, many years ago).
        He said it shot up like 20% friday, but came back down when Trump said no war.
        Shucks!

  5. We could take out every single Iranian military assest in less than 90 days. That includes their entire navy, air force, armor, factories, and research centers. They have zero ability to hit any of our assets that aren’t already in theatre. Yes, here in Denver, I’m very, very scared of Iranian retaliation.

    1. Better hope Iron Dome is as good as they say it is.

      1. I mean, at this point I wouldn’t be surprised if the Israelis were eager to finish this for once and for all. Dubai, on the other hand, was also threatened as a tertiary target, and I’m not sure what sort of defenses they have there. Probably not much if any.

      2. I don’t need Iron Dome, because Iranian missiles can’t reach the continental US.
        American ICBMs, on the other hand, could reduce ancient Persia into a sheet of glass within roughly 8 minutes. There is not going to be any “WWWIII”.

        1. “because Iranian missiles can’t reach the continental US”

          Why bother with the trouble and expense of an American style missile program? Look for unexpected, asymmetrical attacks. Using the internet to disable US infrastructure, or hack the myriad of missiles the US keeps, for example.

          1. Our missiles aren’t accessible from the internet for that exact reason. You can’t hack our missiles, no matter what Hollywood would have you believe. Hell until recently the Navy still used floppy disks because they are more secure for their missiles.

            1. There’s lots of targets for a cyber attack that could harm American interests. They are cheaper and more convenient and more in line with Iran’s asymmetrical strategy. Iran supposedly has (or had) the capacity to hack US drones so maybe they don’t need to hack the missiles if they can hack their vehicles.

              1. Then don’t pick stupid ones that have no chance of actually happening. Especially if they are fucking technologically impossible. Pick something that actually could happen.

                1. Maybe they’ll hack Disney!

                2. “Then don’t pick stupid ones that have no chance of actually happening.”

                  I already mentioned that Iran could conceivably damage American infrastructure without having missiles that reach North America. Cyber warfare is what this capability is called.

                  1. No you said that and then went completely batshit crazy and brought up Iran hacking out missiles. I didn’t correct your first part just the completely deluded second part. The OMG skynet is going to Nuke the world bit.

              2. Drones carry small anti-armour missiles that can take out a small house or bunker but are not a real threat outside of a small target. A Hellfire is good at killing a single tank or bunker but that is about it. And, they don’t fly over the US armed. Iran could possibly hack one (though I’m sure the USAF has improved the firewalls since that report came out years ago) but it would never reach the US to launch a Hellfire. They travel at subsonics speeds and a US interceptor (such as an F-15 or F-22) would easily intercept it and destroy it long before it became a threat to the US. A predator drone could not outrun an AMRAAM missile. Again, stop with the stupid Hollywood make believe.

                1. Just a couple of months ago Iran apparently shot an American drone down. A top of the line model. Do you think the US military was prepared for that, or had they underestimated the vulnerabiity of their drones?

                  1. They shot down a drone, proving my point that drones aren’t hard to shoot the fuck down. So your scenario of Iran hacking drones to attack the US is as fucking imbecile as your scenario were they hack our ICBMs. Learn to fucking read. You just said exactly what I was saying. As for shooting down a drone, with a SAM, that is in no way related to how well the USAF has corrected software problems that may open drones to hacking. I doubt the USAF was surprised that Iran had the capabilities to shoot down a drone (in fact this is pretty well known that a subsonic vehicle is vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire) what surprised them is Iran would shoot it down in international waters with no provocation. Just keep digging.

    2. No, no. That means that we have to engage in an 18 year occupation and nation building. Punitive raids violate the 8th law of thermodynamics. IT. IS. KNOWN.

    3. Exactly. Iran has the capability to cause legitimate damage to US troops throughout the Middle East. They could hit any GCC-area installation in the Gulf if they wanted to.

      And that’s something all these hysterical drama queens in the media and the galaxy-brained commenters here fanning their face over this entire incident are too ignorant to actually consider, because it might mean taking the blinders off and approaching Middle Eastern relations in a holistic manner.

      The mere fact that the GCC, save for a few milquetoast statements about hopes for de-escalation, has largely gone radio silent on the drone strike shows that their leaders are *perfectly fine* with Soleimani getting blown away, and that they aren’t worried in the slightest about this escalating into a larger conflict. Kuwait, which is right on the fucking border with Iran, is hosting the reserve security troops. Qatar, which hosts one of the largest air bases with US troops in the region, but also has an solid economic relationship with Iran due to their shared use of the South Pars gas field and Qatar’s 2017 rift with the other GCC nations, pointedly hasn’t told the US to GTFO.

      These are the guys who have more to worry about than the US if an actual conflict breaks out. Their muted responses in this case are extremely telling.

      1. “Their muted responses in this case are extremely telling.”

        These are public responses, so they don’t tell us much about the more important discussions that take place privately. I imagine the Iranians will concentrate on Iraq, given America’s unhappy history there. They may want to leave the gulf states and their assets out of this, as they all have so much to lose.

    4. “Yes, here in Denver, I’m very, very scared of Iranian retaliation.”

      At least you’ll know who to blame if the city were to suddenly blackout for Persian cyber attack.

      1. Living in the dark for a few days and having to sleep with multiple blankets to keep warm would do a lot of those Denver yuppies some good.

      2. Its weird watching the TDS crew pray for attacks.

    5. Zero ability to hit our assets?

      A bunch of ragtaggers took down the World Trade Center. Poisoning the Denver water supply might be a six-man job. Bombing a Trump-branded office tower, hotel, or golf course outside the United States could be a one-man job (maybe a two-man job inside the United States). Assassinating a few war criminals from the torture period could take as many as a dozen people.

      1. Poisoning the Denver water supply might be a six-man job.

        LOL. You really have no fucking clue how complex the Denver water system is. That’s what makes you a slack-jawed, slope-foreheaded hicklib.

        1. What’s worse is the fantasies of the Leftists.
          They’re attributing their own motives and thought process, all-consuming resentment and suicidal “revenge”, to the Iranian regime, who actually have something to lose and don’t appear to want to just go down in a blaze of fury

          1. Ilhan Omar was on the news last night giving advice where Iran should attack.

      2. Oh, is this the real asshole bigot?
        Stuff it up your ass; your head wants company.

      3. “”A bunch of ragtaggers took down the World Trade Center. “”

        The attack was planned by Khalid. Ragtaggers are not good at planning. We just removed a planner from the face of the earth.

        That which you mention has been in affect for decades. It’s nothing new. However it would be wise for Iran to consider what happened to some ME countries after the WTC went down.

  6. This is a fog-of-war situation in which the agreed-on facts will likely shift; for example, The New York Times reports that earlier today it had been believed “that rockets had been fired on Taji Air Base, an Iraqi military base where American troops are deployed,” but now officials say “the reports of an attack there appeared to be false.”

    NYT reports something and people with more knowledge contradict it? Sounds more like a “day ending in y” situation

    1. Reason just literally told us not to believe the IC. BUT apparent we should still believe the NYT.

    2. NYT is the enemy within. They are with Iran, not America. Perhaps they should be prosecuted for treason.

  7. Al-Asad is in a small canyon out in the desert. We’ll see if there are any casualties, but until I see some battle damage assessment or casualty list this strikes me as just more posturing. Lots of wide open space where they could let missiles fall and not hurt anyone or anything, but still give the appearance that they are “fighting back”

    1. It’s saving face all the way down!

    2. Reports so far are no casualties.

      1. No American casualties. Iraqi are unknown.

    3. Possible, and certainly not the worst outcome.

    4. My thought too, although I have heard that there have been some Iraqis killed, nothing concrete like where and when though.

      1. I’ve heard “casualties” but not necessarily “killed”
        That was an hour or so ago

        1. yeah, all I’ve heard is hearsay, and plenty of it’s coming from TDS “World War REE” types, so who knows.

          1. “World War REE”

            Nice

            1. credit to Rageaholic on youtube, the guy’s hilarious and pretty good at digging into the news for what’s real and what’s not.

  8. Say a prayer for our troops in theater. I know that I will.

    1. Yes. Wishing all the best to the American troops.

      Unfortunately, Democrats and media will play interference for Iran.

      1. Progressive counter tribalism has evolved to outright treason. Treat them as traitors. In fact, just give them phony trials and line them up and shoot them. They should be for that anyway, as FDR was known to do that to traitors, and the orogtards love FDR.

        1. Open wider, clinger. Or not. At this point, it might be more fun for your betters if you don’t.

          1. You certainly deserve the Full Suleimani, hicklib.

    2. Indeed.

      1. “chemjeff radical individualist
        January.7.2020 at 6:07 pm
        When your response consists of an insult, I know I’ve hit the mark”

        So you’re saying I’m the most correct person on this board for over a decade?

      2. It is hilarious how Jeff exposed this fake sentiment.

    3. Thankfully, as of 0900, there are no American casualties reported. My prayers were answered.

      Now let’s see if we can avoid a war.

  9. Ooo the Iranians are so mad at me. Oooo I’m so scared.

    /hides behind Smithers.

    Mostly bark, no bite. They couldn’t even beat Iraq in the 1980s.

    C’man.

    1. They would’ve beat Iraq like a redheaded stepchild if the US hadn’t been giving Saddam weapons.

      1. They were also giving Iran weapons. Remember Iran-Contra. That deal. The one where spares for aircraft and TOW missiles were provided.

        The reason neither side was able to “defeat” the other was an utter lack of competency, not a lack of weapons. Hence the desperate use of chemical weapons and small children to try to get any kind of an edge.

        1. That’s how I remember it. It looked like two retards lobbing rockets and grenades at each other on TV.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQKWn6oPj-c

          1. One of my favorite movie lines
            From the underrated The Replacements

            “I’ve seen monkey shit fights at the zoo more organized than this!”

        2. Yes, I recall that war basically devolved into trench warfare, except for areas in the southern zone where some attempts at maneuver continued.

          Incompetence is about right, even though Iraq should have been able to prevail, given its advantages in equipment, training, and re-supply from the West.

      2. All of you suck, and whatever thought pops into my head at any moment is the truth.

        1. Lol
          Everyone knows, you never go full-jeff

    2. If the Iranians are smart they would do something obvious and also ineffective against military targets. Thereby not creating the likelihood of overwhelming response.

      Then they would go back to planning their specialty – something involving softer asymmetric targets.

      1. The two bases were far put in range, one in Sunni territory and one in Kurd territory. The missiles used against them are easy to detect and shoot down. Both bases are pretty minimal on size. So iran wasnt going for any actual big show. It’s more bluster than anything. But I’m sure we will shortly be told to panic.

        1. Smart choice of targets.
          It’s a gamble, but they might think of this as a way to get Iraqis behind a “no foreign troops” vote.
          On the other hand, it may just reinforce the Sunni and Kurd desire for US presence

      2. If the Iranians are smart, they’ll come to the table and give up their imperial and nuclear dreams.
        Otherwise, their own people are going to rip them apart

        1. Yeah, why doesn’t Iran just submit to American hegemony? It’s a mystery….

          1. We know. You prefer iranian sovereignty. it’s why you think soleimanis life is more valuable than the tens of thousands of deaths he is linked to. How many tears have you shed so far?

  10. Hopefully no Americans are hurt, because otherwise this appears to just be a show saving the regime from the appearance of bowing down to the US and begging forgiveness.
    Could be the first sign of real opportunity to move forward to a stable relationship with Iran

    1. Sad.

      Also, how’s the regime going to spin this “50 people died mourning 1 super important guy”?
      Can’t imagine it makes for good PR with your everyday Iranian

      1. maybe that IS the spin. Maybe some folks tried to protest the funeral and paid a price. Isn’t Iran the one telling the story?

    2. Just like cattle. But worse.

  11. Obviously Trump’s fault. Gave them no choice but to fire the missiles. Practically pushed the button for them.

  12. We took action last night to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war

    1. I’m desperately in love with the obvious fact that you’re an idiot but still too smart to attempt to attach an actual argument to that quote

      1. Hell – if Iran had a sense of humor, they’d just retweet that quote.

        1. If you had bothered to educate yourself you would have said they should have sent that quote that last few dozen times they made a move against the US.

          1. Yeah, I’m not sure how Iran taking this from nothing to war all at once like they have is something for them to crow about, but hey JFree isn’t one to get things like that right often so yeah.

        2. Still nothing chief, you gonna produce or what?

      2. ahahhahahahahhhhahahhahhahhah!!!

        Poop from Sarah Palin’s Buttplug above!!!! Who never “attaches an actual argument”! Read and enjoy!!!

        Bonus below! MORE from Sarah Palin’s Buttplug!!!!

        ahhhhahahhahaspahtgphyegfosgfi!!!!

        1. Hi Old Mex I’m sorry you gave up because you lost.

    2. How dare you quote Trump accurately. You must have TDS. LEAVE TRUMP ALONE!

      1. Keep hyping the Iranians Jeff. We know how badly you want this.

        1. I’m not particularly fond of war, no. Are you?

          1. Not fond of it, but when the other guy starts it (attacking an embassy is an act of war and has always been considered that) I support coming down with both feet and smashing the enemy to keep others from starting shit.

          2. You seem to be quite fond of it. You are cheerleading hysterics. You think Iran’s proxy wars in the region shouldn’t be deterred at all. You’re praying for troop deaths so you can be right.

      2. LEAVE IRAN ALONE!!! IT’S ALL TRUMP’S FAULT THAT THEY KILLED AMERICANS AND ASSAULTED AN EMBASSY!

      3. “chemjeff radical individualist
        January.7.2020 at 6:07 pm
        When your response consists of an insult, I know I’ve hit the mark”

        So you’re saying I’m the most correct person on this board for over a decade?

  13. White supremacist maggots and economically illiterate bumpkins voted in a loud-mouthed racist lout of limited intellect because he promised them a wall to contain a mythical horde of brown people, and also promised them to keep the US out of foreign entanglements. All they deserve each other, but no good person deserves any of you, you racist fucks.

    1. ABC pulled out an old sock. He must really be angry this time.

      1. He’s kind of completely losing his mind that one.

        1. We need hysterics to really give the impact iran was going for here.

          1. A little sexist there Jesse, testerics are probably what’s in order.

            1. Thought hys gender was the new cornucopia.

    2. Your rant sounds kinda racist.

    3. Hi SQRLSY. You used the wrong sock this time.

    4. A comment from the most racist poster of all, how ya doin’ Mexifry?

    5. “Mythical”?

  14. Rain is an odd headline choice. Especially with no reported deaths.

    1. It is only odd if you don’t recognize when someone is trying to fit the narrative.

      1. True. Least we can do is help their PR campaign against Trump since we killed Soleimani.

    2. It’s new math . Rain now = about 12.

      1. To be fair. That’s the exact limit to my rain at the club.

        1. I rained krugerrands but that got me tossed out because S’tarr got a concussion.

        2. I’m picturing the bribery scene from Game Night, only at the strip club. JesseAz slowly slides another single across the stage…. “how about now?”

          1. True story… we used to bring a stack of ones then build “single dollar towers” on the edge of stage. However high it got was what the girl got. Some of them would knock it over not realizing the game.

  15. I see Reason is doing its part trying to whip Americans into a war frenzy. One wonders what the CIA got on them.

    1. Probably some photos of Nick doing something depraved wearing his jacket, and nought else.

      1. Words of wisdom from the Satan worshipper!

        1. Hi Old Mex

    2. So much for ‘Reason’ eh?

      New name! Raisin. Or Reesin!

      1. Maybe just
        “Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee”

        1. ……….tard

      2. Revisionist.

    3. Does that mean the Deep State is good again or bad again? They’re flip-flopping so quickly I can’t keep track of the narrative any more.

  16. A lot of my friends and family, including myself, that are either right of center, center, or left of center are withholding judgment until the smoke clears and we have accurate information. Some right of center (Carlson) have criticized this action, while some left of center TDS victims (Friedman at NYT) had blessed this action. Reuters published this as a preemptive strike to prevent a massive 911 type attack in the works through Soleimani. Most of us are waiting for more info.

    1. Most of us simply don’t care. The imperial presidency has been allowed to steadily accrue war powers under presidents of both parties, until OMG Trump.
      If it leads to a reconsideration of executive power, great. Otherwise, it’s just one more droned terrorist.

    2. They’re overblowing a hit that’s been the rule and not the exception in that region going back decades while making it sound like this time it’s ‘different’. Yeh. Sure. Whatever. In that region?

      Meanwhile….Iran hangs gays…..

      https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-publicly-hangs-man-on-homosexuality-charges-578758

  17. I’m scared this does not turn out to be the 3rd world war. God please intervene.

    1. Stop siding with jeff and mex.

    2. It’s not a 3rd World War until the Germans jump in. It’s the rules.

        1. Reports are that France is already readying the surrender papers when the Germans attack through Belgium and the Ardennes forest for the third time, completely circumventing France’s defensive line in Alsace Lorraine.

          1. Shhh
            You’ll scare the French

          2. The French have a new battle flag: It’s a white cross on a white background.
            And a phone number to call, beginning with 1.

  18. Breaking news:

    The Donald is just itching to head over to Iraq to rally the troops. But his podiatrist says his bone spurs are acting up again.

    1. That was one of those times when you need a close friend to stop you from posting.

      But it’s you.

      1. His mom is at her third job. He is all alone.

        1. I keep forgetting that you stole that sock. Rock on, you sexy, hacker, rock on.

          1. Wow. Is that where that reply was supposed to go?

          2. Thankee

      2. My close friends are busy laughing while you follow me around from comment to comment trying to hump my leg

        1. No one is following you around, because you have posted on every thread. We can’t help but find you. We wish we couldn’t but here you are.

          1. I mean fuck, he just said that he has his close friends over, and he’s dicking around on the internet.

            That’s worse than any insult I have.

        2. I love that you lied.

        3. Your friend watches you post on reason hitting refresh?

    2. Remind me where Trump spent Thanksgiving. Then re-examine your snarky remark.

      1. Hey – I’d love to see him spend the 12th day of Christmas over there – like right now.

        But as his podiatrist says – you just can’t predict when them bone spurs start acting up.

        1. Stop being so pissed because you’re not getting the World War 3 you so desperately are hoping for.

        2. Again where did he spend Thanksgiving. If you think you’re clever you are sadly mistaken. Because no podiatrist stopped him from traveling to an active wear zone and serving troops Thanksgiving dinner, which is what you are trying to imply. But he did something when he was 22 that I can make fun of now and imply he is to scared to visit a combat zone, right after he just fucking visited a combat zone. How stupid are you?

          1. I’m not implying he’s too scared to visit a combat zone. I’m outright stating it. He’s a fucking chickenhawk. And an incompetent CinC to boot.

            1. Right.
              The soldiers love him for other reasons

              1. Something tells me the soldiers that do like him, nevertheless probably won’t confuse him for Napoleon anytime soon.

                1. Fuck off and die, Jeff. Make the world a better place.

                  1. Sevo, shouldn’t you be on your lawn telling the kids to shoo?

                    1. “chemjeff radical individualist
                      January.7.2020 at 6:07 pm
                      When your response consists of an insult, I know I’ve hit the mark”

                      So you’re saying I’m the most correct person on this board for over a decade?

                      Any time now.

              2. One – that is less true by the day

                And you ain’t seen nothing once that incompetence can’t be covered by tweet storms. You assholes of the commentariat will fall for those tweet storms and new shiny objects to bitch about. Troops in harm’s way won’t.

                1. And golly – here’s a conservative source with military connections re the likely ‘decision-making’ that went on re Soleimani.

                  And as the article says – it ain’t the Soleimani decision itself that might be a problem. It’s the very probable utter lack of any comprehension about what comes next.

                2. I was one of those troops (though under Clinton and Bush, the former could give a shit about us, the latter actually seemed to care for us despite starting a stupid war). Tell me again about how the troops feel.

                  1. Trump’s MO re Syria was a good preview of what he will likely do going forward. Because he is incapable of either learning or managing or even paying attention to details.

                    Stab actual allies in the back – and then impulsively tweet a withdrawal that blindsides even US troops in position.

                    1. So pulling out of Syria was the wrong thing to do but using force to protect American soldiers and diplomats was also the wrong thing to do. Where is the logic of your argument?

                    2. I’m saying – if you do something do it RIGHT. Competence is not a vice.

                    3. Physician…

                    4. “Ignore the polls, my anecdotes prove that the soldiers love love love Trump!”

                    5. Ignoring the polls that have questionable findings as supported by other data, i.e. voting totals etc.v

                3. According to this story less than half approved of him in 2016, yet 70+% voted for him. And it doesn’t get into what they disapproves of. And this was taken before this incident. As a veteran myself, I can tell you his actions will probably gain respect from most servicemembers. The main reason we grew to hate Iraq and Afghanistan was because we weren’t allowed to win and pussy politicians created ROEs that got people killed and protected the bad guys. Now, Trump just sent one of those bad guys to paradise by express mail. Soldiers and Marines especially will eat that shit up. If you are going to send us to war at least allow us to win.

                  1. And also anecdotally, those in favor of Trump on all the veteran and servicemembers group’s I belong to on Twitter, Instagram, Reddit and Facebook overwhelmingly support this action.

                  2. If you are going to send us to war at least allow us to win.

                    You fucking moron. We have 90k or so troops in/around the Middle East – and very dispersed. We aren’t gonna ‘win’ a war v Iran with that. They have an army of 500k, an active reserve of 1.5 million. And while the Basij are irrelevant at this point, if the war escalates then their 11 million or so (plus the Shiite majority in Iraq and Bahrain) will come into play.

                    Trump very obviously believes in war by video game. Oooh he’s got ‘targets’. Oooh – he tweets. Better not mess with him. Let’s sit down with some popcorn and watch the shock and awe and all the people throwing flowers at us.

                    That sure as fuck is not how it’s gonna unfold with Iran. You think Bush or Obama didn’t kill Soleimani cuz they don’t have the balls? Wrong. They, unlike Trump, actually spent a nanosecond thinking about the consequences and decided war with Iran is a big fucking deal. Which means potential war with Iran is a big fucking deal. Not a fucking whim between tweets and ‘executive time’ watching Fox.

                    1. Ahahaha he fucking raped you, are your fake friends still laughing at how butthurt he made you

                      Ahahahahahahah

                      HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                      HAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                    2. No, we aren’t going to win with just 90,000. If only we had more troops somewhere else that we could reinforce those 90,000… And you call me a fucking moron, SMH.

                    3. Iran has no Air Force or Navy to speak of and the Army is semi large but poorly trained and equipped. We would have little trouble destroying it. Iran is not scary.

                    4. Going with the wisdom of Bush and Obama?
                      Interesting move

            2. Fuck off and die, JFree. Make the world a better place.

              1. You really need new material.

    3. You mean Trump was smart enough not to let himself be slaughtered in some third world sh*thole? Good for him!

    4. “”The Donald is just itching to head over to Iraq to rally the troops. But his podiatrist says his bone spurs are acting up again.””

      Funny that Trump didn’t use that excuse when he visited troops on Thanksgiving.

  19. Well at this time there is no reports of death or injury to US forces. This may be the revenge attack that Iran said that it would take on the US and allies. So if there is no death to US and allied forces this may be time to wait to see what Iran does next. But if they kill more US forces or allied the US need to take swift and decisive action and make it cost Iran dearly. When the cost gets high enough Iran may bluster but do nothing.

    1. I think this was a token revenge attack they had to do in order to keep the folks at home happy. They were probably careful not to hit anybody. Let’s hope it ends there.

    1. Damn flag, sorry.

  20. On a serious note, it’s a shame what’s happening in Iran under this pathetic theocracy. It’s a nation with a long illustrious past, and young and educated population yearning for liberty that can be an important member of the world community.

    And Persian/Iranian women are hot.

    1. “young and educated population yearning for liberty”

      I’m not saying you’re wrong, but we’ve been hearing this for years. I’m beginning to think it was a bit of wishful thinking.

      1. The ones who can escape to the US and Europe. I had two Persian professors, one who was my major professor in grad school. Both extremely brilliant scientist and neither with any love for the current regime.

        1. I have worked with Iranian immigrants as well. All of them brilliant and terrific to work with.

      2. Maybe you’re right. I don’t know but the message has been consistent.

        Same here. Had an Iranian employee. She was a delight. And so damn pretty.

    2. “Persian/Iranian women are hot.”

      So, so, soooooo much this!

    3. Persia could be the superpower of the region if they ditched the theocracy and had a secular government.
      By far the most talented people of the mid east.
      That’s what is so damn frustrating

  21. Another thing.

    I don’t seem to recall any pearl clutching, pant shitting when Obama and Hilary, you know, TOOK OUT GADDAFI AN ACTUAL LEADER OF A COUNTRY without Congressional approval.

    Somehow no tensions there, right?

    1. Bro, they’re fucking power mongering hypocrites and they only care about hypocrisy when they can shiv someone else with it.

    2. If only the Iranians would concentrate on killing Democrats, the only enemy that matters.

      1. “Democrats, the only enemy that matters.”

        You’re not wrong…

  22. Get out of the middle east.

    1. Ha. Trump tried to get out of Syria and you saw the reaction.

      Good luck with trying that with the ME.

      1. Regardless of the reaction of the deep state and their media pro war puppets, leaving syria was the right thing to do. Trump and his team were too chickenshit to follow through and defy the media and the deep state and actually pull the troops out.

        1. He withdrew troops, got condemned for it (by Reason among others) sent some troops back in and now the narrative is he is wrong for that too. What can he do that he isn’t to blame for? I mean I think he is a pompous asshole but the more I read people like you, the more empathy I have for him. Nice work. I voted for Johnson in 2016 but bullshit like your posts are quickly making people like me consider buying a MAGA hat. Don’t you get that you are turning off potential allies with your TDS?

          1. So, trump rightly withdrew troops, and then was criticized for it. After recieving criticism, he put troops back in.

            Trump pulling troops out was the right thing to do. His inability to kerp the courage of his convictions and keep the troops out is an indictment on him.

            Im pretty neutral on trump as a president. I dont think he is much better or much worse than his antecedents. I did have hope that he had the right instincts to take his america first rhetoric and apply it to the idiotic wars in the middle east and bring them to an end. He has talked a big game about ending the wars for the past few years, but all we uave to show for it is an escalation of the threat of war with iran and american troops have left no other country.

            Call me a libertarian, but i dont think that the U.S. should be waging war all over the world with people who pose no threat to any americans living in their home country.

            1. Check the web; there are sources to help you in your pathetic TDS condition.
              Until then, STFU, you pathetic piece of shit.

              1. You are not the same sevo i talked foreign policy with in 2016.

                2016 sevo agreed that U.S. yroops should leave the middle east.

                2020 sevo belives that anyone who believes that the U.S. has no legitimate military goals in the middle east is a TDS sufferer who is a pathetic piece of shit.

                SAD!

                1. And you’re a new sockpuppet who is pretending he isn’t either of those things.

                  Blah blah.

          2. ” I mean I think he is a pompous asshole but the more I read people like you, the more empathy I have for him. Nice work. I voted for Johnson in 2016 but bullshit like your posts are quickly making people like me consider buying a MAGA hat. Don’t you get that you are turning off potential allies with your TDS?”
            My feelings exactly. I am not entirely comfortable defending Trump because in a lot of ways he’s a pretty loathsome character. But this national TDS hysteria is the most pervasive aberrant behavior I’ve ever seen. After voting Libertarian since Harry Browne I’m voting Trump in 2020 in part because policy wise I think he’s by far the lesser of evils but also because I’d like to see the Schiffs and Pelosis and the Boehms and the Robbys of the world get a nice hard boot to the head. Figuratively speaking of course.

    2. 100% agree.

      1. “chemjeff radical individualist
        January.7.2020 at 6:07 pm
        When your response consists of an insult, I know I’ve hit the mark”

        So you’re saying I’m the most correct person on this board for over a decade?

        It won’t stop just because you run from it.

    3. Get out of the middle east. Cant be said enough.

    4. We can’t because of the oil and stuff.

      1. Bullshit. Those countries can cancel their SOFA agreements at any time. What is the US going to do, tell them “LOLNO, we’re not going anywhere”? Get real.

        1. You’re correct so why haven’t they yet?

          1. Because they need us. BTW we produce enough oil, along with what we buy from Canada and Mexico (and not to mention most of our oil fields are running at minimal capacity because of low prices) that the whole middle East could cut us off and we would have no shortage whatsoever. It may even benefit us by opening new markets for our oil.

            1. So a letter goes out to Iraq saying the US is pulling out and then later says it was a “mistake”? Come on man, if you haven’t noticed the price of fuel hasn’t been low for quite a long time. You know exactly why we’re still there. “We are leaving soldiers to secure the oil”, remember that little tidbit?

              1. I live in the Bakken oil fields. The price of oil crashed in 2016 and hasn’t recovered. Gas prices were near $4 a gallon or more three years ago. The other day I spent $2.20 a gallon. That is considerably lower. The US produces more oil then the Middle East and produces a surplus.
                Oil prices closed at $58.09 a barrel. That isn’t high, not compared to $120 a barrel not to long ago. And for many producers, this is barely more than break even (especially for fracking).

                1. In 2019 the US became a net exporter of all petroleum products, including unrefined oil. We currently produce 91% of our own petroleum needs. With Canada and Mexico making up most of the rest of it).

                  1. Additionally, there a huge new oil fields that haven’t been yet exploited in the southern plains, waiting for the next oil price spike. Bakken oil field remains only partially explored, as many companies stopped drilling in 2016 as prices dropped below $60 a barrel. And the pumps that are working are just pumping the minimum amount required to maintain operation and to meet lease requirements. Yes, they are still drilling some new wells, but most of them are because they were already contractually required to under leases that were signed prior to 2016. Others are being drilled for when prices increase again, so that they can more rapidly increase production.

      2. “We can’t because of the oil and stuff.”

        We can’t make an honest comment because lefty bullshit and stuff.

        1. You done cradling Trump’s balls yet!

          1. You done making stupid, non fact based arguments?

              1. That is not a valid resource. It’s an editorial, an opinion piece that keeps referring to the 1953 coup as evidence. However, in 1953, the US was far more dependant on Iranian oil and Middle Eastern oil. We are now net exporters of all petreleum products and produce 91% of our own oil. The vast majority of the rest of it comes from Canada and Mexico. Our wells are running at minimal capacity because oil is below $60 a barrel and had been for over three years. Exploration is minimal because of low prices, however, large oil reserves, shale and such, have been discovered in Oklahoma and Texas, and the Bakken Shale fields are only partially explored and drilled because drilling decreased dramatically when prices crashed in 2016. No, we don’t need Iranian oil. The data simply doesn’t support this argument. If the Middle East stopped shipping oil to the US, it would take us about a week to make up the minimal loss in supply. And most of that would be as we ramped up existing pumps and the time it took to get the oil from the pumps to the refineries. Oh and decreased exports to meet domestic demand.

                1. “It’s an editorial, an opinion piece”

                  Ok, fair enough. I’ll just take your opinion with a grain of salt.

                  1. Except I presented actual data and real world experience with the subject.

              2. 91 percent of the oil used in the US is domestically produced. While we export more oil then we import. The US is the 3rd largest oil producing nation, behind Russia and Saudi Arabia. We could easily surpass Saudi Arabia if we exploited fully our resources. We have so much natural gas, that we burn it at the wells because their no profit in transporting it from the wells. A sudden glut of Iranian oil would only further destabilize the global oil market and hurt the US domestic suppliers.

                1. bTW I love how you reference an opinion piece as evidence.

                  1. To him and those like him, it is.

                    Which explains everything.

              3. Also, did you even bother reading the opinion piece you referenced (I love how the author argues that shale profitability has dropped 80% as of 2019 and then uses that to argue shale supplies are lower than first reported, no profitability decreased because oil prices went from over a $100 a barrel to around $50 a barrel and shale is more expensive then conventional so profits are more susceptible to price fluctuations).
                But the authors larger point is that more Iranian oil would hurt the US not help it. We are benefitting from low Iranian production and the current status quo. His argument is also Iran is a pissant country that only had any influence because of oil but that is diminishing as their production has decreased.

      3. We don’t need ME oil; only Europe and Japan do. Let them meddle in the ME. They created those problems in the first place.

  23. Just a reminder to all the Pro-Trump commenters here.

    You voted for a guy who ran his 2016 campain on getting the U.S. out of its middle eastern wars.

    Your defense of his iranian escelation is in stark contrast to his stated goals of america first policy that you voted him into office for.

    1. And if Iraq does tell the US to GTFO, how is that bad?

      Stop being such a prissy drama queen.

    2. “Your defense of his iranian escelation is in stark contrast to his stated goals of america first policy that you voted him into office for.”

      No, it isn’t, and there are plenty of posts explaining why.
      You could read them, or you can continue being a shallow minded stooge who knows nothing beyond stale dogma and NPC style talking points.
      Your choice

      1. Really nardz.

        Please explain to me how a war with iran is going to further the interest of the average american. Im curious.

        I get that iran is a threat to U.S. overseas military assest, but i fail to see how tehran is a threat to me at my home in arkansas.

        Trump is an america first guy, and thats the part i like aboit him. His provocation toward iran is Saudia Arabia and Israel first. Im not so much of a fan of that.

        I rwalize that you spend most of your time on the reason boards arguing against people you percieve of as either progressives whose arguements you dismiss or socialists whom you hate. I get that.

        Im neither bub. Im a libertarian who knows that war is bad idea, and always has been. Nothing ushers in socialist policies like a war. Im against that. You should be too.

        You can still be a trump supported without supporting his current middle east policy towards iran. It ok. You can do to.

          1. Why sevo. I know you are a cranky old san Franciscan, but i dont see why a little opposition war is what is triggering you hard. I think you have soent too much time defending the parts of trumo to see how this part of trump is bad. Its ok. Just because a lot of what trump does is good, that doesnt mean everthing he does is good.

            This particular thing is bad. That doesnt mean everthing is bad. Think please, before you blindly insult.

            1. Take sevos advice new troll who is lying about not being new.

        1. And you can be all those things you say you are and still be guilty of shallow, dogmatic thinking.
          You keep saying that Trump’s policy is to escalate with Iran and go to war.
          That’s a shallow assumption. We are in the mid east. If our people and assets are attacked in the mid east, they need to be defended. Iran has continued taking shots at the US for years because prior US administrations didn’t respond appropriately.
          If you want the US out of the mid east, make the case, don’t just bitch. And if you don’t like the approach to Iran, what would you propose we do differently? Does it matter if the theocratic Iranian regime acquires and produces nuclear weapons? I get that you’re unconcerned with geopolitics, but does that mean you have no opinion on nuclear proliferation?
          Put some thought into your beliefs; otherwise it’s just religion

    3. Just a reminder to all the Pro-Trump commenters here. You voted for a guy who ran his 2016 campain on getting the U.S. out of its middle eastern wars.

      Actually, I didn’t vote for Trump. But he’s turned out better than I thought, and I certainly like his policies better than those of the Democrats.

      Your defense of his iranian escelation is in stark contrast to his stated goals of america first policy that you voted him into office for.

      Trump didn’t escalate anything. Trump responded to Iranian escalation, and he did so in a pretty good way: a way that neither commits any US forces nor hurts the Iranian people. If only Obama and Hillary had been that prudent.

      1. Waves hand across your face

        “Iran did nothing, these are not the Iranians you are looking for”

        Gets slapped like a fucking bitch for thinking that shit will work.

        1. Well, your ignorance and naivete are on full display again.

    4. What escalation?

      After Iran’s proxies in Iraq attacked a US Embassy, we took out the military commanders of those proxies with a drone strike in Iraq.

      That’s pure, proportionate, tit-for-tat retaliation against the parties responsible, not escalation.

      1. For the Propagandists, Iran’s 22 missiles fired from Iran into Iraq vs 1 drone attack is NOT AN ESCALATION.

  24. Just a reminder to all the Pro-Trump commenters here.

    You voted for a guy who ran his 2016 campain on getting the U.S. out of its middle eastern wars.

    Your defense of his iranian escelation is in stark contrast to his stated goals of america first policy that you voted him into office for.

    1. I voted for Johnson but I don’t thin killing someone who is responsible for 600+ Americans killed in Iraq and is responsible for attacking a US embassy is a bad thing. But I know in your world you either support Trump it hate him, there is no middle ground.

      1. Lachowsky
        January.7.2020 at 11:51 pm
        “Just a reminder to all the Pro-Trump commenters here.’

        Just a reminder for fucking lefty ignoramuses here, Obo had started at least 3 wars by this time in office.
        Fucking lefty ignoramus.

        1. Oops; wrong reply level; aimed at fucking lefty ignoramus Lachowsky.

        2. And Obo is a war criminal who deserves to be tried for war crimes and hung by his neck until dead for starting 3 wars that he had no congressional approval for and no legal justification for starting.

          Signed-

          The fictional obama supporting leftist in your head.

          1. So was Soleimani. Why the sympathy for him?

  25. The new lefty fucking ignoramus Lachowsky, and all of your TDS victim buddies:
    Is this the ‘tipping point’? Are ‘the walls closing in’? Is this ‘the beginning of the end’? Will the ‘markets ever recover’?
    How fucking stoooooooooopid are you?

    1. Dont call me new, sevo.

      Jesus man, i left when reason went off the rails against trump in early 2017. Im not a lefty ignoramus, im a fucking anti-war libertarian, just like you professed to be when i talked to you about middle eastern affairs during the obama years.

      I dont know why you think its a good thing to call someone who is opposed to middle eastern intervention a lefty ignoramus.

      Calm down dude, im bot the imiganary leftist in your head.

      Your post looks

      1. If you hope to claim that position, you got a ways to go.

      2. im a fucking anti-war libertarian,

        Well, then you should be happy that Trump took out a terrorist via a drone for the purpose of retaliation; that’s in contrast to most of the rest of the politicians in Washington, who want to send in troops to engage in nation building.

        Calm down dude, im bot the imiganary leftist in your head.

        You’re just a useful idiot, who repeats the talking point that taking out a terrorist via a drone is like starting WWIII.

        1. Some think anti intervention means letting other people kick you around while you do nothing.

      3. Lachowsky is an “Anti-war Libertarian”?

        Yet this is when he comes to unreason to chit-chat?

        Not when Trump tries to pull US troops out of Syria and is challenged by Congress.

        Not when Trump tries to pull US troops out of afghanistan and is challenged by Congress.

        Not when Trump tries to pull US troops out of Iraq and is challenged by Congress.

    2. I also like that when i oppose war, i get called a leftist. When i oppose taxes, regulation, and the federal reserve, i get called a right wing nut.

      Thats the life a libertarian these days.

      1. Hey, rando new troll shows up at the same time as jeff.

      2. I also like that when i oppose war, i get called a leftist

        Where did you “oppose war”? What you have done is oppose the killing of a terrorist. The reason why people think that you’re a leftist is because confusing what actually happened with a “war” is a leftist talking point.

        So, either you are a leftist, or you are a useful idiot.

        1. Why not both?

        2. It has been amazing watching the bad waiving saying any US response is war while any Iranian escalation is meh.

  26. Of course the Iranians are going to shoot whatever they have at whatever targets they can find; like Am Soc, we have a juvenile response to an adult problem.
    Are they hoping for a ‘measured’ response?

    1. Of course the Iranians are going to shoot whatever they have at whatever targets they can find

      And the purpose of that would be what? Suicide by missile?

      A totalitarian regime doesn’t manage to stay in power for decades by acting rashly and illogically.

      The logical thing for them to do is to make a face saving response and hope that’s the end of it. And that’s what seems to have happened.

    2. It’s almost like it’s 1964 and Johnson is telling us how much we need to go to war with North Vietnam again. Idiots believed that bullshit. A sucker is born every minute.

      1. Not even comparable.

      2. Trump is saying he doesn’t want war but Iran kept attacking us (which is true) so we punched back. If they attack us again, we’ll punch even harder. The ball is in their court.

  27. “Lachowsky” is actually one of my old sockpuppets.

    I guess when this idiot went scrolling through old threads looking for names to steal, he didn’t bother considering that possibility.

    But he sure looks fucking stupid now lololo.

  28. “Fog of war”? With the entire area covered by satellite and radar surveillance?

    More like coordination of lies to fabricate a new propaganda campaign.

  29. Time to take out the Supreme Leader

  30. Iranian MP threatens to ‘attack the White House’: report

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0YIJQ1jgEI

    1. Oh, I’m sure they are scared.

  31. Oh look, here’s Rand Paul, you know, the SJW Progressive TDS-inflicted Terrorist Sympathizing Pro-Iran Deranged Nutcase, saying that Trump got bad advice and didn’t consider the consequences of killing Soleimani.

    https://thehill.com/policy/international/middle-east-north-africa/477055-rand-paul-trump-got-bad-advice-on-killing-of

    “You would have to be brain dead to believe that we tear up the agreement, we put an embargo on you and we kill your major general, and they’re just going to crawl back to the table and say, ‘What do you want, America?'” he said.

    1. Yeah, we get it. America is evil.

      1. Yup, we’re back in 2002-2003 again. “If you don’t support this current round of military adventurism, you hate America!”

        1. No, we are in 2020 were you are arguing that the US responding to an attack on US military and civilian personal and a US embassy does not require a response.

    2. I love this belief that if you can show someone you disagree with 99% of the time agrees with you on one thing you win an argument. Its childish and stupid, probably why you do it.

      So now do I laugh at you or post comments from Democrats who agreed with the targeting of Soleimani.

      Nah I’ll just argue actual facts which you’re incapable of

  32. Last I looked, two countries do not constitute a world war.
    Last I looked 12 drops of precipitation do not constitute rain.

    1. http://www.newsweek.com/iran-says-it-has-concluded-its-response-us-strike-does-not-seek-escalation-1480956

      They blew up some dirt near a few runways and are now pledging not to do anymore. This was a token response to try and salvage some shred of dignity.

      The headline about Iran “reining missiles” really shows what a piece of shit Doherty is. Not only is it is a lie, it is straight up propaganda for one of the most repressive and evil regimes on earth. But, Reason loves the Iranian Mullahs.

      1. Why cant unreason staff get them some 72 virgins?

      2. Oh my god. Jeff will be heartbroken that I was right and this was all just bluster.

  33. As of 0917, no US casualties after missile attack.

    I think its hilarious that Iran is so upset that they have to reveal their missile launching positions in Iran and fire sucky surface-to-surface missiles that miss all their intended targets.

    1. The lack of casualties may have been the point. As was the attack on Iraqi installations where U.S. personnel are located, as opposed to U.S. installations in Iraq where we have ownership.

      It’s theatre. They couldn’t let the killing of Soleimani go unanswered, but they know that if they push the United States to the point where we start blowing things up, they’ll lose their military capabilities. I think they chose targets with a low probability of harm to the U.S. because they’re looking to back down…without looking to their people like they’re backing down.

  34. Missile Strike Damage Appears Limited, but Iran May Not Be Done

    Of the 22 missiles, the majority were aimed at Al-Asad, an air base in the desert of western Anbar, an entirely Sunni Muslim area. Of the 17 missiles aimed at the base, two fell outside it near the city of Hit, but did not explode, officials said.

    Five of the missiles were aimed at an air base in Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, and hit the headquarters building. Damage assessments were ongoing on Wednesday.

  35. “”Iranian Missiles Rain on Bases in Iraq””

    Rain? It was a sprinkle at bet. If each missile was a hundred dollar bill, the strip dancer would have been disappointed.

    1. at best.

  36. In the 80’s Iraq and Iran had a 8 year long war that ended in a stalemate. Pretty big confidence from one of these countries (Iran) now considering it took all of 3-4 days to defeat Iraq in the 90’s. I wouldn’t be to quick to get into a fight with someone that beat my opponent in a few days when I couldn’t beat them in 8 years! Yeah, yeah blood will flow like rivers and the fleas of 1000 camels will infest our armpits!

  37. Reason: “don’t panic over these hysterical media and government reports on guns, drugs, bail etc.”
    Also Reason: “Run for the hills AS hellfire rains down and we prepare for WW 3!”

  38. I think war is not a solution for any problem. Solve all their problem stay together. For any dating purpose visit : http://www.raginiescorts.com

Please to post comments