Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

Lots of unconfirmed rumors out there that he may have died in the blast on a strike on his bunker NW of Tehran. I give it 60% its true. I would go higher, but none of the regional Arab news are saying anything either way. Worth monitoring because there have already been reports of others in the government already leaving for Russia and other parts. 

Regardless, I think Israel now has the green light from the rest of the ME that he is a valid target with limited reprisals. 

 

star trek GIF

Can I ask where you're "hearing" or seeing these rumors? Mainly because I've not seen that anywhere, not talking shit.

Posted
Can I ask where you're "hearing" or seeing these rumors? Mainly because I've not seen that anywhere, not talking shit.

It’s all over the X. I know it’s now very credible, but it’s gaining traction.
Posted
29 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Can I ask where you're "hearing" or seeing these rumors? Mainly because I've not seen that anywhere, not talking shit.

Hopefully more reliable than the sources he relied upon in the Minnesota shooter thread. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
Posted
43 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

 Worth monitoring because there have already been reports of others in the government already leaving for Russia and other parts. 

This I've heard about from various places, but not sure on the validity.  Would make perfect sense given the proximity.

43 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

Regardless, I think Israel now has the green light from the rest of the ME that he is a valid target with limited reprisals. 

They absolutely do. Al-Assad going down was the last gasp at Iran having any serious allies.  Yemen is a proxy, but even they have limits on what they can do.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, one way to attack that fucker, without bunker busters, is airdrop some light armor and sappers in there and get after it the old-fashioned way.

The way things are going, doesn't sound like there's much to stop em.

Pretty sure they could figure out all of the exit/entry points on that thing and completely seal those in for starters if they didn't want people on the ground.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

What's his face just declared war on the largest US cities. Bombing Iran could be next. He's feeling angry and sorry for himself and he's lashing out. And I'll bet Netanyahu has him convinced US assistance is required for there to be a chance at ending this anytime soon. 

Posted

I guess the purpose of the tankers is to allow Israel to fly further east into Iran? We might as well start dropping bombs ourself if we’re getting this involved 

Posted

Reuters reporting Iran launched another attack this AM and is now saying they are going to flip the bird to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Of course, Iran still maintains the bullshit that they don't want bombs, just depleted Uranium for "science" I guess.

With G7 and the US air movement, I speculate the big moves by US and Israel against Iran may happen by/before mid-week. 

Spoiler

TEL AVIV/DUBAI/WASHINGTON - Iranian missiles struck Israel's Tel Aviv and the port city of Haifa before dawn on Monday, killing at least eight people and destroying homes, prompting Israel's defence minister to warn that Tehran residents would "pay the price and soon".

Iran said its parliament was preparing a bill to leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), adding that Tehran remains opposed to developing weapons of mass destruction. Passing the bill could take several weeks.

...

Before leaving for the summit on Sunday, Trump was asked what he was doing to de-escalate the situation. "I hope there's going to be a deal. I think it's time for a deal," he told reporters. "Sometimes they have to fight it out."

Trump has lauded Israel's offensive while denying Iranian allegations that the U.S. has taken part and warning Tehran not to widen its retaliation to include U.S. targets.

Trump has repeatedly said Iran could end the war by agreeing to tough restrictions on its nuclear programme, which Iran says is for peaceful purposes but which Western countries and the IAEA nuclear watchdog say could be used to make an atomic bomb.

Reuters Pay Link

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
8 hours ago, rpspeed said:

 

Probably wrong thread for dumb question amnesty, but anywhoo. 

 

The airspace in Israel, Iran and Syria are all closed at the moment.  The normal peoples that live in these areas have lives and commerce that should continue.  Do medical trips have to be cancelled?  Do secondary arrangements to drive to a border state and depart from elsewhere become a part of all planning?  Families that are visiting have to upend their plans and find alternate routes? 

 

It seems like a major inconvenience to me, but maybe it is just another part of life in the Middle East.

Posted (edited)

To me, now that you've started the war, you have to ensure that Iran's nuclear program is set back at least a decade, if not more. Which means at some point or another, Fedrow has to be destroyed. Or the Iranian's have to come back to the negotiating table and agree to give up their weapons grade material and ability to enrich. Which if the Isreali's can't do it, we will. 

It's a binary decision at this point, once committed you can't half ass it, you have to whole ass it. 

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
1 hour ago, B00M said:

I guess the purpose of the tankers is to allow Israel to fly further east into Iran? We might as well start dropping bombs ourself if we’re getting this involved 

Maybe that’s the plan. As soon as we are attacked, it’s game on.

 

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Maybe that’s the plan. As soon as we are attacked, it’s game on.

 

I certainly think that is probably an aspect, I suspect, given historicals, a proposal may have been put forth to the current regime of Iran. A typical quid pro quo of our current administration. Give the US x% of oil rights, stop Uranium program, or the US helps Israel. I also suspect Iran says get bent to said offer and they end up the ones suffering without lube. Edit - and I'll admit I much prefer the latter. Which is to say I pretty much agree with @Bateshorn

Edited by BurntEyes
Posted
Just now, BurntEyes said:

I certainly think that is probably an aspect, I suspect, given historicals, a proposal may have been put forth to the current regime of Iran. A typical quid pro quo of our current administration. Give the US x% of oil rights, stop Uranium program, or the US helps Israel. I also suspect Iran says get bent to said offer and they end up the ones suffering without lube. 

Even if they level Iran, they can still hit back. I would be quite nervous if I was the head of security for a Jewish soft target organization in the developing world.

AMIA bombing

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I certainly think that is probably an aspect, I suspect, given historicals, a proposal may have been put forth to the current regime of Iran. A typical quid pro quo of our current administration. Give the US x% of oil rights, stop Uranium program, or the US helps Israel. I also suspect Iran says get bent to said offer and they end up the ones suffering without lube. 

Yeah, If the Isrealis have complete air superiority and control over Iran, any bombing they are doing at this point is to reduce ballistic missile strikes and destablize the Iranian regime.  I'm sure Trump is promising relief in his gross ass zero sum way. 

To build on @BurntEyes comments:  Since the Iranians are mere weeks away from enriching to weapons grade and maybe a few months from a deliverable warhead to Isreal, it's now existential to the Isrealis. If they have to use their own nukes preventively to protect Tel Aviv, they will, so it's unfortunately in our interest to finish what Isreal has started.  I don't make the rules, but that's the reality. 

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Even if they level Iran, they can still hit back. I would be quite nervous if I was the head of security for a Jewish soft target organization in the developing world.

AMIA bombing

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

 

Don't disagree at all, but they may well do that anyway. It's a pick your poison sort of deal in my opinion. Topple the Iranian regime permanently, helping those people hopefully find non-caliphate rule, fully dismantling their Uranium program or kicking the Iran Nuclear can down the road.... again.

I know which option I prefer.

Edited by BurntEyes
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Don't disagree at all, but they may well do that anyway. It's a pick your poison sort of deal in my opinion. Topple the Iranian regime permanently, helping those people hopefully find non-caliphate rule, fully dismantling their Uranium program or kicking the Iran Nuclear can down the road.... again.

I know which option I prefer.

This one?

1_JkVvXWZILOURfAR9dxlF3g.webp.0156cb2164051c49af56525125c2061f.webp

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 2
Posted
11 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Can I ask where you're "hearing" or seeing these rumors? Mainly because I've not seen that anywhere, not talking shit.

 

11 hours ago, twosheds said:


It’s all over the X. I know it’s now very credible, but it’s gaining traction.

 

So basically..... Helobious

Posted
31 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

To me, now that you've started the war, you have to ensure that Iran's nuclear program is set back at least a decade, if not more. Which means at some point or another, Fedrow has to be destroyed. Or the Iranian's have to come back to the negotiating table and agree to give up their weapons grade material and ability to enrich. Which if the Isreali's can't do it, we will. 

It's a binary decision at this point, once committed you can't half ass it, you have to whole ass it. 

17 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Don't disagree at all, but they may well do that anyway. It's a pick your poison sort of deal in my opinion. Topple the Iranian regime permanently, helping those people hopefully find non-caliphate rule, fully dismantling their Uranium program or kicking the Iran Nuclear can down the road.... again.

I know which option I prefer.

One thing I've never bought in all of this, is the idea that Iran, as soon as they got nukes, was going to nuke Israel.  Because if they did, it then becomes an existential threat to Iran and the Shia religion, and the Iranian leadership, and they know this, and they know if they popped a nuke in Israel that they would probably get the Arab world involved against Iran as well. Fallout doesn't care about borders. At the least, Tehran ceases to completely exist, and the Sunni nations would be pleased to see the Shiites go down hard.

But, if I were Iran, I can totally see wanting a nuclear deterrent going forward.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

One thing I've never bought in all of this, is the idea that Iran, as soon as they got nukes, was going to nuke Israel.  Because if they did, it then becomes an existential threat to Iran and the Shia religion, and the Iranian leadership, and they know this, and they know if they popped a nuke in Israel that they would probably get the Arab world involved against Iran as well. Fallout doesn't care about borders. At the least, Tehran ceases to completely exist, and the Sunni nations would be pleased to see the Shiites go down hard.

But, if I were Iran, I can totally see wanting a nuclear deterrent going forward.

TBC: i'm not referring to before the Israeli attacks, i'm referring to after. I also don't entirely subscribe to the idea that the Iranians would immediately or quickly nuke Israel (in the time before ths war started), although I do think it would instantly become leverage in the various ME proxy wars that currently occur. I'm sure the Israelis are also terrified the Iranians could use it to gain leverage in Palestinian negotiations on a two state solution that would totally destablize the Israeli political situation if forced into a deal the right wingers couldn't accept. 

My point is now that Israel has engaged a broad across-the-board attack, the Iranians would probably attempt to nuke or threaten to nuke Israel upon acquiring a deliverable weapon. So Israel now has to destroy the Iranian program or have the Iranian's give it up in an acceptable way.  And if they can't destry Fodrow with conventional weapons, they'll use nuclear, and that makes it our problem (in addition to conventional warhead destruction of Fodrow could be essentially a dirty bomb, which is a disaster in it's own right). 

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

The reports from the US intelligence community was that Iran is not close to developing a nuclear weapon.  Netanyahu has been saying for 25 years that Iran is months away from developing a nuclear weapon only for them to never have one.  I'm all for Iran's regime being over thrown so their people can elect a non extremist leadership so they can enjoy basic rights, but we do NOT need to be dragged into this.  There is no reason to involve US resources into a regional conflict.  Let Israel fight their battles.  We have supplied them with enough weapons and bombs to commit one genocide.  We can use diplomacy to monitor Iran like the rest of the world has and like we have previously done. Is there actual evidence of Iran not complying with the monitoring, testing, and surveillance.?  Negotiations were set to start again until Israel went Leeroy Jenkins with their attack.  Stop wasting tax payer dollars on this bullshit.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
48 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

To me, now that you've started the war, you have to ensure that Iran's nuclear program is set back at least a decade, if not more. Which means at some point or another, Fedrow has to be destroyed. Or the Iranian's have to come back to the negotiating table and agree to give up their weapons grade material and ability to enrich. Which if the Isreali's can't do it, we will. 

It's a binary decision at this point, once committed you can't half ass it, you have to whole ass it. 

Even this is just kicking the can down the road. If you're going all in, you're facilitating regime change at this point. Doing anything else just ends up with the same or similar problems in 5-10 years.

12 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

One thing I've never bought in all of this, is the idea that Iran, as soon as they got nukes, was going to nuke Israel.  Because if they did, it then becomes an existential threat to Iran and the Shia religion, and the Iranian leadership, and they know this, and they know if they popped a nuke in Israel that they would probably get the Arab world involved against Iran as well. Fallout doesn't care about borders. At the least, Tehran ceases to completely exist, and the Sunni nations would be pleased to see the Shiites go down hard.

But, if I were Iran, I can totally see wanting a nuclear deterrent going forward.

Of course they're not going to nuke Israel, it's literally instant suicide. And they already effectively have a nuclear deterrent in their ability to basically completely disrupt regional oil production. This would also (probably) effectively be suicide but them attempting this is not something I would rule out if the regime saw the writing on the wall.

5 minutes ago, victory88 said:

The reports from the US intelligence community was that Iran is not close to developing a nuclear weapon.  Netanyahu has been saying for 25 years that Iran is months away from developing a nuclear weapon only for them to never have one.  I'm all for Iran's regime being over thrown so their people can elect a non extremist leadership so they can enjoy basic rights, but we do NOT need to be dragged into this.  There is no reason to involve US resources into a regional conflict.  Let Israel fight their battles.  We have supplied them with enough weapons and bombs to commit one genocide.  We can use diplomacy to monitor Iran like the rest of the world has and like we have previously done. Is there actual evidence of Iran not complying with the monitoring, testing, and surveillance.?  Negotiations were set to start again until Israel went Leeroy Jenkins with their attack.  Stop wasting tax payer dollars on this bullshit.

Israel can't fight any wars at all without our resources. I've always said that they're free to fight whatever wars they like, just don't do it with my fucking tax dollars, but the reality is that they can't do shit without our money and logisitical support, period, and US foreign policy is effectively uniparty so that was never going to change despite how unpopular it is.

The bolded part is the important bit. I am not confident at all in the Trump administration's ability to negotiate anything that was even close to as effective as the JCPOA. That ship has now (more or less) officially sailed. The JCPOA was also effectively kicking the can down the road, but it was working and could have been expanded upon later on down the line. Between Trump blowing that deal up for literally no reason and Israel launching a pre-emptive strike (100% with our blessing, despite what media talking heads would have you believe), Iran has no reason whatsoever to be trusting of any US-led effort at a diplomatic solution at this point.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
11 hours ago, rpspeed said:

 

Been thinking about this. Where they going to all land? Sure we have airbases across the region, but that is one heck of a footprint (and lucrative target) if if they are close to Iran.

Posted
16 hours ago, KYHorn said:

 

Just to add to some of your points, I think the motivations and pressure behind SA's push to maintain high oil production via OPEC over the last 6 months has become much clearer.

I agree. Even though most Iranian oil goes to China & India, it doesn't matter who produces the oil. 

It is a zero sum game. Take a major source off the table, and the buyers frenzy flips the stabilized market to a sellers market with to guardrails.

The biggest difference being, that Iran appears to be totally isolated this time, with everybody else watching from the sidelines.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, PTINS said:

I agree. Even though most Iranian oil goes to China & India, it doesn't matter who produces the oil. 

It is a zero sum game. Take a major source off the table, and the buyers frenzy flips the stabilized market to a sellers market with to guardrails.

The biggest difference being, that Iran appears to be totally isolated this time, with everybody else watching from the sidelines.  

It's wild how much the entire Islamic world is basically: I'm all good. That ain't none of my business. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
20 minutes ago, victory88 said:

The reports from the US intelligence community was that Iran is not close to developing a nuclear weapon.  Netanyahu has been saying for 25 years that Iran is months away from developing a nuclear weapon only for them to never have one.  I'm all for Iran's regime being over thrown so their people can elect a non extremist leadership so they can enjoy basic rights, but we do NOT need to be dragged into this.  There is no reason to involve US resources into a regional conflict.  Let Israel fight their battles.  We have supplied them with enough weapons and bombs to commit one genocide.  We can use diplomacy to monitor Iran like the rest of the world has and like we have previously done. Is there actual evidence of Iran not complying with the monitoring, testing, and surveillance.?  Negotiations were set to start again until Israel went Leeroy Jenkins with their attack.  Stop wasting tax payer dollars on this bullshit.

 

Good Lord...

 

4 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I am not confident at all in the Trump administration's ability to negotiate anything that was even close to as effective as the JCPOA.

 

Define "Effective"

 

4 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

The JCPOA was also effectively kicking the can down the road, but it was working and could have been expanded upon later on down the line.

 

Define "working"

You seem to be assigning an awful lot of good faith to the world's largest nation-state sponsor of international terrorism. It's already been established that Iran was actively breaking the terms of the deal, hiding facilities, and continuing to develop weapons. Wishing that wasn't so, doesn't change that.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted

Israel: We are taking too much flack for our bullshit in Gaza. We need to change the narrative. Let's bomb Iran!

It's funny. Anytime the US or Israel wants to change a narrative, the solution seems to be alwasy bomb Iran. Doesn't help that Iran likes to play the "bad guy" role and stir up shit in the region. There's always a reason to bomb Iran.

 

That whole region can get fucked.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

Good Lord...

 

 

Define "Effective"

 

 

Define "working"

You seem to be assigning an awful lot of good faith to the world's largest nation-state sponsor of international terrorism. It's already been established that Iran was actively breaking the terms of the deal, hiding facilities, and continuing to develop weapons. Wishing that wasn't so, doesn't change that.

Can you show proof of this?  Because in the other thread, you can see the reports on there that all their facilities were being monitored.  Iran definitely funds Hamas but can you please reference the international terrorism or attacks at US civilians?  Their conflict is regional with Israel.

As for assigning good faith, sorry if I'd like to see proof before we go bomb another country and kill civilians because of weapons of mass destruction that do not exist.  And I like how terrorism is only confined to Muslims/brown people.   As if the 25000+ dead kids in Gaza with bullets in their skulls and blown off limbs from US weapons and American tax dollars is any different than a Hamas moron launching a RPG.  They are both equally wrong and it needs to stop.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

One thing I've never bought in all of this, is the idea that Iran, as soon as they got nukes, was going to nuke Israel.  Because if they did, it then becomes an existential threat to Iran and the Shia religion, and the Iranian leadership, and they know this, and they know if they popped a nuke in Israel that they would probably get the Arab world involved against Iran as well. Fallout doesn't care about borders. At the least, Tehran ceases to completely exist, and the Sunni nations would be pleased to see the Shiites go down hard.

But, if I were Iran, I can totally see wanting a nuclear deterrent going forward.

They want a nuke in order to prevent the shit that Isreal is doing to them now. Same as every other country. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, victory88 said:

Can you show proof of this?  Because in the other thread, you can see the reports on there that all their facilities were being monitored.  Iran definitely funds Hamas but can you please reference the international terrorism or attacks at US civilians?  Their conflict is regional with Israel.

As for assigning good faith, sorry if I'd like to see proof before we go bomb another country and kill civilians because of weapons of mass destruction that do not exist.  And I like how terrorism is only confined to Muslims/brown people.   As if the 25000+ dead kids in Gaza with bullets in their skulls and blown off limbs from US weapons and American tax dollars is any different than a Hamas moron launching a RPG.  They are both equally wrong and it needs to stop.

 

AMIA attacks in Argentina plus a few other bombings is a place to start.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, victory88 said:

Can you show proof of this?  Because in the other thread, you can see the reports on there that all their facilities were being monitored. 

 

https://archive.is/mkHnl#selection-2155.0-2167.160

 

Quote

 

"Adding to the risks is that Fordow is not the only ultra-secure facility that Iran can fall back on. Tehran has recently been building an even deeper and better protected facility into Kūh-e Kolang Gaz Lā, also known as Pickaxe mountain, a few kilometres south of Natanz. 

While Fordow is thought to have two tunnel entrances, Pickaxe has at least four, making it harder to seal off entrances by bombing. Its underground halls also have more floorspace.
Some fear the facility, which Iran has so far barred the IAEA from inspecting, could even be used to assemble a nuclear weapon while Iran was under attack.
“A key question is whether Iran will, or maybe already has, secreted fissile material into Pickaxe, or some other unknown facility,” said the FDD’s Ben Taleblu."

 

 
 
3 minutes ago, victory88 said:

Iran definitely funds Hamas but can you please reference the international terrorism or attacks at US civilians?  Their conflict is regional with Israel.

 

Are you implying that Iran doesn't participate in international terrorism? That it didn't kidnap and kill US civilians, soldiers, and employees in Lebanon in the 80s, bomb a community center in Argentina in the 90s, kill US soldiers with IEDs in Iraq in the 10s, or try to kill US politicians and Generals on US soil in the teens? Iran has been the largest sponsor of International Terrorism since the Islamic Republic was founded after the fall of the Shah. "Death To America!" is an official regime slogan... and they mean it.

 

3 minutes ago, victory88 said:

sorry if I'd like to see proof before we go bomb another country and kill civilians because of weapons of mass destruction that do not exist.

 

Are you implying that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program? That it hasn't actively been trying to develop nuclear weapons of mass destruction for 20+ years?

 

4 minutes ago, victory88 said:

And I like how terrorism is only confined to Muslims/brown people.

 

What the Fuck are you talking about?

 

4 minutes ago, victory88 said:

as if the 25000+ dead kids in Gaza with bullets in their skulls and blown off limbs from US weapons and American tax dollars is any different than a Hamas moron launching a RPG. 

 

Blame Hamas for using their own people as human shields while they hide underneath schools and Mosques with their kidnapping victims. And where are you getting the 25k+ number from? Hamas?

 

4 minutes ago, victory88 said:

They are both equally wrong and it needs to stop.

 

Define "equally". Are you actually trying to draw an equivalency between the actions of Israel, and Iran? Are you serious?

 

Posted
27 minutes ago, victory88 said:

Can you show proof of this?  Because in the other thread, you can see the reports on there that all their facilities were being monitored.  Iran definitely funds Hamas but can you please reference the international terrorism or attacks at US civilians?  Their conflict is regional with Israel.

As for assigning good faith, sorry if I'd like to see proof before we go bomb another country and kill civilians because of weapons of mass destruction that do not exist.  And I like how terrorism is only confined to Muslims/brown people.   As if the 25000+ dead kids in Gaza with bullets in their skulls and blown off limbs from US weapons and American tax dollars is any different than a Hamas moron launching a RPG.  They are both equally wrong and it needs to stop.

 

7 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

AMIA attacks in Argentina plus a few other bombings is a place to start.

This is correct, there is no question that Iran is a state sponsor of international terrorism. That doesn't mean that they are developing WMDs, even the US intelligence community doesn't think this is the case. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen. They started "slipping" in their compliance with the IAEA shortly after Trump blew up the JCPOA and some of their actions have been concerning.

Even still, Israel's justification for a pre-emptive strike and pushing for total war seems non-existent/insane.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Pasken said:

They want a nuke in order to prevent the shit that Isreal is doing to them now. Same as every other country. 

Dude, Iran has openly made it clear for decades that complete annihilation of Israel is their goal. They've made every effort to do so. 

Whether or not they would use nukes against Israel is open for debate but their ultimate plans are not.

I for one, care more about the threat to the US and other western countries should a caliphate regime deeply in bed with terrorist gain access to nukes.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

That doesn't mean that they are developing WMDs, even the US intelligence community doesn't think this is the case.

 

You don't think the Iranians have a nuclear weapons program? Where/when, exactly, did the the "US intelligence community" say that?

Posted
1 hour ago, Parliament said:

Yeah why not just send the calls to VM for a bit.

IMG_7489.jpeg

Yeah I've no clue how the US administration will ultimately respond to those requests because reasons, but Israel done ghosted and blocked Ali on their phones.

Posted
1 hour ago, crash_davis said:

Israel: We are taking too much flack for our bullshit in Gaza. We need to change the narrative. Let's bomb Iran!

It's funny. Anytime the US or Israel wants to change a narrative, the solution seems to be alwasy bomb Iran. Doesn't help that Iran likes to play the "bad guy" role and stir up shit in the region. There's always a reason to bomb Iran.

 

That whole region can get fucked.

I think there is some truth to the bold but it is denying the larger picture and recent "L's" that Iran has taken to weaken them. What I've read is now that  because of the neutering of Hezbollah, Houthis and Hamas (THe triple H of terrorism) that Bibi senses a once-in-a-generation moment to seize on Iran's weakness (they really overplayed their hand and should have just kept rattling the sabre) and he sees he can take a step-function jump for Israel and reshape the region. It's a perfect opportunity for Israel to attack right now and that is outside of the Gaza stuff IMO.

The flipside is that, while showing a little bit of fight, the ayatollah has now been more or less humiliated in front of the world (and even his own people depending on what you read / believe) and he has to be seeing a very hard landing for him.

AND that's with the rumors that Bibi is kowtowin to Trump who told him to NOT directly target/kill the smack-talking Ayatollah...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

You don't think the Iranians have a nuclear weapons program? Where/when, exactly, did the the "US intelligence community" say that?

https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IF/PDF/IF12106/IF12106.17.pdf
 

Lots of information summarized in there.  Take from it what you will.  I don't see any concrete evidence in there stating they are weeks from being able to launch a nuke.  If they did, Trump would be the first to fly a plane with a US bomb.  If anything, he is trying to avoid conflict and that would not be the case if Iran was an imminent threat.  I don't agree much with the orange man, but I agree with him here.  We can take the conversation to the other thread as it is better suited. 

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...