DEVELOPING: Israel launches strike on Iran nuke cites and military command

[Big Blitz]

30 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I've always agreed with this approach to foreign policy as laid out by Levin here.  This is what I'm talking about with the split between MAGA conservatives and traditional conservatives when it comes to foreign policy.  Trump trying to appease both is tough to do.

 

 

 

 

 

We mostly agree with Levin here - the “isolationist” wing of the party is small … but yes very vocal with some prominent voices.  
 

The United States has NEVER been isolationist. 
 

Not from the second we began colonies.  
 

We moved toward the Mississippi.  
 

We moved West.  
 

We intervened in numerous countries in the late 1800s.  
 

WWI.  

 

WWII.  
 

 

I don’t understand this “revert back to isolation” nonsense.  

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

We mostly agree with Levin here - the “isolationist” wing of the party is small … but yes very vocal with some prominent voices.  
 

The United States has NEVER been isolationist. 
 

Not from the second we began colonies.  
 

We moved toward the Mississippi.  
 

We moved West.  
 

We intervened in numerous countries in the late 1800s.  
 

WWI.  

 

WWII.  
 

 

I don’t understand this “revert back to isolation” nonsense.  

Agreed.

Which is why I've never understood both of these propositions are not clearly in America's best interests:

 

1. Iran is run by a theocratic regime committed to the destruction of Israel and the establishment of of new caliphate, such that allowing it to acquire a nuclear weapon is a threat to the region and, in turn, to the United States and global security.

 

2. Russia is run by a dictator who has openly and repeatedly stated his desire to reconstitute - by any means necessary - the former Russian/Soviet Empire, such that contesting Russian aggression, particularly in Europe, is a threat to NATO, to the United States, and to global security.

 

I see no reasonable argument to the contrary, nor do I see any way to find (1) is true while denying that (2) is true.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Doc]

43 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Agreed.

Which is why I've never understood both of these propositions are not clearly in America's best interests:

 

1. Iran is run by a theocratic regime committed to the destruction of Israel and the establishment of of new caliphate, such that allowing it to acquire a nuclear weapon is a threat to the region and, in turn, to the United States and global security.

 

2. Russia is run by a dictator who has openly and repeatedly stated his desire to reconstitute - by any means necessary - the former Russian/Soviet Empire, such that contesting Russian aggression, particularly in Europe, is a threat to NATO, to the United States, and to global security.

 

I see no reasonable argument to the contrary, nor do I see any way to find (1) is true while denying that (2) is true.

 

Putin may want to reconstitute the USSR but Ukraine has shown him and the rest of the World that he has no ability to do so.  

[The Frankish Reich]

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Putin may want to reconstitute the USSR but Ukraine has shown him and the rest of the World that he has no ability to do so.  

Exactly, but thanks in large part to U.S. and NATO resolve.

[B-Man]

 

 

    

 

[Homelander]

9 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The video evidence supports the tourist view for the protesters except for a handful of bad actors. We've all acknowledge J6 rioters deserved to be arrested.

 

Something I'd like to see you acknowledge with the current riots. What the anarchists  think they're going to accomplish is a mystery. It's a losing position on a losing issue. Protecting illegsl immigrant rapists, murderers, drug dealers, sex traffickers and others from justice.. Why not extend the courtesy to the domestic creeps too? All funded by shady NGO dark money much of it from China. How is life as one of Xi's useful idiots?

 

 

 

 

 

Ah yes, the “tourist visit” defense because real tourists smash windows, attack cops, get killed and call for hanging the vice president. The actual video evidence shows violence, broken barricades, and over 1,600 federal charges. But sure, blame it all on “a handful.”

 

And spare me the fear-mongering word salad about immigrants. You can't defend an actual insurrection, so you pivot to cartoonish lies about "protecting rapists" and “Chinese dark money.” It’s all deflection - lazy and not fooling anyone.

 

Being this deep into conspiracyland must be exhausting. Let me know when you come back to reality.

[All_Pro_Bills]

46 minutes ago, Homelander said:

 

Ah yes, the “tourist visit” defense because real tourists smash windows, attack cops, get killed and call for hanging the vice president. The actual video evidence shows violence, broken barricades, and over 1,600 federal charges. But sure, blame it all on “a handful.”

 

And spare me the fear-mongering word salad about immigrants. You can't defend an actual insurrection, so you pivot to cartoonish lies about "protecting rapists" and “Chinese dark money.” It’s all deflection - lazy and not fooling anyone.

 

Being this deep into conspiracyland must be exhausting. Let me know when you come back to reality.

Excluding a small number of bad actors, 1600 mostly misdemeanor trespassing charges even though the doors were opened from the inside and security invited them in and when asked to leave they did. Realistically the government or members of congress were never under any real threat. It was allowed to play out for theatrical value. 

If this was an insurrection then the bar is set really low for that kind of classification. As the facts and evidence hidden by that Kangaroo committee are exposed over the course of time this fairy tale story will go poof. This I am certain of. In the meantime enjoy believing another whopper of a lie.

Edited 14 hours ago by All_Pro_Bills

[Homelander]

6 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Excluding a small number of bad actors, 1600 mostly misdemeanor trespassing charges even though the doors were opened from the inside and security invited them in and when asked to leave they did. 

If this was an insurrection then the bar is set really low for that kind of classification. As the facts and evidence hidden by that Kangaroo committee are exposed over the course of time this fairy tale story will go poof. This I am certain of. In the meantime enjoy believing another whopper of a lie.

 

Oh totally, because when thousands of people storm a federal building during the certification of an election, chant about hanging the Vice President, beat police officers with flags, and smear feces on the walls - well, that’s just a friendly guided tour gone slightly off schedule.

 

And yes, the bar for “insurrection” must be so low - just ask the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys leaders convicted of seditious conspiracy.

 

But sure, tell me more about how they were "invited in" while breaking windows and climbing scaffolding in tactical gear.

 

As for the “Kangaroo committee,” funny how many of Trump's own people cooperated, testified under oath, and backed up the narrative - guess they were in on the fairy tale too?

 

But hey, keep waiting for that big reveal where it all magically flips - any day now, just like the Kraken. 🥴

[JFKjr]

2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Exactly, but thanks in large part to U.S. and NATO resolve.

 

    

[Homelander]

If only Trump had built on the Iran deal instead of tearing up the agreement brokered by Obama.

 

Because clearly, having no deal at all is working out so much better than the one we already had in place, right @sherpa?

 

 

[Doc Brown]

6 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

We mostly agree with Levin here - the “isolationist” wing of the party is small … but yes very vocal with some prominent voices.  
 

The United States has NEVER been isolationist. 
 

Not from the second we began colonies.  
 

We moved toward the Mississippi.  
 

We moved West.  
 

We intervened in numerous countries in the late 1800s.  
 

WWI.  

 

WWII.  
 

 

I don’t understand this “revert back to isolation” nonsense.  

Explain Trump's protectionism economic policies then.

[Doc]

39 minutes ago, Homelander said:

If only Trump had built on the Iran deal instead of tearing up the agreement brokered by Obama.

 

Because clearly, having no deal at all is working out so much better than the one we already had in place, right @sherpa?

 

 

 

Better than Iran definitively not having nukes (anymore)?  LOL, no.

 

And if regime change happens there...

Edited 13 hours ago by Doc

[Big Blitz]

46 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Explain Trump's protectionism economic policies then.

 

Trump is not an ideologue.  
 

Nor are his policies pure protectionist.  
 

He’s the most protectionist president we’ve had in decades.  
 

He’s definitely a populist.  
 

He definitely believes the current global trade system is designed to help multinational corporations at the expense of American labor - thus the tariffs.   
 

 

If you want a left wing socialist ideologue, vote for Bernie (is he really tho).  
 

If you want an “all government intervention bad” POTUS, elect Rand Paul.  
 

The American people are largely aligned with Trump.  
 

We told folks this in 2017 - there is no reason any slightly left of center voter should give a dam about Trump.  He will absolutely maintain the things you are likely good with. 
 

And as a side note, has he not been the only politician consistent on literally everything for the last 40 years?   Doesn’t that say something?  His concern is America to be the best at everything.  America first.  
 

Yet we see 20th century Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, Clinton ALL OVER THE PLACE.  Because their concern is self preservation and their wealth thanks to the government.  

[Doc Brown]

52 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

Trump is not an ideologue.  
 

Nor are his policies pure protectionist.  
 

He’s the most protectionist president we’ve had in decades.  
 

He’s definitely a populist.  
 

He definitely believes the current global trade system is designed to help multinational corporations at the expense of American labor - thus the tariffs.   
 

 

If you want a left wing socialist ideologue, vote for Bernie (is he really tho).  
 

If you want an “all government intervention bad” POTUS, elect Rand Paul.  
 

The American people are largely aligned with Trump.  
 

We told folks this in 2017 - there is no reason any slightly left of center voter should give a dam about Trump.  He will absolutely maintain the things you are likely good with. 
 

And as a side note, has he not been the only politician consistent on literally everything for the last 40 years?   Doesn’t that say something?  His concern is America to be the best at everything.  America first.  
 

Yet we see 20th century Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, Clinton ALL OVER THE PLACE.  Because their concern is self preservation and their wealth thanks to the government.  

You have a unique writing style.  Do you just hit the enter bar after each sentence or thought?  I feel like I'm being shout at.  I was hoping for Haley in 2024.

Edited 12 hours ago by Doc Brown

[Big Blitz]

4 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

You have a unique writing style.  Do you just hit the enter bar after each sentence or thought?  I feel like I'm being shout at.  I was hoping for Haley in 2024.

 

I hate paragraphs lol sometimes just quick bullet points.  
 

No Doc, I’m never shouting at you sir.  

[ComradeKayAdams]

23 hours ago, Thurmal34 said:

I dunno man, it's possible to call out Israel for starving Gazans and also support this attack.

 

Israel has the best intelligence service in the world, and if they decided to attack Iran at this magnitude, they must have felt is was "now or never" in terms of Iran's progression toward a nuke. While Bibi is a far right extremist, there is still an extremely professional defense and leadership apparatus in place in Israel. This would not have happened without solid, actionable, intelligence that Iran was very very close.

 

They have a right to prevent a sworn enemy from acquiring weapons that will endanger their survival.

 

Preemptive attacks are contentious issues in international law and depend entirely on the evidence for “imminence.” Sure, you can be logically consistent in denouncing Israel’s actions in Gaza while supporting their preemptive strikes in Iran. My question, however, is why should the outside world trust a country that is actively committing a genocide and stealing land in every direction?? I personally trust Israel’s government far less than I do the same American government that told us about those WMD’s in Iraq!

 

But now Israel is attacking Iran’s oil and gas infrastructure. So now the goalposts are rapidly moving beyond “prevention of imminent nuclear attack” to “regime change war, with assistance from the United States.” Lovely. If Iran chooses to close off the Strait of Hormuz, say hello to a devastating economic recession. Israel couldn’t wait a few more days for the peace talks in Oman?? Really?! Yeah, right… Keep in mind that we already know Israel has been sabotaging direct talks between the U.S. and Hamas so to keep Hamas in power in Gaza.

 

Many of you guys need to examine why you keep falling for neocon lies and message framing. There are many nuanced lessons to be learned about the dehumanization process, “might makes right” American imperialism, Zionism, and the like. I’ll keep things simple: what is the perspective of our perceived enemy, Iran? Answer that question.

 

My answer: Iran has no reason to ever trust the United States. Our country has been disrespecting their sovereignty since the 1950’s, due to access to fossil fuel energy resources. Iran agreed to the JCPOA and followed it faithfully, according to the IAEA. Then Trump ripped it up, made unsubstantiated claims of violations, and failed to replace the JCPOA with revised peace terms. Fast forward to 2025, and Trump’s “Art of the Deal” strategies somehow include denying Iran’s fundamental international right to fissile nuclear material for energy and medical research purposes. Meanwhile, Trump is supporting Israel’s offensive attacks against Iran…just as he’s supporting their ethnic cleansing in Gaza and their annexation of both the West Bank and southwest Syria (all of which had been previewed years earlier with the Abraham Accords and with Trump’s acknowledged annexation of the Golan Heights).

 

To be clear: I’m no fan of Iran’s theocracy, in a similar way that I’m no fan of Christian nationalism in the United States or of Jewish apartheid practices in Israel. But the neocon fearmongering of Iran using nuclear weapons in the region, which would thereby 100% assure their own destruction, is tired and stupid. If Iran wants nuclear weapons ASAP, it is so to avoid becoming the next Libya.

[CoudyBills]

On 6/13/2025 at 5:16 PM, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Israel attacks Iran, with our significant financial and military support but against our wishes- stay out.  Russia attacked Europe and essentially NATO- we support Ukraine, Europe and NATO

 

Europe is (waS OUR ALLY)  Russia is (was) our enemy.

 

What's so difficult?

didn't some maga here post something derogatory about neo cons?

Russia attacked NATO, when?

[CoudyBills]

9 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

We mostly agree with Levin here - the “isolationist” wing of the party is small … but yes very vocal with some prominent voices.  
 

The United States has NEVER been isolationist. 
 

Not from the second we began colonies.  
 

We moved toward the Mississippi.  
 

We moved West.  
 

We intervened in numerous countries in the late 1800s.  
 

WWI.  

 

WWII.  
 

 

I don’t understand this “revert back to isolation” nonsense.  

You understand the concept of bankruptcy, yes?  That is the reason.

[SectionC3]

9 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Explain Trump's protectionism economic policies then.

And NATO.