![]() |
Originally Posted by Cyio
(Post 4021783)
If this were any other president, Democrat or Republican, the narrative would be far different.
|
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 4021809)
You're correct. Because no other President would have been stupid enough to do this.
|
Originally Posted by SampsonSimpson
(Post 4021806)
It’s a terrible idea until it actually happens, right? Then it’ll be more winning?
|
Originally Posted by vaxedtothemax
(Post 4021776)
I forget, how much did we give Ukraine?
Iran is a war of choice that Israel manipulated the US to pursue. It has been a disaster and the US is objectively in a strategically worse position because of it while Iran has been strategically strengthened. Ukraine is a conflict initiated by Russian aggression rather than a war of choice. Supporting Ukraine has resulted in Russia and its military being significantly weakened, a good thing given they are a chief adversary to US interests around the world. In any case, the aid we have provided to Ukraine pales in comparison to that given to Israel over the years, so I'm not sure this point has the salience you think it does.
Originally Posted by vaxedtothemax
(Post 4021776)
How has the policies against Iran worked from ‘78 to 2/26?
Instead we made him a martyr and made ourselves the villain by threatening to genocide the Iranian people.
Originally Posted by vaxedtothemax
(Post 4021776)
Life was really good, gas was low… things were humming along nicely. It would seem
anyone with a modicum of common sense can conclude that to risk losing that, there was most likely a threat that a President finally had the balls to address rather than saying “Don’t”. I think it's less about having the "balls" to do it than having the good sense to recognize that US and Israeli interests are not one and the same. Ironic though that you talk about "balls" and machismo even though he has thrown a weeks long temper tantrum about how NATO hasn't come to our aid in our war of choice.
Originally Posted by vaxedtothemax
(Post 4021776)
I’ve got between 51 and 111 days for oil to
retreat to $70, the stock market to gain about 1k, no furloughs to happen and no a/c delivery changes. I like my chances. I said several pages back oil would retreat 20-30% almost immediately when a deal was reached. It retreated 17% on nothing more than a ceasefire announcement. Where are my oil” to the moon” chicken littles at? "The futures and spot prices are rarely exactly the same, but the gap between them has grown unusually big in the past few weeks, so much so that oil executives and analysts say futures prices no longer accurately reflect the extent of the supply shock that the world is experiencing. “The futures market is not representing the on-the-ground and on-the-water reality of oil at all,” said Vikas Dwivedi, global energy strategist at Macquarie Group, an Australian financial services firm. “It’s quite broken.” Mike Wirth, the chief executive of Chevron, the second-largest U.S. oil company, expressed similar concerns last month at a Houston energy conference, CERAWeek by S&P Global. “Physical prices and physical supplies would reflect a tighter market than I think the forward curve reflects,” Mr. Wirth said, referring to the futures market." https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/10/b...il-prices.html |
Originally Posted by ReadOnly7
(Post 4021812)
such a brave and original take on things. Many previous Presidents have done numerous “stupid” things along these lines. Unless you have ALL the BTS info, you’re just spewing your partisan BS. (I don’t like the situation, either)
This war is stupid. Period, full stop. He’s doing the exact same thing he said he would not do, ran on not doing, and in fact, accused that the Democrats would start a war with Iran and take us into another ME war. |
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 4021809)
You're correct. Because no other President would have been stupid enough to do this.
Unfortunately, it’s somewhat of a dichotomy given the stranglehold the Islamists have on the government. Complete annihilation or let them get a nuke. |
Originally Posted by ThumbsUp
(Post 4021852)
Someone would have to do it eventually, democrat or republican. No one would let them get a nuke. And if there was evidence they had enriched to 84% 3 years ago, it’s not a stretch that they were close to doing so now with the delivery vehicles they already have.
Unfortunately, it’s somewhat of a dichotomy given the stranglehold the Islamists have on the government. Complete annihilation or let them get a nuke. |
Originally Posted by airplanes
(Post 4021872)
I can’t wait for Iran to finally agree to stop making nuclear weapons and agree to allow outside inspectors to ensure there is no illegal enrichment going on.
|
Originally Posted by ThumbsUp
(Post 4021878)
Yeah, unfortunately there is actually no way to do that in a manner which they would comply. That’s why JCPOA was a pipe dream. Unless there was a way to remove every ounce of nuclear material and forever prevent it from entering the country covertly, both of which would never happen, they would always seek one. It’s just the nature of terrorists. Negotiating with them is a fool’s errand.
|
Originally Posted by airplanes
(Post 4021883)
Oh ok. I guess JD is going to Pakistan just to eat biryani and play golf. Someone should really tell him about the whole fool’s errand thing. But I’m sure this Khamenei is so honest compared to the last one.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:02 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands