https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/01/12/remarks-by-president-biden-during-tour-of-nowhere-coffee-co-emmaus-pa/

Good thing the Islamic Jihadist (Iran Proxies) know not to do anything. I look to President Biden protect and defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

We'll see...

I have no doubt he'll respond; the question is having the wisdom to calibrate the appropriate response. While three deaths are tragic a larger war will likely result in a lot more tragic US deaths. Does he order a strike against an Irananian target directly or against the proxy that carried it out? I would think a response against the proxy but strong enough to deter them (and other Iranian proxies) from doing it again.

If only you were right in the case of the Houthi. The “deterrence” you speak of seemed ineffective unless the effect was more missiles/drone attacks are wanted. Biden himself said that his strikes on the Houthi should do it.

Obviously not, Mr. President.

To answer your questions, Freeman…

Yes and yes. He should attack Iran, AND its proxies. I would embargo the oil coming out of Iran. I would LEVEL any proxy camp. I would freeze ALL Iranian assets until regime change occurs. That would be real regime change, not just one mullah to the next.

I am by no means being biased in this. Reagan, after the Beirut bombing, had a muted response. I think that was wrong.

The President's job #1 is to protect the American people, and the American armed forces. One good thing about George Bush 2 is that when 911 happened, he acted and acted strongly.

Well, China is now pressuring Iran to stop the Houthi attacks...

The job of the American president is to protect the interests and security of 330 million Americans. Starting a war in the Middle East because of a drone strike killing three Americans doesn't do that IMHO. That would be an emotional response. Things are very volatile in the Middle East with Israel's invasion of Gaza and the death of many Palestinian civilians. We have to think strategically. Make sure our military personnel are adequately protected (how did that drone get through?) and make that proxy rue what they did. Maybe even some direct response against Iran is required to get their attention. But not at the scale you're proposing I don't think and we would have weigh doing that carefully. I would think meaningfully (as in the Untouchables "They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue.")hitting the proxy should be the likely option (with a verbal warning that any similar attack will be met with direct attacks on Iranian targets) but we'll see.

Looks like the drone got through due to misidentifcation because a US drone was coming in at the same time.

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/i ... e-99378749