The Latest: Possible attack on US forces led to deployments

[Eugene]

Source: Associated Press

The Latest: Possible attack on US forces led to deployments

46 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on United States and Iran (all times local):

10:25 p.m.

A U.S. defense official says the deployments of an aircraft carrier strike group and land-based bombers to the Middle East are in response to indications that Iran and its proxy forces were preparing to possibly attack U.S. forces in the region.

The defense official tells The Associated Press that the Pentagon approved the deployments of the USS Abraham Lincoln and its strike group of ships and combat aircraft.

The official says U.S. forces at sea and on land were thought to be the potential targets. The official wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly and requested anonymity.

A White House statement says the military resources were deployed to send a message to Iran that “unrelenting force” will meet any attack on U.S. interests or those of its allies.

-snip-

Read more: https://apnews.com/b64d3f60cc5d4db5a812b4d11e39a0da

______________________________________________________________________

For some strange reason, "Gulf of Tonkin" keeps running through my mind.

[roody]

1. What a f;;;ing pile of war mongering.

[DURHAM D]

2. Obviously someone is worried about his polling. nt

[spanone]

3. B.S.

[Eko]

4. What?

This administration thinks we are all idiots, Iran is going to attack US forces? Give me a fucking break.

[misanthrope]

5. Saber rattling pulls in votes

Here come the manufactured crises. At the very least, it stirs nationalism. If worse comes to worst, it gives an excuse for a national emergency that suspends regular activity.

Another page straight from the authoritarian's playbook.

[emmaverybo]

6. Oh, yeah. Preparing. That's a good one. I guess a little birdie overheard the prep. nt

[More_Cowbell]

7. "Thought to be potential targets"? It's wag the dog

I hope that the House moves Mueller's testimony up, as right now it will happen a few days after the fleet arrives in the middle east.

[Midnight Writer]

8. Come on, people! How will Iran strike our forces if we don't put them in easy range?

You can't expect radical Islamic terrorists who will gladly give their lives to kill infidels to use TOO much effort.

[DFW]

9. The leaders of Iran are not completely stupid

They know that if they ever want to get their economy running again, they will have to reach an accommodation with the USA. The saner among their leaders know that, but even the nut cases (their equivalent of our Republicans) know that provoking a firefight with us is a useless venture for both sides.

For our part, Republicans know better than to attack Iran. If there is no genuine provocation or strategic need, Republicans never attack countries they KNOW will shoot back. Victories win elections. Body bags do not. So, they attack places like Grenada (Reagan) or Panama (Bush). Iraq was a major miscalculation, not a change in strategy. Remember Rumsfeld at the start of the Iraq invasion: "Maybe six days, maybe six weeks. Certainly not six months." Oh, certainly not. Try twelve years?

There is no sane reason to launch an attack on Iran. They are armed to the teeth and WILL shoot back. Of course, when "sane" leaves the equation, then a TV interview showing Hillary smiling might be reason enough for the current crowd of crazies to initiate hostilities. Then it will be up to the Generals in the Pentagon, who will have the unenviable burden of having about ten minutes to decide whether or not their CiC has completely taken leave of his senses.

[NBachers]

10. Don't worry, we're in strong, capable hands. Jumpin' John Bolton's got this.