Jews are never happy
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (38)
sorted by:
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.
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.