|
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 June 18 2026 23:54 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +5 — Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge, for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa. Hormuz is an international waterway. Nobody can toll an international waterway.
Thats not exactly correct, for few reasons. First and foremost is, that anyone with sufficient power can do so. Among the others is the fact that Iran is not a part of UNCLOS (as they never ratified it in parliament). Whats funny here, is that US and Iran are in the same position regarding UNCLOS (the new one), but argue exact opposite points. It is rather obvious that if Strait of Hormuz happen to be in US territorial waters US would immediately started to charge toll on ships crossing it, like, obviously.
As far as UNCLOS arguments are: all parties arguments are retarded and all are blatantly rooted in self interest.
Given that "for 60 days only" means it is basically a holiday taken during conflict. As in: they either agree on some stuff during this time, or unpause.
|
On June 19 2026 00:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 00:07 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:00 oBlade wrote:On June 18 2026 23:45 KwarK wrote:On June 18 2026 23:30 oBlade wrote:On June 18 2026 23:02 KwarK wrote:This is another really good moment for conservatives to stubbornly refuse any kind of reflection on the media that they consume and how it could have led them to draw such utterly false conclusions. In retrospect America's defeat in this war seems so obvious that it was basically inevitable. A regime change war where you refuse to change the regime. An occupation of the ground on the strait using air power alone. It was never going to work. And I guess it must have been obvious because somehow random commentators on team liquid like myself said as much from the start. So we have a situation in which people consuming conservative media were saying this 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. at the same time as I was saying this On March 03 2026 03:14 KwarK wrote:
To win this all Iran needs to do is keep causing expense (delayed oil freighters, refinery shutdowns, incredibly expensive interceptor missile burn rates, infrastructure damage) without internal collapse.
That's not to say that all is going well in Iran, clearly it is not. But all is going according to plan. There was a plan for how to deal with this situation and they're not flying blind. If they don't collapse but do continue to disrupt then Trump is going to be the one declaring victory and going home without any of his stated objectives met. Trump needs Iran’s internal loyalist security forces to switch sides in order to win, Iran needs them to hold firm and be willing to massacre Iranians to win. We don’t know whether they will hold firm, I’m not going to predict an Iranian victory, but they certainly have a theory of victory here. We got to view how two brains of admittedly uneven quality were able to forecast the future after consuming information from two sources of uneven quality. In retrospect it is pretty clear that one forecast was substantially better than the other. So the question now is will the conservative ask himself why, when his information source was tested against reality, it was so thoroughly disproved? Will he change his information source to one that doesn't lead to such public humiliation? Will there be any introspection at all about how he got it so completely wrong? Not a conservative, kid. Trump: They can't have a nuclear weapon. KwarK: You have to change the regime!!!!!! (spammed x3 months) Trump: Good news, it's over, they're not going to have a nuclear weapon. KwarK: You didn't change the regime!!!!!!!!!! It must have been heartbreaking when KwarK found out Operation Project Freedom had been continued at night. And in all that time a total of 0 Iranian mines blew up a total of 0 ships anywhere. Truly one of the wars of all time. If you think for sure the conflict is really over (interesting act of faith), you're admitting the regime changed from one pursuing nuclear weapons to one that isn't. Which was the goal. The actual goal by the actual commander-in-chief carried out by actual generals. Your own armchair hopes for the war as General... Forum, don't enter into the evaluation. Is this a public humiliation kink thing? I genuinely don’t understand. You’re acting like nobody here will remember that you insisted that the regime had already been changed. Did I? My mistake. The regime is the EXACT same as it was. It's a Regime of Theseus. Thanks for your productive good-faith correction. You have once again proven yourself to be the smartest person in the entire General Forum. Now how many mines hit how many ships, buddy? You do realize all of these include Iran demining right? Also, you do realize that Iran saying no nuke is not a change , they have always said that. Just back when the US had competent leadership there was actual mechanisms in place to check on them. In any case their nuclear program was completely obliterated in 2025.
that's the beauty of Trump. he is winning so often and hard it's genuinely hard to keep track. your head will spin with every additional and newly declared truth stretching reality. be they embellished, imagined or otherworldly crafted.
in this regard I somewhat feel for oBlade, pretty hard to keep it straight and trying to grasp a line so thin it's near impossible to tow.
|
United States44392 Posts
Ultimately Trump made a commitment that the war with Iran would end with unconditional surrender. Promises made, promises kept.
|
Finland965 Posts
Doing it in Versailles is a bit on the nose, though.
|
On June 19 2026 02:12 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2026 23:54 oBlade wrote:5 — Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge, for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa. Hormuz is an international waterway. Nobody can toll an international waterway. Thats not exactly correct, for few reasons. First and foremost is, that anyone with sufficient power can do so.
Obtuse misreading of the point.
"You can't nuke Russia."
"Sure you can just push this button the missiles are all ready and loaded."
Nobody can toll an international waterway without any attempt to enforce the toll being caught in a blow-up contest.
On June 19 2026 02:12 Razyda wrote:
Among the others is the fact that Iran is not a part of UNCLOS (as they never ratified it in parliament). Whats funny here, is that US and Iran are in the same position regarding UNCLOS (the new one), but argue exact opposite points. It is rather obvious that if Strait of Hormuz happen to be in US territorial waters US would immediately started to charge toll on ships crossing it, like, obviously.
Why is that obvious? UK tolled Gibraltar? Never. What precedent are you operating from?
On June 19 2026 02:12 Razyda wrote:
As far as UNCLOS arguments are: all parties arguments are retarded and all are blatantly rooted in self interest.
Given that "for 60 days only" means it is basically a holiday taken during conflict. As in: they either agree on some stuff during this time, or unpause.
For 60 days (or extended) means Iran MUST help ships transit, without any charge for any of the help and facilitation. There are things you can charge for in theory like a tug, an escort, and for entrance to your own territorial port. But if the former of those ended up being de facto tolls that would rise to the blow-up contest issue eventually. You're right it's based ultimately on sufficient power like the Third Reich didn't need to ratify the Nuremberg charter for Speer to be prosecuted and it doesn't matter what maritime treaties Iran has or hasn't ratified, just like the fact that they DID ratify the weak and symbolic NNPT doesn't motivate any of our colleagues to have second thoughts about the nuke thing.
|
On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore
Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both.
|
There was a blow up contest for the strait of Hormuz.
Iran won, beating the US.
|
On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both.
Given oBlade's passionate defense of kpop salutes and Trump appropriating rhetoric about immigrants from Nazi Germany, you could make a very strong argument they're not conservative but a secret third thing.
|
Ugh, when even the fascist bootlicking ally from the UK is no longer buying the propaganda things must be very dire in the oBlade land.
I also went on to skim r/conservative and oh boy, it seems like our boy here is one of the last residents with the prerequisite pigheadedness and lack of shame to stay on the daddy Trump island.
|
On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both.
If you can't even get THIS right there's little hope for you wrestling with the big issues.
|
On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both.
No oBlade is a MaGA guy who supports a populist no matter the nonsense. He has no conservative values, no red lines. Just whatever Trump and group say he goes with.
|
On June 19 2026 02:39 oBlade wrote:
Why is that obvious? UK tolled Gibraltar? Never. What precedent are you operating from?
Denmark? Coincidently pre Suez canal era Portugal was tolling the very strait of Ormuz we talking about (and some others)
On June 19 2026 02:39 oBlade wrote:
"You can't nuke Russia."
"Sure you can just push this button the missiles are all ready and loaded."
Nobody can toll an international waterway without any attempt to enforce the toll being caught in a blow-up contest.
You being kinda dishonest here. You specifically said "nobody can", not "nobody can without risking a war".
On June 19 2026 02:39 oBlade wrote:
For 60 days (or extended) means Iran MUST help ships transit, without any charge for any of the help and facilitation. There are things you can charge for in theory like a tug, an escort, and for entrance to your own territorial port. But if the former of those ended up being de facto tolls that would rise to the blow-up contest issue eventually. You're right it's based ultimately on sufficient power like the Third Reich didn't need to ratify the Nuremberg charter for Speer to be prosecuted and it doesn't matter what maritime treaties Iran has or hasn't ratified, just like the fact that they DID ratify the weak and symbolic NNPT doesn't motivate any of our colleagues to have second thoughts about the nuke thing.
This is what you quoted:
"Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge, for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa."
It doesnt have to do any helping, at the very best it may stop testing artillery over Strait of Hormuz.
Bolded: So in the end you agree with me? Why contest then?
|
Coincidentally Portugal tolled the Strait of Hormuz in the 16th century over 500 years ago. Checkmate.
|
On June 19 2026 03:05 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both. No oBlade is a MaGA guy who supports a populist no matter the nonsense. He has no conservative values, no red lines. Just whatever Trump and group say he goes with.
Perhaps all 3 then: conservative, MAGA, and Republican?
|
On June 19 2026 03:12 oBlade wrote:
Coincidentally Portugal tolled the Strait of Hormuz in the 16th century over 500 years ago. Checkmate.
We both know you can do better. This is not even the argument, to be completely honest. You asked for precedent I gave you some. You may have made argument that this precedents are the very reason why UNCLO happened, and we could have discussion about it, but you chose otherwise. Anyways, why argue with me if you know I am right? (considering that this was only thing, you were able to came up with). Especially considering the fact that there is bunch of people, who were only able to throw thinly veiled (if at all) insults as their only contribution to discussion?
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On June 19 2026 03:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 03:05 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both. No oBlade is a MaGA guy who supports a populist no matter the nonsense. He has no conservative values, no red lines. Just whatever Trump and group say he goes with. Perhaps all 3 then: conservative, MAGA, and Republican?
Fuck only knows to employ some of my local vernacular
|
On June 17 2026 21:23 oBlade wrote:
Drumpf is the biggest criminal since Biden.
On June 19 2026 02:47 oBlade wrote:
If you can't even get THIS right there's little hope for you wrestling with the big issues.
That second quote is a perfect response to the first quote.
|
On June 19 2026 03:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2026 03:05 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 19 2026 00:08 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 00:04 WombaT wrote:
For someone who apparently isn’t a conservative Oblade sure as fuck carries a hell of a lot of water for the cause. Maybe if Adam Sandler decides to make the Waterboy 2 he might be best off not casting himself in this one.
I mean I find the folks who have shrines of Trump as Jesus deeply confusing individuals, but I do understand why they’ll go to bat.
Republicans are not conservatives anymore Maybe not all Republicans are conservatives and maybe not all conservatives are Republican, but oBlade is definitely both. No oBlade is a MaGA guy who supports a populist no matter the nonsense. He has no conservative values, no red lines. Just whatever Trump and group say he goes with. Perhaps all 3 then: conservative, MAGA, and Republican?
Conservativism doesn’t matter at all to him. It’s whatever Trumps says. There are still conservatives that support the republicans. But supporting Trump and the Republicans doesn’t make you a conservative.
|
What does "conservatism" even mean without any qualifiers. I can tell you what liberal-conservatism, social-conservatism, nationalist-conservatism etc. are, but the only thing they all have in common is support for hierarchies maintained by the government. In that respect Benito Mussolini is just as conservative as Joseph de Maistre, just manifested in different ways for their times.
|
On June 19 2026 04:28 LightSpectra wrote:
What does "conservatism" even mean without any qualifiers. I can tell you what liberal-conservatism, social-conservatism, nationalist-conservatism etc. are, but the only thing they all have in common is support for hierarchies maintained by the government. In that respect Benito Mussolini is just as conservative as Joseph de Maistre, just manifested in different ways for their times.
I'd say that the core tenet of conservatism is the idea that stuff is ultimately pretty good the way it currently is, and thus change should always be undertaken only with utmost care, because it risks ruining a good thing. Kind of a "measure twice, if in doubt don't cut at all" attitude.
Of course, i doubt that that is how most conservatives actually use that word. But a lot of them are actually regressive rather than conservative. Wanting to go back to some golden past is not conserving stuff after all, it is going back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
