Jews are never happy
(twitter.com)
Comments (38)
sorted by:
Oh, and if I have to pick between Iran and Israel existing...well...firstly, I'm going be like 'holy shit, really, this is my lucky day!'
And then I'm picking Iran to continue to exist.
Israel is everything they claim Iran is; a terrorist state, a rogue state, and disrupting peace in the region and sewing chaos throughout the world.
Unless jews somehow go away, israel going away wont solve anything at all
I don't need to get into all that, but Israel going away would certainly solve a lot of problems.
Taking away every jew’s plan B is a big deal.
it's never really stopped them from doing things that would get them kicked out of cities and countries for most of their existence
Why have the zionists gone full mask-off in the past 2 years? You used to have to dredge the depths of the internet to find some obscure jew from the 30s-50s saying stuff like this, now you’ve got big names spazzing out like idiots.
Desperation. They spent decades poisoning the demographics of western nations, and now they've come to the realization that when the boomers die out, support for israel will die out with them. So they're pushing as hard as they can to goad the evangelicals into demanding total war on israel's behalf.
The 3rd worlders they imported into the west certainly don't give a shit about the holocaust
100% Agree.
I actually think that if Israel continues to be retardedly pig-headed about their policies, they may actually flip to being a staunch chinese ally by 2050.
October 7th either made them feel vulnerable after years of feeling invincible while faking it for victim points, or was an allowed event that backfired heavily and caused a massive amount of the Western World to side with Palestine against them.
Their golems are turning against them everywhere, even if it doesn't feel like it yet, enough to no longer feel like they are in complete control and its causing them to fucking panic. Even if they are still only down a bunch of random footsoldiers turning on them.
A bit of both, but I don't think it backfired per se, they just handled it horribly after the fact, and insisted like acting like fucking psychopaths.
October 7th didn't turn the world against Israel. Israel turned the world against Israel, by what they did, and how they did it.
Those are the two extremes, reality is probably somewhere in the middle but we will never truly know. Maybe their intelligence knew the attack was coming and just didn't prevent it to have their own 9/11 moment, maybe it truly was completely out of left field.
But either or, it caused a huge uprising against them because it gave a rallying moment for the pro-Palestine movement to erupt from. Before then, basically nobody talked about or cared about them.
Nothing Israel has actually done matters to those people. They hate them out of trained responses: "white", colonizers, successful, fighting browns, fighting Muslims, etc.
Everything I’ve heard and read suggests that October 7th was allowed to happen, chief being no warnings from Mossad, the IDF being pulled back further than normal and moving the concert close to the border.
Yeah that's a lot of what I heard as well, but I don't like making definitive beliefs on these things because the waters get so murky that its impossible to tell your ass from your elbow in it.
I could buy it also just being Mossad heard about it and let it happen.
You mean from oct 7?
They were always like this
Should he really be invoking Hitler when The Jewish State of Israel™ is at the least popular it has ever been in it's short history?
"My spirit will rise from the grave and the world will see i was right."
Jews never realise how unpopular they are until theyre getting kicked out of the country
𝅘𝅥 One hundred and ten times, and couuuuntiiiing. 𝅘𝅥
I saw a comment saying that Mark Levin is desperately trying to increase the score.
Heh. Someone came in and downvoted EVERYONE for wrongthink.
Mark Levin hates the words "people not dying".
That's so not true. He hates goys not dying
That says it all right there doesn't it? Where does that idea even come from? Most muslim countries are vehemently anti-Israel and anti-Jew. Iran and Khomeni aren't special here. Iran and Israel's regional spat shouldn't concern us. You need to work on your anger issues, Mark.
Probably from all the scapegoats and chicken sacrifice. Jews are obsessed over decapitation strikes and smothering Baby Hitlers in the crib, like they're killing the origin of sin.
That's because he wasn't interested in taking it, while many in the German military were desperate to save what was left from the Soviet hordes. In the words of one of the half dozen German generals that were assigned to defend German forces in Holland before Operation Market Garden: "END THE WAR, YOU FOOLS!"
Unlike Mark Levin, I don't feel the need to firebomb every single major Persian city because the ayatollah's are faggots.
Frankly, if Trump allows Israel to keep air dominance over Iran so that any time Iran tries to go back into getting a nuke, their leadership gets killed, it is a good way of coercing the Iranians into good behavior.
Killing the ayatollah would simply cause the state to collapse, and a civil war to break out.
All this for a made-up problem of an "Iranian nuke", which wasn't a real thing until you started attacking them?
Now they'll want a nuke, and they'll be right, and you can thank your, yes, Chump for it.
Iran has always wanted a nuke (because the Israelis already have many). That wasn't the issue, frankly it seems like the whole "weeks away" thing has always been kayfabe. I think Trump took the advantage that Israel gave him to strike Iran to severely degrade their capacity to build nukes.
I don't think they're gonna want a nuke, nor are they gonna get one. Frankly, if they really wanted one, they could have bought one... but it seems like no one trusts them, especially not the other arab states.
Not to say that I trust the IC, but they say that they ended this in 2003. It makes sense. The threat to them wasn't Israel, it was Iraq. Iraq's threat was ended in 2003. It does make sense.
It also makes sense for them to pursue nukes. But the best of both worlds might be the ability to create a bomb (thus creating deterrence) while not actually crossing the finish line.
History might suggest hte opposite of what you claim. Bandwagoning is less effective than balancing. Dying empires are left on life support (see Ottoman Empire).
You said they 'always wanted a nuke'. Does this mean that you think this attack changed their mind into not wanting a deterrence?
You don't need to convince me of why they want a nuke, I'm for nuclear proliferation.
Maybe history will say I'm wrong, but I think my caution during this whole thing has served me better than agreeing to apparent narratives.
I don't know yet if it did, but it should have. Iran is being bullied. There's no way around this. The US is not asking. It should be apparent that, deterrent or not, they're not getting one. The US put a battleship in Tokyo harbor and sent a trade agreement. You don't get to say no. The only logical thing for them to do is take the L. If they really want a nuke, they'll need to buy one. it's just not on the table anymore.
Remember when """"someone"""" dropped poison gas from a barrel bomb onto civilian targets in Syria? Israel struck Syrian air fields and WMD facilities. Trump demanded the chemicalogical weapon programs end. What did Assad do? Abandoned the whole program and handed the weapons off to Russia with independent inspections. It didn't save him in the long run, but it bought him time that he used to actually re-take a lot of land back from the rebels, and he very nearly won the war.
Truth is, it's the only reasonable action to take. Full demilitarization of the nuclear program to take the issue off the table. China and Russia will look like the adults in the room, and you'll get time to recover. It's the only option. Everything else is just stupidity and ego. I don't know if the ayatollah is smart enough to take it.
I think you overestimate what you can monitor, and what you can do. You're telling me that the US will be laser-focused on Iran for the next 30 years to prevent this one thing, and will never be distracted by anything that goes on anywhere in the world? That's just not how things work in my view.
Given that ballistic missiles can be taken out, I'm not sure one nuke is enough as deterrence.
That was under Obama, but your point is well-taken. Perhaps if Assad had kept his chemical weapons and withstood some US pinpricks, he'd still be in power. Not saying it's good.
See, I don't think the nuclear program is "militarized" at the moment to begin with. But it might get that. I can't imagine a country getting pounded by two nuclear powers and not realizing that it needs a nuclear weapon.
They may not be very competent, but I don't doubt how smart they are.
Iran might be the only thing the US concentrated on for 50 consecutive years, except the Soviet Union.
My mistake. I think Trump had a different strike. It's hard to keep track.
I think the issue is that they have enriched Uranium. Regardless of when they got it, they could build a nuke in relatively short time because they have the Uranium as it is. Knocking out the facilities slows that development time, but the admin seems to not want the Uranium. I think they are lying about how satisfied they are. It's clear to me that this was a major failure of Israeli intel, or they just straight up lied to the US, and I'm leaning towards the latter.
"Welp! Now you can't find the Uranium. Here's 50 more places you could bomb that definitely have it."
It wasn't enriched to nearly the extent necessary for a bomb.
How so? Lies about what?
Some very cynical people claimed that they would now use the Hamas playbook of saying that the uranium is hiding under every school and hospital in Iran, but fortunately that didn't happen.
You'd think that the basis of one of the most famous memes in history, Hitler screaming from the movie Downfall, would have taught them that Hitler was expecting to turn it around and win even as his bunker was literally being shelled.
Most survivors only did so out of pure defiance of his orders.
He wasn't the only one. SS units kept fighting even when the Wehrmacht stopped. Then compare that to Japan.
Fighting true totalitarianism is a nightmare. The Iranians just aren't true totalitarians, they're just regular nutters.
To that end, I thought Victor Davis Hansen had an interesting read of exactly how "regime change" would shake out in Iran with the current state of things we know on the ground.
The TLDR being that the people of Iran will absolutely be embarrassed and angry over the impotence of their leadership after what has happened, but lacks the organization to be able to do anything about it themselves. With what he saw as more likely being that the Military (which has now seen all of its own regime-friendly officers killed and replaced by younger "wild card" officers) will take the opportunity to blame the Ayatollahs for this mess, execute them, and implement an Egyptian-style Military Dictatorship. Which he also views as only marginally better than the current situation in terms of regional stability.
I totally get the idea, and it wouldn't be out of character for the middle-east... but I don't know that the military is all that regime unfriendly.
I still maintain the risk is: Kurdistan secedes, Turkey invades, all hell breaks loose.