Originally posted by walshy
If you want to say it was in retaliation to embassy bombings then you can go back to idk the 80s or whoever attacked first idk
It's not about what I want to say it's about objective reality. This was in direct response to an attack on our embassy.
I don't expect a president in 2020 to be in charge when we are attacked and then not do anything with the reason being "we did some shit in the 80s" that is asinine.
And since u don't live here u don't know, but just the day before this shit happened democrats were calling Trump toothless, saying Iran "rolled" him, etc.
The Ayatollah himself flat out told us there was nothing we could do. Seems Trump disagreed.
And u say this risks iran to respond well they were already attacking and don't u think there is merit to the idea that if we do nothing it emboldens them to do more?
IMO they were testing the waters to see how much they could get away with. It's just weird to me people think doing nothing or maybe applying useless sanctions would cause iran to stop