|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:24 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:03 Billyboy wrote:
Markets don’t believe there is a quick exit coming. Oil prices up, dow down.
@olblade can we call the last Iran war a failure since it didn’t “obliterate “ their nuclear program and they needed to do it again so soon after?
And to anyone. What is the current price tag on this? Even moving all the stuff has huge costs. Huge strategic failure and disaster, @biblyob. Iran was shrewdly able to destroy 14 American bunker-busting bombs using two of its nuclear sites, reducing them to smithereens, while losing 0 bunker-busting bombs of its own. Flawless victory by the Iranians. Glad we agree that was a failure. Look, the US has successfully destroyed all of Irans anti air. They have destroyed Irans navy. They have killed mush of the senior leaderships. They have destroyed most of Irans radars if not all. They have destroyed many of Irans launchers. They have claimed to have obliterated their nuclear sites again. Sadly to paraphrase Trump, last time they just dug them up and they could use them again so we will see this time.
This is information of generally useful resolution. Hold that thought.
They probably didn't "dig up" the centrifuges. Those aren't fixable once blown up. They almost certainly just have/had many centrifuges in several places. What you'd need to dig up is the existing uranium stockpile because that's the whole game, otherwise your centrifuges have nothing to refine.
On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
What they have not accomplished, regime change. They sped up the transition and have put a more radical person in control.
Two sentences directly after the other.
They haven't accomplished regime change, and they put a more radical person in control. Sure just say anything.
Sped up the transition to... what.
On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
Their proxy’s are still armed and dangerous, not even close to defeat.
They have not opened the strait.
You can separately actually fight Hezbollah and the Houthis but anyway fighting Iran the point is to cut them off. When you stop serving a guy at a bar it doesn't un-drunk him instantly.
On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
They have not taken away Irans ability to strike countries around and don’t seem to have a good answer for the drones.
This would be a problem if they wanted to accomplish the strategic goal of literally blow up every single missile before April 2nd when Billyboy has to post about it to oBlade.
Remember before that information of generally useful resolution? You took it and reduced it to the lowest possible resolution meaningless binary state.
You took their capabilities have been greatly reduced and continue to be, and summarized it as they still have the capability. Meaningless. Having 2 missiles you still have the "ability" to strike. If Iran had 10,000 missiles and lost 9,998 you could sit here and post editorialized NYT level "they still have the ability to strike countries around!"
On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
So basically all the strategic goals they wanted to accomplish, have been failures. But they have been very successful at destroying a bunch of conventional military equipment of Irans. I’m not sure how that comes close to a win when you consider the cost. Even if we are only talking money, with is like a quarter of the picture.
Convert everything else to a cost if you want to compare apples to apples. Put a dollar price on Iran maintaining an expanding missile shield. Put a dollar price on them getting a nuclear weapon. Do the whole calculation or your ledger is incomplete. You can say it's impossible to compare apples to oranges, or you can try to convert apples to oranges to compare two piles of oranges, but if you just go to an apple tree and say look there's no oranges therefore the orange tree wins you started from an exclusionary biased assumption.
A lot of the "strategic goals" are your brainstorm. Like regime change. The administration may not need any particular regime, just to have whatever one there is not get nukes and unlimited missiles and fund all the enemies of humanity.
The closest unbiased sense of where the goals lie might be the reports we have of the 15-point conditions for ceasefire from this year and from the bombing ultimatum last year.
+ Show Spoiler +1. Iran must dismantle its existing nuclear capabilities.
2. Iran must commit never to pursue nuclear weapons.
3. There will be no uranium enrichment on Iranian territory.
4. Iran must hand its stockpile of some 450 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent to the International Atomic Energy Agency in the near future, in a timetable to be agreed.
5. The Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo nuclear facilities must be dismantled.
6. The IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, must be granted full access, transparency and oversight inside Iran.
7. Iran must abandon its regional proxy “paradigm.”
8. Iran must cease the funding, direction and arming of its regional proxies.
9. The Strait of Hormuz must remain open and function as a free maritime corridor.
10. Iran’s missile program must be limited in both range and quantity, with specific thresholds to be determined at a later stage.
11. Any future use of missiles would be restricted to self-defense.
In return, Iran would benefit as follows:
12. Iran would receive a full lifting of sanctions imposed by the international community.
13. The US would assist Iran in advancing its civilian nuclear program, including electricity generation at the Bushehr nuclear plant.
14. The so-called “snapback” mechanism, which allows for the automatic reimposition of sanctions if Iran fails to comply, would be removed.
|
On April 03 2026 01:57 Geiko wrote:
The people defending the Trump administration here never seem to have opinions of their own. It's always just parroting the MAGA talking points.
If tomorrow Trump decides to stop the war you'll hear them say "actually that's a good thing because..." and if Trump decides to put boots on the ground "That's the best option to end this war...".
I would love it if you guys could tell us what you're expecting from your president before he actually does all the insane shit he does instead of always justifying it after the fact.
The worse part is that they are doing this without a modicum of shame or self awareness, you can quote their stupid flip flopping back to them from a month ago and they will just ignore it and continue with their propaganda like nothing happened.
oBlade was spewing stupid shit like "Hormuz is not closed ships are just turning off transponders and going through it anyway because Iran has been neutralized" a month ago, and yet, he is still here spewing his bullshit like nothing happened in the meantime pretending to be an expert:
On March 03 2026 03:37 oBlade wrote:
There is already no "Iran." Random missiles to Iraq and Oman and Kuwait is a product of central command and control collapse.
Gulf states are realistic and logical enough to realize that even if such an entity could be "negotiated" with it could not be trusted in the future not to randomly crash out again and fire missiles or bomb things as it has a long history of doing. Let alone continue on the missile and nuke path.
March 3, "there is no Iran". Also, lying through his incel teeth, Iran has no history of "randomly crashing out and firing missiles or bombing things". The only occurrences of Iran doing so was in exchanges with Israel recently, plus, even during this conflict they send warnings to the places they are hitting. As much as this fascist bootlicker would like to pretend otherwise, Iran is a rational actor.
On March 10 2026 02:13 oBlade wrote:
Tankers are going through by just turning their transponders off, because Iran has no radars or naval assets left so as long as you don't scream "I AM AN OIL TANKER RIGHT HERE" there's no way for the "regime" to make good on threats that "If you can afford oil at $200 a barrel watch and see what happens." Because they have no targeting capabilities left for any missiles that they would happen to have operational still.
March 10th, major oBlade explained how the strait is acutally open because you can just pass the strait by turning off your transponder and there is nothing Iran can do, as pictured here:
Source.
|
On April 03 2026 02:30 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:On April 02 2026 23:24 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:03 Billyboy wrote:
Markets don’t believe there is a quick exit coming. Oil prices up, dow down.
@olblade can we call the last Iran war a failure since it didn’t “obliterate “ their nuclear program and they needed to do it again so soon after?
And to anyone. What is the current price tag on this? Even moving all the stuff has huge costs. Huge strategic failure and disaster, @biblyob. Iran was shrewdly able to destroy 14 American bunker-busting bombs using two of its nuclear sites, reducing them to smithereens, while losing 0 bunker-busting bombs of its own. Flawless victory by the Iranians. Glad we agree that was a failure. Look, the US has successfully destroyed all of Irans anti air. They have destroyed Irans navy. They have killed mush of the senior leaderships. They have destroyed most of Irans radars if not all. They have destroyed many of Irans launchers. They have claimed to have obliterated their nuclear sites again. Sadly to paraphrase Trump, last time they just dug them up and they could use them again so we will see this time. This is information of generally useful resolution. Hold that thought. They probably didn't "dig up" the centrifuges. Those aren't fixable once blown up. They almost certainly just have/had many centrifuges in several places. What you'd need to dig up is the existing uranium stockpile because that's the whole game, otherwise your centrifuges have nothing to refine. Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
What they have not accomplished, regime change. They sped up the transition and have put a more radical person in control. Two sentences directly after the other. They haven't accomplished regime change, and they put a more radical person in control. Sure just say anything. Sped up the transition to... what. Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
Their proxy’s are still armed and dangerous, not even close to defeat.
They have not opened the strait. You can separately actually fight Hezbollah and the Houthis but anyway fighting Iran the point is to cut them off. When you stop serving a guy at a bar it doesn't un-drunk him instantly. Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
They have not taken away Irans ability to strike countries around and don’t seem to have a good answer for the drones. This would be a problem if they wanted to accomplish the strategic goal of literally blow up every single missile before April 2nd when Billyboy has to post about it to oBlade. Remember before that information of generally useful resolution? You took it and reduced it to the lowest possible resolution meaningless binary state. You took their capabilities have been greatly reduced and continue to be, and summarized it as they still have the capability. Meaningless. Having 2 missiles you still have the "ability" to strike. If Iran had 10,000 missiles and lost 9,998 you could sit here and post editorialized NYT level "they still have the ability to strike countries around!" Show nested quote +On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
So basically all the strategic goals they wanted to accomplish, have been failures. But they have been very successful at destroying a bunch of conventional military equipment of Irans. I’m not sure how that comes close to a win when you consider the cost. Even if we are only talking money, with is like a quarter of the picture. Convert everything else to a cost if you want to compare apples to apples. Put a dollar price on Iran maintaining an expanding missile shield. Put a dollar price on them getting a nuclear weapon. Do the whole calculation or your ledger is incomplete. You can say it's impossible to compare apples to oranges, or you can try to convert apples to oranges to compare two piles of oranges, but if you just go to an apple tree and say look there's no oranges therefore the orange tree wins you started from an exclusionary biased assumption. A lot of the "strategic goals" are your brainstorm. Like regime change. The administration may not need any particular regime, just to have whatever one there is not get nukes and unlimited missiles and fund all the enemies of humanity. The closest unbiased sense of where the goals lie might be the reports we have of the 15-point conditions for ceasefire from this year and from the bombing ultimatum last year. + Show Spoiler +1. Iran must dismantle its existing nuclear capabilities.
2. Iran must commit never to pursue nuclear weapons.
3. There will be no uranium enrichment on Iranian territory.
4. Iran must hand its stockpile of some 450 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent to the International Atomic Energy Agency in the near future, in a timetable to be agreed.
5. The Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo nuclear facilities must be dismantled.
6. The IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, must be granted full access, transparency and oversight inside Iran.
7. Iran must abandon its regional proxy “paradigm.”
8. Iran must cease the funding, direction and arming of its regional proxies.
9. The Strait of Hormuz must remain open and function as a free maritime corridor.
10. Iran’s missile program must be limited in both range and quantity, with specific thresholds to be determined at a later stage.
11. Any future use of missiles would be restricted to self-defense.
In return, Iran would benefit as follows:
12. Iran would receive a full lifting of sanctions imposed by the international community.
13. The US would assist Iran in advancing its civilian nuclear program, including electricity generation at the Bushehr nuclear plant.
14. The so-called “snapback” mechanism, which allows for the automatic reimposition of sanctions if Iran fails to comply, would be removed.
This is not the dunk you think it is. You arguing that it’s not the same regime but worse, but rather a new worse regime, uh sure you win. They succeeded in putting a worse regime in place.
They have also failed in at least 8 of the 11 points.
The cost on their degraded missile capacity I would put at 13 dollars. Since they can still destroy the worlds economies with what they have and now they are using less. The delaying of a nuke, I’ll put at 174 dollars because we’ll making sure Iran would never have a nuke is a worthwhile goal, they in no way have gauranteed that and simultaneously told every dictatorship, actually just everyone that you need a nuke. Hell, there are even now conversations about if Canada should get a nuke.
This whole thing is an epic own goal.
I look forward to reading why Trump is still winning in a few months, when they are still winning, just harder in Iran and Trumpflation has doubled gas a food prices.
|
On April 03 2026 02:33 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 01:57 Geiko wrote:
The people defending the Trump administration here never seem to have opinions of their own. It's always just parroting the MAGA talking points.
If tomorrow Trump decides to stop the war you'll hear them say "actually that's a good thing because..." and if Trump decides to put boots on the ground "That's the best option to end this war...".
I would love it if you guys could tell us what you're expecting from your president before he actually does all the insane shit he does instead of always justifying it after the fact. The worse part is that they are doing this without a modicum of shame or self awareness, you can quote their stupid flip flopping back to them from a month ago and they will just ignore it and continue with their propaganda like nothing happened.
They aren't really alone in that are they?
Their absurdity is intentional. These are your own observations. Yet you all still just can't help yourselves. It's a bizarre thing to watch happen.
On April 01 2026 00:35 Doublemint wrote:for some reason people are all playing along with this charade until an undefined pain threshold is reached. + Show Spoiler +woe to the US and its championship level idiotic leadership in this still young century when that happens. burning through money and credibility at breakneck speeds will have consequences, it is not the 70's anymore where anything goes. or the 90s. or the 2010s where even after all the BS war on terror and a GFC draining even more resources and accruing unsustainable debt will seem like a far away problem. the "I got mine too bad about yours, you weakling" POTUS: Trump lashes out at UK and France, telling allies ‘the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore’@CNBC Posting on Truth Social, Trump said, “the Country of France wouldn’t let planes headed to Israel, loaded up with military supplies, fly over French territory.”
“France has been VERY UNHELPFUL with respect to the ‘Butcher of Iran,’ who has been successfully eliminated! The U.S.A. will REMEMBER!!!,” he said in one post.
In another post, the president singled out the U.K. for criticism while urging other countries to take action in the Strait of Hormuz, the vital oil route that Iran has effectively blocked during the war.
“All of those countries that can’t get jet fuel because of the Strait of Hormuz, like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, I have a suggestion for you,” Trump wrote.
“Number 1, buy from the U.S., we have plenty, and Number 2, build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait, and just TAKE IT.”
“You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!,” he wrote.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth piled on at a press briefing later Tuesday morning.
“There are countries around the world who ought be prepared to step up on this critical waterway as well,” he said. “It’s not just the United States Navy. Last time I checked, there was supposed to be a big, bad Royal Navy that could be prepared to do things like that as well.”
When asked if reopening the strait is a core objective for the U.S. to end the war, Hegseth said defeating Iran’s navy remains a key goal, but clearing the waterway is not just the U.S.′ “problem set.”
“I think other countries should pay attention” to Trump’s words, Hegseth said, referring to the Truth Social posts. “He’s pointing out, you know, might want to start learning how to fight for yourself.” entitlement and stupidity without an end in sight. his own voters will have to learn to budget pretty hard. necessities of daily life like a full gas of tank, especially with how car dependent US cities are, being next in line of becoming prohibitively expensive will rear its ugly head. I don't think anyone will like when that levy breaks. at least you already have that militarized police I guess.
Everyone knows they need a line, no one seems to know where they will draw it.
|
On April 03 2026 03:00 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 02:30 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:On April 02 2026 23:24 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:03 Billyboy wrote:
Markets don’t believe there is a quick exit coming. Oil prices up, dow down.
@olblade can we call the last Iran war a failure since it didn’t “obliterate “ their nuclear program and they needed to do it again so soon after?
And to anyone. What is the current price tag on this? Even moving all the stuff has huge costs. Huge strategic failure and disaster, @biblyob. Iran was shrewdly able to destroy 14 American bunker-busting bombs using two of its nuclear sites, reducing them to smithereens, while losing 0 bunker-busting bombs of its own. Flawless victory by the Iranians. Glad we agree that was a failure. Look, the US has successfully destroyed all of Irans anti air. They have destroyed Irans navy. They have killed mush of the senior leaderships. They have destroyed most of Irans radars if not all. They have destroyed many of Irans launchers. They have claimed to have obliterated their nuclear sites again. Sadly to paraphrase Trump, last time they just dug them up and they could use them again so we will see this time. This is information of generally useful resolution. Hold that thought. They probably didn't "dig up" the centrifuges. Those aren't fixable once blown up. They almost certainly just have/had many centrifuges in several places. What you'd need to dig up is the existing uranium stockpile because that's the whole game, otherwise your centrifuges have nothing to refine. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
What they have not accomplished, regime change. They sped up the transition and have put a more radical person in control. Two sentences directly after the other. They haven't accomplished regime change, and they put a more radical person in control. Sure just say anything. Sped up the transition to... what. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
Their proxy’s are still armed and dangerous, not even close to defeat.
They have not opened the strait. You can separately actually fight Hezbollah and the Houthis but anyway fighting Iran the point is to cut them off. When you stop serving a guy at a bar it doesn't un-drunk him instantly. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
They have not taken away Irans ability to strike countries around and don’t seem to have a good answer for the drones. This would be a problem if they wanted to accomplish the strategic goal of literally blow up every single missile before April 2nd when Billyboy has to post about it to oBlade. Remember before that information of generally useful resolution? You took it and reduced it to the lowest possible resolution meaningless binary state. You took their capabilities have been greatly reduced and continue to be, and summarized it as they still have the capability. Meaningless. Having 2 missiles you still have the "ability" to strike. If Iran had 10,000 missiles and lost 9,998 you could sit here and post editorialized NYT level "they still have the ability to strike countries around!" On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
So basically all the strategic goals they wanted to accomplish, have been failures. But they have been very successful at destroying a bunch of conventional military equipment of Irans. I’m not sure how that comes close to a win when you consider the cost. Even if we are only talking money, with is like a quarter of the picture. Convert everything else to a cost if you want to compare apples to apples. Put a dollar price on Iran maintaining an expanding missile shield. Put a dollar price on them getting a nuclear weapon. Do the whole calculation or your ledger is incomplete. You can say it's impossible to compare apples to oranges, or you can try to convert apples to oranges to compare two piles of oranges, but if you just go to an apple tree and say look there's no oranges therefore the orange tree wins you started from an exclusionary biased assumption. A lot of the "strategic goals" are your brainstorm. Like regime change. The administration may not need any particular regime, just to have whatever one there is not get nukes and unlimited missiles and fund all the enemies of humanity. The closest unbiased sense of where the goals lie might be the reports we have of the 15-point conditions for ceasefire from this year and from the bombing ultimatum last year. + Show Spoiler +1. Iran must dismantle its existing nuclear capabilities.
2. Iran must commit never to pursue nuclear weapons.
3. There will be no uranium enrichment on Iranian territory.
4. Iran must hand its stockpile of some 450 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent to the International Atomic Energy Agency in the near future, in a timetable to be agreed.
5. The Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo nuclear facilities must be dismantled.
6. The IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, must be granted full access, transparency and oversight inside Iran.
7. Iran must abandon its regional proxy “paradigm.”
8. Iran must cease the funding, direction and arming of its regional proxies.
9. The Strait of Hormuz must remain open and function as a free maritime corridor.
10. Iran’s missile program must be limited in both range and quantity, with specific thresholds to be determined at a later stage.
11. Any future use of missiles would be restricted to self-defense.
In return, Iran would benefit as follows:
12. Iran would receive a full lifting of sanctions imposed by the international community.
13. The US would assist Iran in advancing its civilian nuclear program, including electricity generation at the Bushehr nuclear plant.
14. The so-called “snapback” mechanism, which allows for the automatic reimposition of sanctions if Iran fails to comply, would be removed. This is not the dunk you think it is. You arguing that it’s not the same regime but worse, but rather a new worse regime, uh sure you win. They succeeded in putting a worse regime in place. They have also failed in at least 8 of the 11 points. The cost on their degraded missile capacity I would put at 13 dollars. Since they can still destroy the worlds economies with what they have and now they are using less. The delaying of a nuke, I’ll put at 174 dollars because we’ll making sure Iran would never have a nuke is a worthwhile goal, they in no way have gauranteed that and simultaneously told every dictatorship, actually just everyone that you need a nuke. Hell, there are even now conversations about if Canada should get a nuke. This whole thing is an epic own goal. I look forward to reading why Trump is still winning in a few months, when they are still winning, just harder in Iran and Trumpflation has doubled gas a food prices.
I think this is actually a victory for Trump. People basically stopped talking about the Epstein files after all. And also he probably made some money off of the market manipulation once again.
Probably a loss for basically anyone else, though.
|
On April 03 2026 03:00 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 02:30 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:On April 02 2026 23:24 oBlade wrote:On April 02 2026 23:03 Billyboy wrote:
Markets don’t believe there is a quick exit coming. Oil prices up, dow down.
@olblade can we call the last Iran war a failure since it didn’t “obliterate “ their nuclear program and they needed to do it again so soon after?
And to anyone. What is the current price tag on this? Even moving all the stuff has huge costs. Huge strategic failure and disaster, @biblyob. Iran was shrewdly able to destroy 14 American bunker-busting bombs using two of its nuclear sites, reducing them to smithereens, while losing 0 bunker-busting bombs of its own. Flawless victory by the Iranians. Glad we agree that was a failure. Look, the US has successfully destroyed all of Irans anti air. They have destroyed Irans navy. They have killed mush of the senior leaderships. They have destroyed most of Irans radars if not all. They have destroyed many of Irans launchers. They have claimed to have obliterated their nuclear sites again. Sadly to paraphrase Trump, last time they just dug them up and they could use them again so we will see this time. This is information of generally useful resolution. Hold that thought. They probably didn't "dig up" the centrifuges. Those aren't fixable once blown up. They almost certainly just have/had many centrifuges in several places. What you'd need to dig up is the existing uranium stockpile because that's the whole game, otherwise your centrifuges have nothing to refine. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
What they have not accomplished, regime change. They sped up the transition and have put a more radical person in control. Two sentences directly after the other. They haven't accomplished regime change, and they put a more radical person in control. Sure just say anything. Sped up the transition to... what. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
Their proxy’s are still armed and dangerous, not even close to defeat.
They have not opened the strait. You can separately actually fight Hezbollah and the Houthis but anyway fighting Iran the point is to cut them off. When you stop serving a guy at a bar it doesn't un-drunk him instantly. On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
They have not taken away Irans ability to strike countries around and don’t seem to have a good answer for the drones. This would be a problem if they wanted to accomplish the strategic goal of literally blow up every single missile before April 2nd when Billyboy has to post about it to oBlade. Remember before that information of generally useful resolution? You took it and reduced it to the lowest possible resolution meaningless binary state. You took their capabilities have been greatly reduced and continue to be, and summarized it as they still have the capability. Meaningless. Having 2 missiles you still have the "ability" to strike. If Iran had 10,000 missiles and lost 9,998 you could sit here and post editorialized NYT level "they still have the ability to strike countries around!" On April 02 2026 23:40 Billyboy wrote:
So basically all the strategic goals they wanted to accomplish, have been failures. But they have been very successful at destroying a bunch of conventional military equipment of Irans. I’m not sure how that comes close to a win when you consider the cost. Even if we are only talking money, with is like a quarter of the picture. Convert everything else to a cost if you want to compare apples to apples. Put a dollar price on Iran maintaining an expanding missile shield. Put a dollar price on them getting a nuclear weapon. Do the whole calculation or your ledger is incomplete. You can say it's impossible to compare apples to oranges, or you can try to convert apples to oranges to compare two piles of oranges, but if you just go to an apple tree and say look there's no oranges therefore the orange tree wins you started from an exclusionary biased assumption. A lot of the "strategic goals" are your brainstorm. Like regime change. The administration may not need any particular regime, just to have whatever one there is not get nukes and unlimited missiles and fund all the enemies of humanity. The closest unbiased sense of where the goals lie might be the reports we have of the 15-point conditions for ceasefire from this year and from the bombing ultimatum last year. + Show Spoiler +1. Iran must dismantle its existing nuclear capabilities.
2. Iran must commit never to pursue nuclear weapons.
3. There will be no uranium enrichment on Iranian territory.
4. Iran must hand its stockpile of some 450 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent to the International Atomic Energy Agency in the near future, in a timetable to be agreed.
5. The Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo nuclear facilities must be dismantled.
6. The IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, must be granted full access, transparency and oversight inside Iran.
7. Iran must abandon its regional proxy “paradigm.”
8. Iran must cease the funding, direction and arming of its regional proxies.
9. The Strait of Hormuz must remain open and function as a free maritime corridor.
10. Iran’s missile program must be limited in both range and quantity, with specific thresholds to be determined at a later stage.
11. Any future use of missiles would be restricted to self-defense.
In return, Iran would benefit as follows:
12. Iran would receive a full lifting of sanctions imposed by the international community.
13. The US would assist Iran in advancing its civilian nuclear program, including electricity generation at the Bushehr nuclear plant.
14. The so-called “snapback” mechanism, which allows for the automatic reimposition of sanctions if Iran fails to comply, would be removed. This is not the dunk you think it is. You arguing that it’s not the same regime but worse, but rather a new worse regime, uh sure you win. They succeeded in putting a worse regime in place. They have also failed in at least 8 of the 11 points. The cost on their degraded missile capacity I would put at 13 dollars. Since they can still destroy the worlds economies with what they have and now they are using less. The delaying of a nuke, I’ll put at 174 dollars because we’ll making sure Iran would never have a nuke is a worthwhile goal, they in no way have gauranteed that and simultaneously told every dictatorship, actually just everyone that you need a nuke. Hell, there are even now conversations about if Canada should get a nuke. This whole thing is an epic own goal. I look forward to reading why Trump is still winning in a few months, when they are still winning, just harder in Iran and Trumpflation has doubled gas a food prices.
I'm not arguing the regime is worse. I don't agree with you.
I was pointing out you couldn't make it two sentences without a laughable self-contradiction.
Yes those 11 haven't been achieved by force or agreed to by Iran yet. That's why the war is still happening.
Let's take a probable one of the 8 you think they have "FAILED" in: Iran committing to never pursue nuclear weapons. Well, obviously if Iran hasn't committed to that by now, then the entire Trump administration and America is a massive FAILURE right. Things were a lot better when Iran was simply pursuing nuclear weapons. Without the trying to stop them part. Success was easy. All you had to do was nothing, and then by definition you couldn't have failed at whatever you were working on. If you try to do 100 pushups and do 80, you failed. Success is trying to do 0 and then doing 0.
Except suppose by next week, month, year, they still haven't come around to accepting #1-6 and start enriching again - oops, the next round of centrifuges also got bombed. The deadline of "success" isn't just the day you happen to be posting and googling if the war's over yet. Different things change on different timeframes.
On April 03 2026 02:33 Jankisa wrote:Also, lying through his incel teeth, Iran has no history of "randomly crashing out and firing missiles or bombing things". The only occurrences of Iran doing so was in exchanges with Israel recently, plus, even during this conflict they send warnings to the places they are hitting. As much as this fascist bootlicker would like to pretend otherwise, Iran is a rational actor.
Nothing says "rational actor" quite like shooting a Thai tanker on its way to India.
|
United States44242 Posts
In the 2025 war you said the nuclear program had been wholly destroyed by the bombs. In the 2026 war you said that the nuclear program was now so far along that it had to be bombed but fortunately it has now been wholly destroyed by the bombs.
If you were right the first time then it would seem they have some respawning nuclear tech that is impervious to bombs. Presumably it’ll just respawn again.
If you weren’t right the first time then it would imply that making the same claim again months later is probably not credible.
|
On April 03 2026 03:18 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 02:33 Jankisa wrote:Also, lying through his incel teeth, Iran has no history of "randomly crashing out and firing missiles or bombing things". The only occurrences of Iran doing so was in exchanges with Israel recently, plus, even during this conflict they send warnings to the places they are hitting. As much as this fascist bootlicker would like to pretend otherwise, Iran is a rational actor. Nothing says "rational actor" quite like shooting a Thai tanker on its way to India.
Yeah, it absolutely does, they sent a warning to ships, ship was trying to cross despite the warning, they hit it, somehow, with "no Iran", "collapsed command structure" and "no radar". Bold move to try to quote me on that and ignore everything else, for a person with a modicum of shame, that would be a stupid move, for you, a Trump supporter, it's just a Thursday.
Anyhow, Pam is out, somehow not due to her "Dow is over 50.000" meltdown, but, as it seems to me, because Trump was jelous of the guy she was seeing.
I mean, look at that head of hair:
Wakefield works in finance and real estate investment. He is a founding principal of Varner Wakefield Equity Partners, a private equity firm focused primarily on real estate investments across the United States.
This guy is everything Trump pretends to be, a successful businessman with great hair who is fucking who Trump wants to fuck, no shit he fired her because he 'hates being around' him.
The clown show rolls on.
(for the inevitable "centrist" cohorts who will try to claim this was a serious opinion, it is not, I just find it funny, thank you for your attention to this matter)
|
Every outlet I've checked have said it's because of her handling of the Epstein files. Still funny to remember that all of the redactions she OK'd were easily undone by just copy/pasting the blacked-out text into Notepad or Word. If she were slightly more competent she could've asked someone to double check that for her.
No words for her tenure except "disgrace". She broke the law to keep Trump's child molestation from being public knowledge but still failed to do that. Anyone on the political spectrum on or between the points from "you shouldn't break the law" to "you shouldn't expose Republicans being rapists" can agree that's bad.
Trump's dilemma is he needs people who are loyal enough to follow an octogenarian pedophile to the gates of Hell itself, but also smart enough to actually be able to get things done. In practice there's nobody in the middle of that Venn Diagram. The actual competent ones like Jim Mattis won't break the law for him, and the lawbreakers like Hegseth are all morons.
|
On April 03 2026 03:34 KwarK wrote:
In the 2025 war you said the nuclear program had been wholly destroyed by the bombs. In the 2026 war you said that the nuclear program was now so far along that it had to be bombed but fortunately it has now been wholly destroyed by the bombs.
If you have a stockpile of uranium, you can refine it once you have made a room somewhere big enough for a bunch of centrifuges, which are not unique in a nuclear program (in other words there is more than one of them, in fact many, and you can make and replace and buy more). Unfortunately, even if you bomb uranium, it does stay uranium. This and other basic physics facts are available at your local community college.
On April 03 2026 03:34 KwarK wrote:
If you were right the first time then it would seem they have some respawning nuclear tech that is impervious to bombs. Presumably it’ll just respawn again.
The bombings will continue until "Death to America" improves.
On April 03 2026 03:35 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 03:18 oBlade wrote:On April 03 2026 02:33 Jankisa wrote:Also, lying through his incel teeth, Iran has no history of "randomly crashing out and firing missiles or bombing things". The only occurrences of Iran doing so was in exchanges with Israel recently, plus, even during this conflict they send warnings to the places they are hitting. As much as this fascist bootlicker would like to pretend otherwise, Iran is a rational actor. Nothing says "rational actor" quite like shooting a Thai tanker on its way to India. Yeah, it absolutely does, they sent a warning to ships, ship was trying to cross despite the warning, they hit it, somehow, with "no Iran", "collapsed command structure" and "no radar". Bold move to try to quote me on that and ignore everything else, for a person with a modicum of shame, that would be a stupid move, for you, a Trump supporter, it's just a Thursday.
That's not legal.
At all.
In an extremely well-established way.
You are telling me Iran is a rational actor for doing something in blatant contravention of international law.
Want to extend that generous benefit of the doubt to Israel and America?
|
United States44242 Posts
Bombs girls school. Cries about laws.
|
Hegseth declaring no quarter is a war crime. Perfidy, which he bragged about before denying he did, is also a war crime.
|
You are mixing things buddy, being a rational actor and things being legal are two completely separate things.
They are in a fight for their survival, they said that they will close the strait by any means necessary as their red line option and have been saying this since 90-es .
If I threaten I'll blow up your moms car if you burn down my house, and then do it after you burned down my house, I acted in a rational, albeit illegal way.
Are you even trying anymore? I could swear that your arguments used to have a semblance of coherence, I guess it's hard to maintain that while you are defending worse and worse shit that makes less and less sense, but you could at least ignore it like you ignored the rest of your quotes from earlier this month.
|
On April 03 2026 04:13 Jankisa wrote:You are mixing things buddy, being a rational actor and things being legal are two completely separate things. They are in a fight for their survival, they said that they will close the strait by any means necessary as their red line option and have been saying this since 90-es . If I threaten I'll blow up your moms car if you burn down my house, and then do it after you burned down my house, I acted in a rational, albeit illegal way. Are you even trying anymore? I could swear that your arguments used to have a semblance of coherence, I guess it's hard to maintain that while you are defending worse and worse shit that makes less and less sense, but you could at least ignore it like you ignored the rest of your quotes from earlier this month.
On April 03 2026 03:58 oBlade wrote:
Want to extend that generous benefit of the doubt to Israel and America?
Now imagine you're America and Israel, I'm Iran and Hamas, my mom's car is my entire military and leadership structure oh and Gaza, and your house is October 7th and the Beirut bombing. Suddenly every desperate sanctimonious cry for validation you have blessed us with here now just collapses under the weight of the hypocrisy of your absurd special pleading. Who's to complain about even literal fascism, if the fascists were rational actors? Who's to care anyone broke a law, if they were acting rationally?
|
On April 03 2026 04:23 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 04:13 Jankisa wrote:You are mixing things buddy, being a rational actor and things being legal are two completely separate things. They are in a fight for their survival, they said that they will close the strait by any means necessary as their red line option and have been saying this since 90-es . If I threaten I'll blow up your moms car if you burn down my house, and then do it after you burned down my house, I acted in a rational, albeit illegal way. Are you even trying anymore? I could swear that your arguments used to have a semblance of coherence, I guess it's hard to maintain that while you are defending worse and worse shit that makes less and less sense, but you could at least ignore it like you ignored the rest of your quotes from earlier this month. Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 03:58 oBlade wrote:
Want to extend that generous benefit of the doubt to Israel and America? Now imagine you're America and Israel, I'm Iran and Hamas, my mom's car is my entire military and leadership structure oh and Gaza, and your house is October 7th and the Beirut bombing. Suddenly every desperate sanctimonious cry for validation you have blessed us with here now just collapses under the weight of the hypocrisy of your absurd special pleading. Who's to complain about even literal fascism, if the fascists were rational actors? Who's to care anyone broke a law, if they were acting rationally?
That is not how things work buddy.
October 7th happened, Israel went in, Israel and Hamas signed a ceasefire brokered by US.
Beirut bombing happened in 1983.
You don't get to decide, after the fact, that you will go ahead and bomb a country "back to the stone age where they belong" based on grudges, that would be insane.
Suddenly every desperate sanctimonious cry for validation you have blessed us with here now just collapses under the weight of the hypocrisy of your absurd special pleading.
Do you really think you are impressing anyone with this buddy? You are just showing how hollow your arguments are when you try to throw in every "big" word you know.
Who's to complain about even literal fascism, if the fascists were rational actors? Who's to care anyone broke a law, if they were acting rationally?
That is the problem, my incel friend, the fascists are not rational, attacking Iran at this time was and is tremendously stupid and bad for everyone, but you and the fascists you support are not intelligent enough to understand that.
The international law was first broken when Israel and USA launched an illegal war on Iran. After that, anything goes for Iran as they are attacked by 2 superior enemies.
They, as an rational, intelligent actor understand that they have to use asymmetrical means of retaliation, since the idiots who attacked them left them no choice.
If you were to say that Israel is acting rationally, that is something that can maybe be defended if you subscribe to moronic "might makes right" philosophy, Israel has been perusing this philosophy since very early in their inception and it got them October 7th. It got them 23 civilians and 11 soldiers killed with thousands more injured so far in this war. All of this could have been avoided by rational actors, unfortunately, that's not who Trump and Nethyanahu are.
|
On April 03 2026 04:12 LightSpectra wrote:
Hegseth declaring no quarter is a war crime. Perfidy, which he bragged about before denying he did, is also a war crime.
This guy being “minister of war” is just so fucking pathetic it will be a stain on the US for decades. He sounds like a 13 years old trying to be badass.
By the way. Pam Bondi has been fired. Oh no. Anyways.
|
On April 03 2026 04:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 04:12 LightSpectra wrote:
Hegseth declaring no quarter is a war crime. Perfidy, which he bragged about before denying he did, is also a war crime. This guy being “minister of war” is just so fucking pathetic it will be a stain on the US for decades. He sounds like a 13 years old trying to be badass. By the way. Pam Bondi has been fired. Oh no. Anyways.
The bad news for whenever Trump fires someone is that it means he's managed to find a more sycophantic replacement.
|
United States44242 Posts
If you need someone who is willing to turn a blind eye to sexual abuse of children as long as the Dow is above 50k then Pam is the woman for the job. But right now Trump needs a different skill set. He needs someone who’ll turn a blind eye even if it’s below 50k.
|
Keeping the Epstein files from being investigated or released and not hold any members of the sycophant club accountable for their corruption is basically the job description. Hegseth is next i give him 2 weeks.
|
On April 03 2026 04:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2026 04:12 LightSpectra wrote:
Hegseth declaring no quarter is a war crime. Perfidy, which he bragged about before denying he did, is also a war crime. This guy being “minister of war” is just so fucking pathetic it will be a stain on the US for decades. He sounds like a 13 years old trying to be badass.
But that can be said about basically anyone in the current US administration. That is the sad thing. Hegseth is uniquely pathetic and silly as a minister in a historical context. But within this administration, you also got Trump, you got Kennedy. You even had Musk with his DOGE bullshit for a while. You get all these clowns at once.
Which might once again be a typical Trump play. If you only have one clown, it is easy to focus on that one. If everyone is a clown, you can't focus on one of them for long enough for it to matter before you get distracted by another of the clowns doing something even more insane.
That seems to be the MAGA play. Do horrific, illegal, idiotic or plain insane things so quickly that no one can focus on a single thing long enough for there to be consequences. And so far, it has worked in some insane way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://www.reuters.com/resizer/v2/DEF3KHEGSRD4FLRFOZWXRCLZIQ.jpg?auth=435322d6eb5db59665e35367c84d811fbc02bfbb84d794711b6d18eb8b24323e&width=1920&quality=80)
![[image loading]](https://i2-prod.themirror.com/article1679055.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200f/0_Pam-Bondi-Attends-Confirmation-Hearing-To-Be-Attorney-General.jpg)
