Posted on 05/08/2018 1:00:30 PM PDT by deplorableindc
National security adviser John Bolton said Tuesday that President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal isn't part of a broader plan to attack the country.
Bolton, a national security hawk considered by detractors to be too quick to support the use of military force, denied a plan to invade Iran following Trump's televised speech ending U.S. participation in the deal.
A reporter told Bolton there was speculation that the decision was a "precursor to the U.S. putting boots on the ground on Iran."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Not yet anyway. Trump had better admonish him to get his facts straight :)
Why would anyone think it were?
liberals are psycho.
Lots of mullah lovers suggesting that the only alternative to the end of sanctions is an invasion. That’s a straw man. We did fine plinking away at Saddam’s forces for over a decade. We can just as easily take apart Iran’s military assets from the air in the process of systematically dismantling its nuclear program.
We owe Iran a lot of death and destruction of their government and armed forces.
Agreed. The likelihood of us invading Iran is zero to null. We just want them to back off on their attempted nuclear-armed Islamist conquest of the Middle East.
Anyone that thinks that is an idiot. Just more Fake News.
The media may not realize this, but Trump doesn't make these decisions in a vacuum. I'm sure we have intelligence and I'm sure we know sanctions will force them to wake up as they are quite severe and recessions/depressions (See Venezuela) don't help the mood of the populace.
We’re pushing for regime change.
But we learned from the Iraq War that we can’t impose it by force.
When the Iranians overthrow the mullahs, that’s fine.
Until that day comes, our sanctions and maximum pressure will remain in place.
Bolton go send your own children or grandchildren to war in Iran.
The source for that idea is impeccable:
A reporter told Bolton there was speculation...
Speculation. Official speculation. By genuine, anonymous people. Not your ordinary fever dream, fantasy, or drug-addled imagining, heck no, but actual speculation. Is that the sort of thing a reporter would just make up?
I reserve the right to rephrase that question...
Yes they are. They are always for something before they are against it or vise versa. The liberal Kenyan Administration put "boots on the ground" and bombers in the air in Libya and Syria. They threw gasoline on a fire started by President Bush. They were determined to make Iran a nuclear military power. They are disgusted that North Korea is destined to be nuclear free.
Pretty obvious that was nothing but a fishing expedition reverse-engineered to make a story for an already-written clickbait headline.
The best US policy to deal with Iran is to totally ignore Iran. Due to the inherent contradictions and absurdities of the medieval mullah rule, the brutal suppression of the people cannot go on forever. Eventually the regime will collapse or fundamentally reform. Then and only then will the Iranian people join the 21st century. The US should just ignore them.
Ah, "The Chickenhawk Fallacy". Even "slow" children see through that.
I think the entire reason to invade Afghanistan and Iraq were to surround Iran, and to get the REMs out of the mountains.
Only a fool would invade Persia.
Panic in the streets. Trump is overturning the Kenyan Messiah’s sole foreign policy “success.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.