Football ...
Basketball ...
Baseball ...
Other Sports ...
Futbol ...
🤫995🤫 ...
Gambling ...
Movies & TV ...
Music ...
Hobbies ...
Lulz ...
Food & Travel
...
Daily Texan ...
Business & Markets ...
Cloak Room ...
Help ...
For Sale ...
Board Discussion ...
Advertise...
Tailgate Donations
-
Posts
15602 -
Joined
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by bolverk
-
He was pretty vocal over the weekend about a governor and former VP candidate suggesting that China might be a good mediator but was utterly silent when the current president suggested Putin, as were a couple of other posters.
-
I don't get where you're seeing anyone, much less most posters, saying or even implying "that Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination," but agree that it would be a racist statement, were anyone saying that. Speaking only for myself on this, the main concern is that a decision in favor of regime change can't be rushed or taken lightly. We (the West), and most importantly, the Iranians themselves, will have to live with those consequences. To mitigate the negative effects, both direct and indirect, a plan should be in place to prevent bad actors from taking advantage of the situation, which could easily lead to political chaos, violence, and civilian suffering. How do you prevent such an environment from taking hold? Well, someone needs to provide security and keep the peace so that civil society can thrive. Who's going to do that? Obviously, the IRGC, as an organization, and its leaders have $profitted immensely during the reign of the mullahs, so I don't suspect they'll be willing partners in shedding their current wealth and privilege. The regular army? Perhaps, but I know very little about their capacity to do that: leadership, training, etc. An outside force, as Inka has previously suggested, comprised of Canadians, Nordic countries, various Latin American and/or African nations? Is there a coalition to ensure they're on board? I'm asking not so stubborn as to let any hypothetical perfect plan stand in the way of a good one. All I'm asking is, "What is the fucking plan?" if we're going to do this. As for our experiences of the recent past in the region, my doubts aren't with the capacity of the people living in these places. Rather, they're with the capacity of the people, who are not living in these places, making these decisions. Now, THIS is what I'd call implied racism.
-
Lots of silly, fun memes in there, but this offers a good explanation for why it resonates, telling us, "You too can make a difference." https://www.reddit.com/r/andor/comments/1ldnj4a/david_graeber_anthropologist_explains_why_andor/
-
Wordle 1,460 3/6 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩⬛🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Connections Puzzle #738 🟨🟨🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟪🟪🟪🟪 🟦🟦🟦🟦 🙂 Daily Quordle 1241 4️⃣6️⃣ 7️⃣5️⃣ m-w.com/games/quordle/ ⬜⬜🟨🟩⬜ 🟩⬜🟩⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟨⬜🟨⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨🟨⬜ ⬜🟩⬜🟩🟩 ⬜🟨🟨⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
-
I wonder if they'll be gold-plated (painted), like the other tacky shit he's slapped all over the White House.
-
Right, so let's be very clear and not pretend this is a necessary or defensive war. It's very much a preemptive war of choice in which Israel (and the US, if we join in) are absolutely the aggressors, determining for the Iranian people that their government (no matter how shitty it might be) is no longer fit to rule there and acknowledging that the Iranian people will just have to pay the price...along with all the other foreseeable, and unpredictable, consequences (i.e., regional instability and whatever that might do to Middle Eastern countires, the price of oil and whatever that might do to the global economy, terrorism, international relations, and all the rest). Let's be clear-eyed about this. There will be a price to pay. If it's worth it, then fine. But no one here or in leadership should come back in a few months or years and say, "Damn, I didn't expect it to cause X, Y, and Z," and then try to place the blame on someone else when they can't put out the fire fast or thorough enough.
-
It's like people haven't heard the song "The First Noel" a bajillion times before.
-
I like how he phrases the flag poles as being "a GIFT from me." (imagining that in Smeagol's voice) At least we'll have something to remember him by.
-
I pretty much agree with all that -- it's likely too late for any other scenario other than the course we're currently on unless, for whatever reason, Trump surprises us all and decides to not go through with it. If that's indeed the case, then we can just start discussing the duration of the war and degree of suffering this will cause over the short- and long-term, including the severity of blowback and bloody consequences.
-
Well, yeah, I'm definitely old enough to remember that. It was the Sunni radicalization or conservative crackdown in Saudi part that I didn't have context for. I didn't realize that Saudi Arabia had ever been anything other than how we've known it.
-
That all may well be true, but I'm trying to figure out or predict something unexpected that Iran might do next. If they're content to just draw it out, and lose, then that's a separate discussion, involving lots and lots of death and destruction. I just felt like there'd been enough talk about Bibi and DonDon for the moment, but I'm not going to force the topic if no one wants to try to envision other possible scenarios.
-
Thought experiment: Let's game this out from the perspective of the ayatolla and the mullahs, assuming they want to A) continue living and B) stay in power. What should they do? I mean, they don't have a lot of friends that could do shit to help at the moment (SYRIA - gone as an ally; HEZBOLLAH - neutered; HAMAS/RUSSIA - kinda tied up for the moment; HOUTHIS - no real "reach") and even fewer military options (fight to the last man or last ballistic, I guessin the hope of drawing Israel/the US into costly on-the-ground fighting but this would inevitably lead to losing power, which kinda goes against assumption B from above). Almost every imaginable outcome from continuing to fight is terrible for them. If I were them, I think I'd go ahead and renounce any domestic uranium enrichment program tout de suite as a first gambit in hopes of immediately stopping the bombs and eliminating the initial justification for the war and, therefore, increasing international pressure on the Netanyahu and Trump regimes to announce a ceasefire. Would that be enough? I guess it might be enough to get Trump to simmer down for a short bit and give isolationist Republicans and Democratic doves enough time to pass a resolution requiring congressional approval for US strikes with WMDs off the table. It's a long shot for a couple of CR reasons, but at this point, I can't think of any other "play" for them that meets the two requirements: staying alive and in power. NOTE: I'm not addressing the long-term implications of this, only the short-term avoidance of more bombs and regime change, which I assume is what a smart, rational actor would want (Yeah, yeah, I know, "But Bolverk, they're not rational!" Come on, man, it's just a thought experiment that might help the Surly hivemind think shit through without us all hating each other more than we already do). Anyone else got other takes on what they might do or flaws in the above?
-
Thanks for the YouTube link. I was only 8 when that happened and had forgotten all about it, but it brought back some really vague memories, as my dad religiously watched the news at dinnertime. What I had no idea about was how it altered Saudi domestic affairs and empowered the Wahabbi clerics, which in turn, no doubt, radicalized a bunch of Muslims and possibly contributed to a lot of shit the world has been experiencing since then. It’s remarkable how a single incident like that could have the power to alter the course of world events in unforeseeable ways.
-
One final question to anyone in particular before I take off for a while: What's the likelihood of Saudi's own Shiite population getting all hot and bothered by this stuff? It seems there's a big concentration of them in the eastern part of that country. I realize they're Arabs, not Persians, but do they feel beholden to, or loyal to, Iran or any place in it, like Sunnis do Mecca/Medina?
-
I appreciate your patience in responding to my multiple "just asking questions" posts, but if we're going down this road to toppling another government, I'd really like us to have thoroughly discussed the consequences in addition to the casus belli. Bolded would be my biggest worry. You know far more about the region than I ever will, so I'll take your word about the Kurds remaining peaceful, not trying to break away, and I had some idea about the folks in SE Iran already. How about all these other groups, though? Do any of the others have breakaway tendencies, or do other neighboring countries have revanchist claims on Iranian territory?
-
Right, no sectarian violence, but there could absolutely be strong ideological differences. It's not like there isn't an example of the last Shah being deposed. And as for SE Iran, isn't that area dominated by Baluchis, the same group that's in western Pakistan? Haven't those guys been in some kind of low-level rebellion against the Pakistani government? If so, what's the risk of them uniting and trying to break off from both Iran and Pakistan to create their own country? And, then of course, the installation of western troops (US or otherwise spread out trying to protect the oil & gas fields, as well as all the downstream infrastructure: refineries, pipelines, etc. Are Americans prepared to see US soldiers getting bombed protecting all those assets and facilities? Finally, what's the obligation of the Israelis under the principle of "you broke it; you fix it" if they're successful in their push for regime change? Obviously, they're not going in as occupiers, but should they pay some of the bills since they're the lead in all this?
-
If Netanyahu's goal is not only the destruction of Iran's capacity to build nuclear weapons -- and I believe it is, given the expansion of targets beyond those sites (e.g., state TV) AND his repeated calls for the Iranian people to rise up -- what's the on-the-ground situation in Iran if they/we are successful in toppling the regime? Recall the power vacuum left in Iraq when the Baathists were taken out, instability in Syria during their civil war, and the subsequent rise of ISIS in the region. What's the plan for nation-building after a war for regime change? Are we confident that the people would support the son of the Shah? What happens with all the nuclear material that Iran has built up? I sure hope Israel/US has a plan for that, if it is indeed the goal.
-
According to this poll discussed in an Israeli newspaper, it seems most Israelis are A-OKAY with ethnic cleansing in the occupied territories, and about half are in favor of outright genocide. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-05-28/ty-article-magazine/.premium/yes-to-transfer-82-of-jewish-israelis-back-expelling-gazans/00000197-12a4-df22-a9d7-9ef6af930000 A recent survey of Israeli Jews reveals a growing comfort with the idea of forcibly expelling Palestinians – both from Gaza and from within Israel's borders. The poll also found that a significant minority supports the mass killing of civilians in enemy cities captured by the Israeli army. These disturbing trends reflect the radicalization of religious Zionism since Israel's 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, and the failure of secular Israeli Jews to articulate a vision that challenges Jewish supremacy. Commissioned in March by Pennsylvania State University and conducted by Tamir Sorek for the Israeli polling firm Geocartography Knowledge Group, the survey polled a representative sample of 1,005 Jewish Israelis. It posed a series of "impolite" questions – topics typically avoided in mainstream Israeli polling – about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. According to the results, 82 percent of respondents supported the expulsion of Gaza's residents, while 56 percent favored expelling Palestinian citizens of Israel. These figures mark a sharp rise from a 2003 survey, in which support for such expulsions stood at 45 percent and 31 percent, respectively. Religious interpretations play a key role in shaping these views. Nearly half (47 percent) of respondents agreed that "when conquering an enemy city, the Israel Defense Forces should act as the Israelites did in Jericho under Joshua's command – killing all its inhabitants." Sixty-five percent said they believed in the existence of a modern-day incarnation of Amalek, the Israelite biblical enemy whom God commanded to wipe out in Deuteronomy 25:19. Among those believers, 93 percent said the commandment to erase Amalek's memory remains relevant today. This apocalyptic rhetoric has found fertile ground in religious Zionist circles, where leaders have long advocated for such extreme policies. One of the most influential figures to call for such policies is Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, head of the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar. In January 2005, just before Israel's dismantling of its Gaza settlements, Ginsburgh delivered a sermon near the Knesset that laid out a vision fundamentally at odds with the secular Zionist ideal of a "Jewish and democratic state." Ginsburgh gained notoriety for his pamphlet "Baruch Hagever" ("Baruch the Man"), which praised Baruch Goldstein, the settler who massacred 29 Muslim worshippers in Hebron's Cave of the Patriarchs in 1994. Following the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, Ginsburgh was placed under administrative detention. He later endorsed a book that sanctioned the killing of non-Jewish women and children. Unlike the early leaders of the Gush Emunim settler movement, Ginsburgh views any Palestinian presence in the Land of Israel as a desecration of God's name. His 2005 sermon, now known as "Time to Crack the Nut," was a call to embrace Jewish supremacy in the Land of Israel. It prepared his followers for mass violence and ethnic cleansing – policies that, two decades later, appear to be unfolding in Gaza. With Ginsburgh's vision seemingly coming to fruition, it is worth revisiting the ideological framework he proposed. This is a long piece. It goes on about the history of this Ginsburgh guy and his movement, but in all the discussions on this board, we rarely talk about the radicalization that's taking place among Israel's population (free link): https://archive.is/lRf9g
-
Israeli tanks kill 59 people in Gaza crowd trying to get food aid, medics say CAIRO/GAZA, June 17 (Reuters) - Israeli tanks fired into a crowd trying to get aid from trucks in Gaza on Tuesday, killing at least 59 people, according to medics, in one of the bloodiest incidents yet in mounting violence as desperate residents struggle for food. Video shared on social media showed around a dozen mangled bodies lying in a street in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip. The Israeli military, at war with Hamas-led Palestinian militants in Gaza since October 2023, acknowledged firing in the area and said it was looking into the incident. Witnesses interviewed by Reuters said Israeli tanks had launched at least two shells at a crowd of thousands who had gathered on the main eastern road through Khan Younis in the hope of obtaining food from aid trucks that use the route. "All of a sudden, they let us move forward and made everyone gather, and then shells started falling, tank shells," said Alaa, an eyewitness, interviewed by Reuters at Nasser Hospital, where wounded victims lay sprawled on the floor and in corridors due to the lack of space. "No one is looking at these people with mercy. The people are dying, they are being torn apart, to get food for their children. Look at these people, all these people are torn to get flour to feed their children." Palestinian medics said at least 59 people were killed and 221 wounded in the incident, at least 20 of them in critical condition. Casualties were being rushed into the hospital in civilian cars, rickshaws and donkey carts. It was the worst death toll in a single day since aid resumed in Gaza in May. In a statement, the Israeli military said: "Earlier today, a gathering was identified adjacent to an aid distribution truck that got stuck in the area of Khan Younis, and in proximity to IDF troops operating in the area. "The IDF is aware of reports regarding a number of injured individuals from IDF fire following the crowd’s approach. The details of the incident are under review. The IDF regrets any harm to uninvolved individuals and operates to minimise harm as much as possible to them while maintaining the safety of our troops." Medics said at least 14 other people were also killed by Israeli gunfire and airstrikes elsewhere in the densely populated enclave, taking Tuesday's overall death toll to at least 73. Funeral of Palestinians killed in what the Gaza health ministry says was Israeli fire near a distribution center in Rafah, in Khan Younis The health ministry said 397 Palestinians, among those trying to get food aid, had been killed and more than 3,000 were wounded since late May. The incident was the latest in nearly daily large-scale killings of Palestinians seeking aid in the three weeks since Israel partially lifted a total blockade on the territory it had imposed for nearly three months. Israel has been channelling much of the aid it is now allowing into Gaza through a new U.S.- and Israeli-backed group, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which operates a handful of distribution sites in areas guarded by Israeli forces. The United Nations rejects the system as inadequate, dangerous and a violation of humanitarian impartiality rules. Israel says it is needed to prevent Hamas fighters from diverting aid, which Hamas denies. Gaza authorities say hundreds of Palestinians have been killed trying to reach GHF sites. The GHF said in a press release late on Monday that it had distributed more than three million meals at its four distribution sites without incident. The Gaza war was triggered in October 2023, when Palestinian Hamas militants attacked Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli allies. Israel's subsequent military assault on Gaza has killed nearly 55,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza's health ministry, while displacing nearly the entire population of 2.3 million and causing a hunger crisis. Since last week, Gaza Palestinians have kept an eye on the new air war between Israel and Iran, which has long been a major supporter of Hamas. Gaza residents have circulated images of buildings in Israel wrecked by Iranian missiles, some saying they are happy to see Israelis experiencing a measure of the fear of airstrikes that they have endured for 20 months.
-
Apologies if this has already been thoroughly covered by the talking heads teevee (I don't watch cable news), but I thought this covered the challenge of taking out the Fordo site pretty well. Iran’s Best-Protected Nuclear Site Is Deep Underground Only the U.S. military has the 30,000-pound bomb capable of reaching the facility and the bomber that can carry it. In a separate article discussing the political calculus on whether the US should enter the fray (which I am not posting here to avoid a CR discussion), there was additional detail about the use of MOAB on the site to take out the facility that I thought was interesting, bolded below: There is only one weapon for the job, experts contend. It is called the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or the GBU-57, and it weighs so much — 30,000 pounds — that it can be lifted only by a B-2 bomber. Israel does not own either the weapon or the bomber needed to get it aloft and over target. If Mr. Trump holds back, it could well mean that Israel’s main objective in the war is never completed. “Fordo has always been the crux of this thing,” said Brett McGurk, who worked on Middle East issues for four successive American presidents, from George W. Bush to Joseph R. Biden Jr. “If this ends with Fordo still enriching, then it’s not a strategic gain.” That has been true for a long time, and over the past two years the U.S. military has refined the operation, under close White House scrutiny. The exercises led to the conclusion that one bomb would not solve the problem; any attack on Fordo would have to come in waves, with B-2s releasing one bomb after another down the same hole. And the operation would have to be executed by an American pilot and crew. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/16/us/politics/trump-iran-diplomacy-conflict.html
-
Trump sees peace between Iran and Israel soon, eyes Putin role WASHINGTON, June 15 (Reuters) - Despite evidence that the conflict between Israel and Iran is escalating, U.S. President Donald Trump expressed optimism on Sunday that peace would come soon and cited the possibility that Russia's Vladimir Putin could help. In a social media post, Trump said there were many unspecified meetings about the issue happening and encouraged the two countries to make a deal. And in an interview with ABC News, he said he was open to Putin, whose forces invaded Ukraine and who has resisted Trump's attempts to broker a ceasefire with Kyiv, serving as a mediator. Israel and Iran launched fresh attacks on each other overnight into Sunday, killing scores. "Iran and Israel should make a deal, and will make a deal," Trump wrote on his Truth Social site. "We will have PEACE, soon, between Israel and Iran! Many calls and meetings now taking place." Trump did not offer any details about the meetings or evidence of progress toward peace. His assertion contradicted comments by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said on Saturday that Israel's campaign against Iran would intensify. A White House spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on how Trump and the White House were working to de-escalate the situation in the Middle East. Trump told ABC News that Iran wanted to make a deal and indicated something like the Israel strikes would accelerate that. "Something like this had to happen because I think even from both sides, but something like this had to happen. They want to talk, and they will be talking," Trump said, according to ABC reporter Rachel Scott. "May have forced a deal to go quicker, actually." The United States has engaged in talks with Iran about its nuclear program and Trump has told reporters previously that the talks were going well. But another round of discussions scheduled for Sunday in Oman was canceled after the Israeli and Iranian strikes. Trump said he and Putin had discussed the situation in the Middle East on Saturday in a call that focused more on that conflict than the Russian war in Ukraine. "He is ready. He called me about it," Trump said about Putin serving as a mediator, according to Scott. "We had a long talk about it. We talked about this more than his situation. This is something I believe is going to get resolved." Trump, who portrays himself as a peacemaker and has drawn criticism from his political base for not being able to prevent the Israel-Iran conflict, cited other disputes that he took responsibility for solving, including between India and Pakistan, and lamented not receiving more praise for doing so. "I do a lot, and never get credit for anything, but that’s OK, the PEOPLE understand. MAKE THE MIDDLE EAST GREAT AGAIN!" he wrote on Truth Social.
-
Trump Renews Embrace of Putin Amid Rift With Allies President Trump opened his remarks at the Group of 7 gathering of industrialized nations by criticizing the decision to expel Russia from the bloc after Moscow’s 2014 “annexation” of Crimea. President Trump could have opened by talking about trade. He could have discussed the wars in the Middle East or the long-running, brutal war in Ukraine. But there was something else that appeared to be top of mind for Mr. Trump during Monday’s meeting in Canada of the leaders of the Group of 7 industrialized nations: President Vladimir Putin of Russia. “The G7 used to be the G8,” Mr. Trump told reporters, referring to the group’s decision to eject Russia in 2014, after it attacked Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea, a prelude to its full-scale invasion. He went on to blame former President Barack Obama and former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada for kicking Russia out, and argued that its inclusion in the group would have averted the war in Ukraine. (Mr. Trump was wrong — it was not Mr. Trudeau, but rather Stephen Harper, who was the Canadian prime minister at the time of Russia’s expulsion.) “I would say that was a mistake,” Mr. Trump said, “because I think you wouldn’t have a war right now.” And with that, Mr. Trump’s troubled history with the alliance repeated itself. When he attended the summit the last time it was held in Canada, in 2018, he called for Russia to be readmitted to the alliance. The suggestion angered and appalled allies, setting off a rift before Mr. Trump left the summit early, telling reporters on his way out: “They should let Russia come back in. Because we should have Russia at the negotiating table.” Mr. Trump’s remarks came one day before he was supposed to meet in Canada with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, whom Mr. Trump has repeatedly criticized for the invasion of his country and has even accused of not wanting the war to end. The White House announced on Monday that Mr. Trump would leave the summit early and return to Washington to deal with the war between Israel and Iran. In a recent interview, Mr. Trump said he was open to having Mr. Putin serve as a mediator in the Middle East conflict. cont'd:
-
Wordle 1,459 3/6 ⬛⬛🟩⬛⬛ ⬛⬛🟩🟨⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Connections Puzzle #737 🟪🟪🟪🟪 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟦🟦🟦🟦 🟨🟨🟨🟨 🙂 Daily Quordle 1240 4️⃣5️⃣ 6️⃣7️⃣ m-w.com/games/quordle/ ⬜🟨🟩⬜⬜ 🟨⬜⬜🟨🟨 ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜🟨🟩⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟩🟩 🟨⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨🟨 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
-
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!