ComradeKayAdams

The spirit of the Constitution is such that the legislative branch limits the unilateral power of the executive branch to start wars. It is emphasized in the War Powers Clause and later reinforced in the 1973 War Powers Resolution. BOTH political sides repeatedly ignoring this Constitutional intention since WW2 has dangerously emboldened American imperialism. The hyperbolic Canada remark was an obvious reductio ad absurdum meant to point out MAGA hypocrisy. Perhaps it would have been more persuasive for me to just substitute Canada with Iran. If senile Joe Biden had suddenly bombed Iran in the same manner as Trump, we all know exactly how MAGA would have responded. No one in my family would follow me to Scandinavia, bruh... I’m going to stay in the United States, I’m going to vote for Zohran today, and I’m going to vote for AOC as President in 2028. Deal with it. According to Papa Adamski: 2 to 3 years with a concerted effort. His assessment is based on the public IAEA reports after JCPOA but before Israel and the U.S. started bombing Iran. According to him, the above-ground activity needed for properly building nuclear weapons would have been far too conspicuous to evade the IAEA to the level that Bibi and Trump claim happened. He emphasized the plutonium processing much more so than the uranium enrichment and the missile deployment technology. Any additional sci/tech questions for Papa Adamski? I’d be happy to ask him! Regarding pantsuits: oh you dare lots, indeed! POP QUIZ TIME FOR LEH-NERD SKIN-ERD: The ratio of Kay’s blazer dresses to chic pantsuits is known to be 4.5, and the ratio of Kay’s blazer dresses to skirt suits is 1.8. Kay owns 2 chic pantsuits. If Kay is suddenly gifted 4 frumpy Hillary Clinton-esque pantsuits, how many weeks can Kay now go wearing a unique formal business outfit? You may or may not need to recall Cauchy’s Integral Theorem for this: the line integral over a closed contour C for w(z)*dz = 0. If you get this question correct, I will press a gold star sticker onto your forehead. If not, you will see gold star stickers circling above your forehead (i.e., I shall punch you in the face, bruh). High-stakes pressure elevates cognitive performance, Leh-nerd…

Whose opinions I would trust, you ask? Select IAEA representatives plus Congressional members of national security and intelligence committees (of all political stripes: left and right, populist and establishment). We should be following Constitution-esque protocols when dealing with imminent nuclear threats. Would you have been comfortable with a senile Joe Biden whimsically and unilaterally bombing, say, Canada over unsubstantiated rumors of imminent nuclear annihilation? Why am I still living here in the United States, you ask?? LOL…um, family and friends, career and culture, the melting pot ethos, a lifetime of cherished memories, the vast natural geographic beauty, representative democracy, the Bill of Rights, the Constitutional separation of powers, etc… What’s wrong with me using the political process to change public policy? Didn’t you try to do the same last November? You are perfectly free to consider yourself an arbiter of what’s “American” and what’s not. Go ahead and declare imperialism and trickle-down economics “American,” while declaring universal health care and nationalized land/natural resources “un-American.” Just remember that at previous points in American history, ideas like slavery and Jim Crow and miscegenation and Gilded Age capitalism and legalized misogyny and the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans were considered sclerotic American values. Yes, your post is a bit opaque to me, but I THINK I’m following: you’re telling me that there are clear standards for defining “imminent” nuclear emergencies like this one, and that you personally know of evidence existing that shows Iran crossed this “imminence” threshold? I’m honestly in no position to tell you that you are incorrect. I’m a civilian biomed device engineer who took one college elective course in intro nuclear science/engineering (random shout-out to the Lamarsh textbook…I still have it in my bookshelf!). All I can tell you, anecdotally, is that my Dad is a solid-state materials physicist and a mild-mannered political centrist. His technical nuclear background is a lot better than mine, and he has DARPA funding under his belt. We talked about this exact topic for a few minutes last night, and he seems to think that the technological likelihood of Iran being able to strike Israel (let alone the U.S.) with nuclear weapons this calendar year is absurd. I feel like we’re going around in tautological circles at this point? Absent new nuclear intelligence information that is made publicly available, let’s agree to disagree. I envisage scenarios in which we’re aligned with what the proper course of action should have been. P.S. My formal business wardrobe ratio of blazer dresses to CHIC pantsuits is officially 4.5. FOUR POINT FIVE. The implication that I might ever wear a frumpy Hillary Clinton warmonger pantsuit was completely out of line. You’re out of your element, Leh-ny, and how dare you.

Agreed! And let’s also reiterate the TRUE origins of this Iran-Israel-U.S. conflict, lest the PPP warmongers try to obfuscate otherwise: the 1953 coup in Iran and the 1948 Nakba. I’m anti-American Empire, not pro-Iran. I am in favor of national sovereignty and human rights while against unnecessary wars and collective punishment. My first instinct of distrusting government claims of WMD’s is a consequence of growing up in the post-9/11 era. What you deem to be a sign of mental illness is what I consider to be a sign of basic intelligence. No, I don’t believe we will see the evidence in under 10 years or ever. As a concerned American citizen, it’s not that I need the specific intelligence made public to me. I just need various trusted third parties to see the evidence in private and then to publicly confirm that the claims are legitimate. I’m a girl, actually, but thank you for your kind words! You’re a good poster, too. This forum could use more people like yourself who can sustain political discussions and debate. Also: I’m a social democrat and not a communist or even a socialist, but don’t expect BillsFanNC to ever understand the distinction. The “comrade” in my name is a tongue-in-cheek thing. P.S. A friend of Muppy is a friend of Commie Kay! I hear ya, but I’m just super pessimistic that the current Iranian regime can be ousted without American boots on the ground. Moreover, I’m far from confident that a replacement regime would be any better for the world or for Iranians. Love ya, Mups! << hugs Muppy >> << punches Leh-nerd because…reasons >> “Imminent” = on the order of days or weeks or months, not a year or longer. There has been ZERO evidence suggesting the danger was imminent. Trump and Netanyahu opted out of diplomacy way too soon for, I believe, reasons that I’ve already articulated. You’re presenting a fork-in-the-road situation as if both choices are of approximately equal caliber in rationale. What happened to the Leh-nerd who is uber-skeptical of government power, the establishment, the deep state, and what not?? You seem to be suspending a lot of your innate distrust when it comes to this particular dilemma.

Brilliant retort! Super profound! Much logic! Many insight! Yes, a guess from a random online MAGA Carolina bumpkin carries the same approximate weight as an estimate from a peer-reviewed publication in the world’s most prestigious medical journal. And yes, Trump certainly did a lot to help dispel that mean-spirited TACO label. Proving people wrong who say mean things about you is the most important component of foreign policy. Careful, measured analyses of the long-term consequences of one’s actions is for soy boys, women, and the LGBTQ+. MANLY MEN bomb sh!t and scream, “America! F*ck yeah!” in any nearby faces of brown-skinned people with funny-sounding names. I am STILL WAITING, by the way, for any evidence that Iran’s nuclear program posed an IMMINENT threat to Israel and the United States. Perhaps one of you warmongering PPP’ers, replete with MIC stocks but totally devoid of the physical fitness to serve in battle, will step up to the plate in this regard??

Fine, I’ll engage you in your obvious deflective pedantry. There is no objective ranking of human rights crises, but why I think calling the Gaza genocide the worst “since the Holocaust” is not hyperbolic: 1. 50-60k deaths is a horrific undercount. The Gaza Health Ministry lost the ability to officially count its dead long ago. The Lancet estimated almost 200k last summer, when you include people still buried under the rubble plus all the indirect deaths. 2. It is ongoing and only getting worse with the impacts of malnutrition on starving children. 3. It is being carried out by a First World country and funded by another one. 4. It is occurring in the age of the internet and digital mass media. 5. From a historical perspective, it probably marks the beginning of the end of Zionism. 6. From a historical perspective, it probably marks the end of the American Empire as a respected moral figure on the international stage.

Your first paragraph: Sure, but Iran was reasonable to not be compliant after being compliant. That’s what tends to happen when one side suddenly reneges on a deal! The IAEA works for the countries of the United Nations, so it is incumbent on those countries to make sure a more stringent JCPOA v2.0 is composed. Your second paragraph: Correct, I was not arguing in favor of any covert CIA government nonsense! Fully open channels of communication, like what we have with other countries of the West, must be part of any potential treaty with Iran. The Iranian theocrats are just going to have to deal with my ridiculously chic outfits in my Instagram photos. Your third paragraph: Oh boy…you are on thin ice with me, Leh-nerd. Thin. Ice. And believe me, your 24.8 BMI is the least of our problems on this frozen metaphorical pond. “Dismantlement of the genocidal Zionist project” is a peaceful proposal that simply means bestowing upon Palestinians the exact same citizen rights that Jewish Israelis enjoy, while at the same time prosecuting all war criminals within both the Israeli government and Hamas. I should also clarify that I’ve been using a colloquial definition of “non-interventionism,” when I probably should be saying “anti-imperialism.” As a self-described “ardent non-interventionist,” I still want to “intervene” multilaterally to stop blatant acts of aggression if it makes sense to do so. The MOTIVES behind military and economic pressure are paramount to me. I keep repeating myself about Israel and Gaza because you guys keep framing the Iran-Israel conflict so ignorantly! On one side, Iran’s government is a socially regressive theocracy guilty of making irresponsible verbal threats to Israel and funding terrorists/resistance fighters. On the other side, Israel is an apartheid state guilty of genocide and illegal occupation of land. Neither are good, but only one side here is initiating acts of aggression against its neighbors. Only one side here has fully functioning nuclear weapons not monitored by the IAEA. Only one side here agreed to become a member of the NPT. Which side, exactly, is the greater threat to nuclear escalation at the moment?? But fine, I’ll stop bringing up the worst human rights crisis since the Holocaust because doing so challenges your infantile black vs. white worldview. Paradigm-shifting thoughts affect poor wittle Weh-nerd in the feel-feels, and awww…Weh-nerd’s feel-feels are what weally matter!! << haughty eyeroll >> << tosses baby formula bottle at Leh-nerd’s face >> << uploads latest cut-out maxi pic to Instagram page >> << sends Instagram page link to Ali Khamenei >>

International economic sanctions would serve as the carrot and the stick. A “kinetic” approach shouldn’t be necessary because the IAEA found Iran fully compliant during the JCPOA v1.0. Iran’s era of non-compliance began after Trump suddenly reneged on the deal. “Intervening via low-key revolution and king-making” is still letting the Iranians decide for themselves how they want to be governed. ~80% of Iranians are already dissatisfied with a theocracy. Basically, Iranian women can come visit me in NYC and watch my TikTok videos on how to wear bell-sleeved floral-patterned skater dresses while haughtily flipping one’s hair out in public, on the way to one’s appointment to abort one’s rapist’s baby. Iranians will want to live like Kay because who wouldn’t?? This is the extent of the revolution fomentation: simply opening up channels of communication (internet, travel, etc.) that promote the awesomeness of secular humanism and the American Bill of Rights. Iran’s government would theoretically agree to this because it would be part of the prospective international peace deal. And while I’m proposing theoretical solutions, allow me to expound on an additional carrot we are morally obligated to dangle in front of Iran: the full dismantlement of the genocidal Zionist project…a new one-state solution, under equally full IAEA surveillance as Iran, and with all Israeli government war criminals sent to The Hague. This would make the Houthis and Hezbollah happy, too, to go along with their Abraham Accords brethren and the rest of the Middle East (if they’re all being honest with their feelings about the psychopathic country that is Israel).

What I think SHOULD happen? As an ardent non-interventionist, I would have Iran agree to a JCPOA v2.0 crafted by the IAEA. In return, the international community would lift all economic sanctions on Iran, agree to a permanent ceasefire, and impose a worldwide BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction) policy against Israel if Israel does not oblige. I would also open up all channels of cultural communication with Iran as part of the deal, which would essentially be a “Trojan horse” strategy to foment internal dissent and revolution via secular humanist principles. Consider these additional questions as you assess this topic: 1. Who do you trust the most among Trump, Netanyahu, Khamenei, and the IAEA? My answer: easily the IAEA. Not even close. 2. Is Iran a rational actor or an irrational one? My answer: a rational one, believe it or not. Their observed behavior has remained consistent with a country fully aware of and completely invested in its self-preservation. A “rational actor,” as defined in this instance, understands that the single use of a nuclear weapon against Israel would equate to its own instant annihilation. Modern world history has taught us that possession of nuclear weapons equate to protection from American imperialism. Become Russia or North Korea and not Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, etc… 3. What is motivating the United States government in this conflict? My answer: the MIC, AIPAC, powerful individual oligarchs like Miriam Adelson, and (sadly) many Christian fundamentalists. 4. What is motivating Israel in this conflict? My answer: a quest for regional hegemony so that a Greater Israel (including Gaza, the West Bank, all of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, southwest Syria, and southern Lebanon) can be constructed with minimal resistance. 5. Why did Israel attack Iran just days before the latest scheduled peace talks in Oman? My answer: to sabotage the peace talks. 6. Why was Trump insistent that Iran not have a nuclear energy program for civilian purposes? My answer: typical “Art of the Deal” stupidity. 7. What are the prospects for de-escalation? My answer: Frighteningly poor. The world leaders involved all appear to be sociopaths, in the clinical DSM-5 sense of the word. Tribalism is deeply entrenched and the dehumanization process is highly advanced. Iran just struck an Israeli hospital, for bleep’s sake, which I interpreted as an “oopsie!” response to all 36 of the hospitals Israel has targeted in Gaza since 10/7/23.

LOL…I knew it! I can spot an Abundance stan from a mile away! Sorry, but I’m just not a fan. The only meaningful message I could glean from the book is that Democrats need to deliver on their promises to improve people’s daily lives. That’s about it. You know my politics, Tibsy, so you know that I think progressives are far better positioned than establishment liberals to solve these problems. If you want to talk about homelessness, increasing the housing supply is only one component of a multi-faceted issue. Sure, there are definitely silly regulations that hinder housing construction progress. But what about oligopoly effects from corporate landlords? Sluggish wage growth relative to rising prices throughout the economy? Bankruptcies due to health care debt? Mental health crises? Drug addictions? Deficiencies in our veterans affairs program? Then there’s the grave matter of ecosystem collapse due to suburban sprawl. You praised Houston for its lax building regulations, but us New Yorkers are not like Texans! We actually care about things up here like the environment, efficient transportation, and global warming. I can be aligned with you on issues like public housing and anti-NIMBY politics, but a lot of that available land needs to be reserved for natural carbon sequestration (i.e. planting trees) in the form of (preferably unfragmented) woodland/wetland ecosystems. Ugh…I hijacked the Iran thread…so I suppose I’ll ask, again, the collective PPP warmongers salivating at regime change: where is the evidence that Iran’s nuclear program posed an imminent threat to Israel and the United States? Note how “imminent” doesn’t mean “eventual.” This question should be the CENTRAL FOCUS of this thread. Also, for the people who think Iranian regime change is a simple matter of bombing the right places and that it won’t escalate to American boots on the ground: what about the potential for a refugee crisis a la Syria 2015, when Iran is FOUR TIMES the population size of Syria?? The law of unintended consequences…ugh…

The law of unintended consequences? Good luck with that. The vast majority of Americans are perfectly comfortable with “might makes right” imperialism. We’re simply too ignorant and arrogant to learn lessons from the past 80 years of failed interventionism. Most contemporary Americans can’t even distinguish between democratic socialism and authoritarian socialism, so it’s a safe bet that most Americans alive today would have supported the 1953 coup in Iran. It would have been efficaciously sold to us under the guise of ethical existentialism, as opposed to the blatant machinations of American and British fossil fuel oligarchs. Imperialism and Zionism go hand in hand, of course, so no surprise that this majority Christian nation can’t see Israel for the rogue pariah state it has become. Americans find comfort in a black-and-white view of the world because it assuages our delicate egos and our infantile preconceptions. We need to see “good guys” fighting “bad guys,” and we need to be the “good guys.” This is why we obstinately maintain so much trust in a nation actively committing genocide, stealing more Arab land, and refusing to sign the NPT. This is why we are unable to examine our own country’s mistakes in diplomacy from the perspective of Iran, which quite rationally desires the status of a North Korea over that of a present-day Libya. Still waiting for ANY evidence that Iran’s nuclear program posed an IMMINENT threat to Israel and the United States… OH MY GOD, Tibsy…you’ve been reading Ezra Klein’s “Abundance,” haven’t you?? I want to remain mindful of not hijacking the thread, so I’ll just make these two quick points: 1. Some regulations are bad, and some are good. Regulations that prevent ecosystem degradation and promote collective bargaining are most often among the latter category. 2. Be wary of anyone not willing to frame political arguments as the American people in opposition to corporate oligarchs. More specifically, be skeptical of anyone who is not vocally against Citizens United v. FEC (2010). << Kay throws her green MAFA** hat at Tibsy’s face >> ** - MAFA = Make America Forested Again (it’s a custom designed hat!)

Fair enough, Leh-nerd. I did enjoy your “astute” remark and the BMI compliments! A +1 rep boost for you! It’s only a “like” reaction and not an “awesome” reaction, however, because I only counted these 2 distinct compliments when I was kinda hoping for a compliment tally more in the 5+ range from you... But getting back on topic, let’s now briefly review La Commie Kay’s outline of what SHOULD be done (but obviously won’t): 1. Stop attacking Iran. 2. Lift all economic sanctions on Iran. 3. Negotiate a JCPOA v2.0 deal with Iran. 4. Encourage internal revolt and regime change within Iran. 5. Arrange a permanent ceasefire and full hostage exchange between Israel and Hamas. 6. Send Bibi, Smotrich, Ben-Gvir, and the rest of Israel’s government leaders to The Hague for their war crimes. 7. Send Hamas military leadership to The Hague for their war crimes. 8. Lead an international coalition to guide a new single Israel-Palestine country, with full and equal rights for all, regardless of ethnicity or religion. P.S.: 24.8 BMI is actually pretty good! Don’t forget that muscle weighs more than fat, so I think BMI as a health metric can sometimes be misleading for guys. But you gotta go 100% whole-food plant-based if you want to drive from Fat Boy City to Slender Man Town! P.S.P.S.: WTF is a “cassette deck,” bruh?? Is that a device situated alongside your rotary phone, typewriter, and cathode ray TV?? (P.S.)^3: The rapper spells his name as “Eminem.” You were thinking of the candy, “M & M’s.” Typical 20’s BMI’er…always thinking about junk food… Even lesser known fact: John Lennon’s first draft to those original lyrics predicted the internet, Two Bills Drive, and our political debates all in one!! He was so far ahead of his time because he could LITERALLY see half a century into the future! Lennon, however, probably correctly assumed that the people would fear his powers of omniscience. So he promptly threw this first draft into the trash bin, to be forever forgotten by history, until now… Imagine there’s no Leh-nerd. It’s easy if you try. No conservative poster With a 24.8 BMI. Imagine all of PPP Havin’ more of their say. Ah-ha-aaah… Imagine there’s no Leh-nerd. It isn’t hard to do. No one for Kay to bully And to claim smells like poo. Imagine all of PPP Lookin’ less obese. You-oo-oooh… You may say Kay’s a dreamer, But she’s not the only one. Muppy has her own opinion, “Ugh. With his MAGA rants I’m done.” Imagine there’s no Leh-nerd. I wonder if you can? Fewer non-sequiturs and whataboutisms, As if a moderator ban. Imagine all of PPP Sans Leh-nerd’s thoughts unfurled. You-oo-oooh… You may say Kay’s a dreamer, But she’s not the only one. Muppy once more opines, “Meh. His verbose opinions had a good run.”

HECK. YEAH. I’ve been to the Brooklyn Wegs a few times already while visiting friends, but the Manhattan Wegs is closer to where I work and live. Greenpoint is the place to be on Dyngus Day if you can’t make it to Buffalo!

AWESOME! The one next to NYU! I go there a couple times a month just for the upstate NY nostalgia! Zohran picked up the Bernie Sanders endorsement yesterday, so now he’s ready to roll for this coming Tuesday. It will be an all-hands-on-deck canvassing adventure over the final weekend. We still need volunteers in the Bronx, FYI…for any progressive PPP lurkers out there… My official ranked-choice top-5 vote for Tuesday: 1. Zohran Mamdani 2. Brad Lander 3. Zellnor Myrie 4. Scott Stringer 5. Adrienne Adams It’s super strategic if you’re a progressive: Zohran #1, all 5 spots filled, no Cuomo listed, and Adrienne Adams as an emergency anti-Cuomo centrist rally candidate.

Your sarcasm is adorable, but let’s please try to stay on topic. Polling data suggests that older conservative men, more or less, are the one demographic holdout in majority support of both neocon foreign policies and the state of Israel. Let’s call this the “Leh-nerd Skin-erd Demographic,” or “LSD” for short. As this group’s representative, could you perhaps explain why the LSD may be so dissociated from reality, present AND past? All of us young whippersnappers promise to step off your lawn if you can lend insight into your group’s apparent majority support for the following ethical quandaries: government claims involving WMD’s, regime change wars, preemptive military strikes, collective punishment, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and apartheid states. My perceived arrogance, by the way, stems from a strong understanding of this broad topic. If you see faults in my line of thinking, by all means point them out! Such verbal back-and-forth forms the basis of what linguistic scholars call a “discussion.” Try it, bruh. Oh, and yes I am most certainly “buttoned up for reals.” Sartorial fastening is a trivial endeavor for any vegan with a 19.3 BMI. << haughty hair flip >>

Tibsy?! You look…different. Yes, Israel absolutely wants the U.S. involved with regime change in Iran. They want us to eventually do most of the legwork for them. Once the Iranian theocracy’s regional influence is dismantled, Israel can more easily move toward their Greater Israel plans that include, at minimum, ethnic cleansing in Gaza and the annexation of the West Bank. I don’t know exactly what’s wrong with the Boomers on this topic, but I do know that they grew up at a time when Israel was a much more politically reasonable country. Since the Likud Party formed in the 1970’s, it has been a gradual descent into far-right nationalism that really accelerated after the Second Intifada. First and earliest impressions are hard to shake. I’m sure I could whip up a delightfully caustic hypothesis from Bruce Cannon Gibney’s book, “A Generation of Sociopaths: How the Baby Boomers Betrayed America.” However…I do now sort of regret picking on the Boomers (and the middle-agers). I suspect other factors are much more strongly in play that transcend biological age: Islamophobia, the inevitable dehumanization process resulting from settler colonialism, the particulars of one’s news media diet, etc… “So be it,” indeed, because I don’t see much evidence lately suggesting Israel cares that much about international opinion. As long as the United States allows them to operate with impunity, they’re perfectly content with whatever war crimes their darkened hearts desire. Israel is ALREADY attacking Iran’s fossil fuel energy infrastructure with the obvious objective of significantly harming Iran. If these continued attacks happen to impact the global fossil fuel economy as well, then Israel will simply scream “anti-Semites!” or “Hamas!” or something. I think everyone here wants to see regime change in Iran. I’m just not personally a fan of the U.S. (or Israel) using its military might to make it happen. I’d rather see the Iranians do it completely on their own. I would lift all international economic sanctions on Iran and cultivate a more diplomatic relationship with everyone there. This would then hopefully elevate the country’s standard of living, empower Iran’s intelligentsia, and embolden its working class based on the principles of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Political revolutions come in many different flavors. Why not buck the American trend from the past 75 years and try it my way??