Jump to content

Dahobbs

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    17791
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dahobbs

  1. Well, I'm generally skeptical of anyone over the age of 30 with roommates. I'm especially skeptical of 57 year old roommates. Maybe @Laxtonto can tell us more about politically inconvenient truths while apologizing for his misstatement earlier.
  2. Yes. Those that think the first page didn't age well are idiots. An anti abortion radical targeted democratic law makers, abortion providers, and abortion advocates. But sure, he must be a lefty because he wasn't kicked off a commission by Walz.
  3. Feel free to issue a mea culpa whenever @Laxtonto
  4. They haven't been. At least no reliable sources have confirmed it. It is also unlikely because Israel has been operating its non stealth planes in Iranian airspace. Many of those were loaded out with fairly close range ground attack munitions like JDAMs. If Iran had downed an F35, you'd expect many more reports of downed 4th gen aircraft. We haven't seen that.
  5. Iron Dome is really good against rocket and mortar fire from Iranian proxies. It has shit all to do with defending against Iran's long range ballistic missiles.
  6. Yeah everyone, like abortion providers, abortion advocates, and Democratic politicians... how are we going to solve this mystery?
  7. Ok, finally found corroborating links for this one: https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/minnesota-shootings-manhunt-06-14-25#cmbwg03b9000s356m8a27n4un
  8. Yes they both voted. No, they didn't both vote for it. You didn't read your own link. Hoffman voted against: Hoffman actually voted against it twice. He voted against suspending the rules to accelerate its readings for votes and then against the passage of the bill.
  9. Sigh. Can we not post political misinformation? One voted for the bill. Not both. The right wing account you're quoting has already corrected that statement.
  10. Calm the fuck down. We were approaching the question from different perspectives. I was looking at purely from a technical "get it done" perspective of who can mediate. I wasn't suggesting who should or analyzing political implications. I understand your points generally and already said I agreed it wouldn't be good for the US. I don't know what else you want. Go fucking take a Xanax or something. Your brain fucking turns off and you go rage mode whenever Israel is mentioned.
  11. What is wrong with you?
  12. Let it go. Jesus.
  13. Some new weapons are giving it the ability to economically counter mass drone threats, APKWS II (Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II) is a cheap rocket with a laser guided kit added that gives it some air-to-air chops. You can fit them in pods so a single fighter can carry dozens. And they only cost like $20k-30k per shot, which actually makes them win price exchange with drones like the Shahed (cost estimates between $50k and $200k). And a fighter wing can actually counter a drone swarm in single sortie rather than having to go back and re-arm. These are already in service with F-16s.
  14. That's a given. China is going to look to fill the power vacuum we've left by withdrawing a lot our soft power projection assets. Back to missile defense, BBC did a decent overview last year of Israel's assets (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-20385306) The full article is worth a read for anyone looking for some good information. But I think this is most helpful: US promise to deploy THAAD to Israel was huge. I believe they now have 2 batteries in country (a cool billion dollars per battery).
  15. You're making the same mistake. The question wasn't about what he wanted. It was about which entity was in a position to do it. The answer demonstrates the difficulty of the situation from our perspective. At any rate, I didn't intend this to be a huge derail, so let's drop it and get back to updates on events. Iran has updated the number of scientists killed to 9. There is also this: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/14/world/israel-iran-news/db1009e6-b251-5d94-bdab-cb4e25bd1276?smid=url-share
  16. I think you've misunderstood the question. Your point appears to be that it would be bad FOR US. That may be true. But that isn't what I was analyzing. The question was who was in a position to negotiate a peace successfully, not what is the ideal outcome for the US. I don't disagree that China negotiating a peace isn't an ideal outcome for the US.
  17. We aren't a party. I don't know that either Iran or Israel have particularly strong feelings on China. You keep saying it is terrible idea. But 1) you haven't actually said why and 2) it isnt like I'm saying I want it, it just is reality. There aren't really any other strong players that haven't already staked a position here. Y'all be dense. For real.
  18. Again, what are you arguing? I know a thing or two about mediation. A heavily biased party is never going to be a good mediator. It just isn't how it works. The US can certainly exert pressure on Iran (and Israel). But the Iranians are never going to see it as anything but an Israeli proxi. That's just the reality. I don't know why you think China is a bad option. It hasn't staked any particularly strong position with regard to Israel that I'm aware of.
  19. I really don't know what point you're making. What we want is irrelevant. The question was what party is in position to mediate an end to this. It isn't us. That's a fact. China is a decent option. I'm not sure what the other one is. Nd
  20. China is both a strong party and semi neutral. Iran isn't going to listen to us.
  21. @Hitch Unfortunately this is going to get worse for everyone.
×
×
  • Create New...