Iran was an IQ test. You favorite pundits flunked.
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (58)
sorted by:
And that's a good thing?
I don't think this is a win. They just repeated the 2003 playbook with close to zero pushback and support from most Democrats. That is terrifying. Trump slammed Tucker and even his own Director of National Intelligence, just because he wanted to scoop up some dirty credit for this war.
I also have no problem with Israel, I just think they shouldn't be bombing other countries without cause.
As much as I hate Muslims and Islamist governments, any regime change in Iran would absolutely send 10-20 million refugees streaming into Europe, so for you it is a good thing that that government is almost certainly not going anywhere.
As for the rest, Trump has clearly decided not to pursue further military action and has publicly called on the Israelis to cut it out. He then sidelined the people in his administration who were calling for all-out war on Iran and signal-boosted Tulsi when she praised the ceasefire. As hard as they tried to use the 2003 playbook, he's made it pretty clear that he's not going to play and the people who were egging him on to further action are seething about it to anyone who will listen. So yes, that's a win.
Yes, though probably not if it was a peaceful internal thing, rather than one imposed through invasion, bombing and/or state collapse.
He was the one playing it! Look, I'm not saying he hasn't done good AFTER the strike. Hell, things have gone as well as they could have given preceding events. I'm not saying to disown him. I'm saying that he did great wrong before. Why is it bad that people were warning against the disastrous consequences of this madness? Why are they the ones who are low IQ, and not the people who fell for it again?
I never said the people who were cheering for war were the smart ones. But even discounting the neocons and neolibs, even inside MAGA and dissident right circles this has just been another episode of the right eating itself, coupled with the usual display of one-upmanship with all the usual suspects trying to be the quickest to announce the beginning of WW3, the quickest to throw the Trump out with the Menorah oil, the most outraged and the most upset over the supposedly inevitable ensuing war. This is the kind of infighting that is almost always a psyop, which is why Fuentes and Owens are the culprits I mention most, and almost always a deliberate distraction. And the panic was ultimately unnecessary. That is literally all I've been trying to say.
What one person sees as 'the right eating itself', another person may well see as 'healthy debate'.
Things were not looking good. With Israel vowing to do a regime change, and to make Tehran burn, and Trump saying "VERY GOOD! EVERYONE EVACUATE TEHRAN"... it's a miracle that things happened as they did. I would not be surprised if the opposition from MAGA played a role.
What exactly do you propose? That people should have sat on the sidelines and just trusted the non-existent plan?
Tucker is the guy I trust most. You're not mentioning him, but he is in the avatar for this video.
How do you know that? If you're playing Russian Roulette, even with a chance of 16.667% or however much it is, is it "unnecessary" for someone to panic about you pulling the trigger if just by chance, you survive?