Some of you may read this and think it shows why we needed to attack preemptively. Others may think it shows how risky our decision was. Either way, understanding the state of play is key.
It was always risky. I'll agree with you there and nothing will be easy from here. I agree, too. But I imagine Israel will put boots on the ground and we might help with special forces, but if you are right about all this, this is why he acted at all. These people are not balanced and they intended terrible things. You can't just let them keep doing it.
AND for our President to act to finally put an end to the Iran nuclear threat takes guts. War is expensive & risky & a bad outcome puts his presidency & party at risk. Few would do the right thing to disarm Iran for those odds.
I'm not convinced that Iran was an "imminent threat" to the United States. They have never tested a nuclear weapon, and even if they've managed to assemble one small enough to put on a missile or one of their ubiquitous drones, none of their delivery systems has anywhere near the range to reach the United States.
I can see how Israel might have felt threatened, but don't they have between 80 and 400 nukes stockpiled, some of which are ready to go? Wouldn't this be enough to deter the mullahs from launching one at Israel?
Is it truly your opinion that the religious fanatics that have ruled Iran for the last 47 years operate on the sort of rational calculus that normal governments do?
Who said Trump has an easy way out? We couldn't wait until the nukes started flying anymore. This is something that should have been done 47 years ago. This is a VERY risky proposition, but a necessary one. I believe we have a real chance for lasting peace in the Mideast and the world, thanks to Donald Trump. He is the only one with the guts to do what has been necessary for a long time.
The ONLY person on the planet who can find a way is Trump...everyone KNOWS it. No one else had the fortitude to do what should have been done long ago. Will this end in nuclear devastation...perhaps, but not probable. I see the THREAT as less than what it would have been if nothing was done in the larger perspective. Just interesting to me how so MANY in America bought the whole IRAN rhetoric they were NOT enriching and for a purpose. The enablers and deniers in America is what it is.
So 47 years of talking, placating, and bribing has brought us to the precipice we were desperately trying to avoid.
47 years of trying to "put us in their shoes" instead of accepting that these people are religious fanatics who want literally to wipe out all civilization. Even theirs if it means " glory to Allah".
These people cannot be reasoned with. Their own ideology requires they lie and cheat to achieve their dominance.
There is only one solution and now is the opportunity to achieve that.
Oh, and what about women and 30,000 people he just murdered. Turn a blind eye? These people are really horrible and they are a case in point about the second amendment. If they had it, it wouldn't be at this point most likely. So I imagine Israel will do boots on the ground with our air support or some limited special forces and perhaps we'll arm their people. But no easy answers. There never were.
There are lots of bad national leaders in the world, Putin, Xi, etc., but most of them are rational. The Iranian theocrats are not rational. They hate us so much that they are willing to accept huge amounts of pain and destruction for their people. If Alex is right and they have a Hiroshima type nuke, they will deploy it against the United States as soon as they figure out a way of getting it here. Conclusion: either the theocrats surrender (very unlikely) or they must be destroyed. Waiting until New York City is nuked by Iran is waiting too long.
Yeah, I tend to think they have, as a nation, been at war with us for decades and they clearly have bad intentions and no respect even for their own lives. Definitely irrational.
I'm listening to Glenn Greenwald and Tucker going on about how free speech is being curtailed in favor of Israel and that's happening in universities. I TAUGHT there and I can tell you it is exactly the opposite! They are teaching an "oppressor/oppressed" post colonial theory, DEI theories of all minorities, and Israel and white people are now the "oppressors." It's simply not true. People like Tucker and Glenn are helping this. And I don't see where Glenn or Tucker are being censored at all here. In Europe, lots of censorship is going on for all kinds of issues. Maybe that's a pov, but Tucker and Glenn never never mention Oct. 7th with any kind of compassion, or as relevant in ANY way, and call all Israel's actions "genocide" not war. They haven't said a thing about this attack on the synagogue in Michigan and there are worrisome things happening here. I just don't get it. I get Alex's reluctance and worry over this war, and I don't agree with all his statements, or wonder if anyone knows the right thing, but I just don't understand this demonization of Israel to this degree. I haven't heard Alex do that. And they are absolutely wrong about universities. Megyn Kelly called Mark Levin a micro-penis, or micro-prick? She worried me when she did Howard Stern, but she and Candace and Tucker and MTG are off the deep end now. And they sure as hell are not being censored. Glenn isn't quite as nuts; I just think he's wrong about the US at least. There IS antisemitism here, anti white sentiment and sometimes discrimination against Asians. And they simply ignore that.
There is rampant antisemitism in Canada, too. Started up with a constant barrage of paid Pro-Palestine protesters in our streets who actively march through Jewish neighborhoods and harass people in front of Synagogs. No clue why the police do NOTHING.
Yes, so I do not see the Jews OR Israel being favored like they claim. If anything, it's people like Glenn and Tucker doing the reverse when they should be objective.
It is actually rather simple, follow the money. They are antisemitic Israel bashers because it brings more clicks thus more money. This actually makes them even more despicable in my opinion.
I had a hard time believing Tucker would do it for that reason, but I can't figure out any other anymore. Glenn, though, I think believes this. He's just mistaken about a lot of it, especially within universities. White liberal professors are into this oppressed/oppressor thing, post colonial theory -- and that means they don't like white people or Jews (Jewish people can't win for losing; NOW they are oppressors). So Glenn is just mistaken. Free speech does get a little tricky because hate speech is protected and students who are citizens certainly get to say what they want as long as they break no rules. But the thing they are missing is that universities are no longer places of debate and ideas--almost all the professors are leftist activists and are not allowing that exchange--and it is FAR from pro-Israel.
CNN did a 4 minute clip featuring an Iran State propaganda station. It is like they are saying, see? We are not winning, they still have their TV stations up and running. Yes. It is pure TDS. Their ratings suck and I hope they go broke from their woke. 😡
I think it’s time we start taking out their Iran’s media. I know it’s been a balancing act for the Trump Administration to inflict maximum military damage while trying to minimize damage to the public structure.
I'm trying to square yesterday's article with this one. You know, where Trump goes to the Democrats and The Squad to ask permission, and they listen to him instead wanting to talk about Jeffrey Epstein in order to save humanity. You know, because the framers of the constitution insisted.
Very interesting discussion of uranium enrichment. But it just makes me madder that US presidents for the last 47 years have been so damn timid. This regime has always been dangerous & irrational and it should not have been allowed thrive & fester. Not to mention sending pallets of cash in the dark of night.
The best we can hope for is a new, cooperative regime birthed by a popular uprising in Iran. And that's not looking promising at the moment. We're in a difficult position but that I think action was necessary.
Not clear if this is knowledge the public didn't already have access to if it looked (people are too lazy and complacent to do the work required). The point you may be making is there is solid rationale for the attack - yet you and many others still try and suggest otherwise. How are you squaring that circle???? Have you now shifted your views on the attack? Very unclear from your summary. In any event it proves the point that it isn't easy being President and thank God we have one who is comfortable making tough decisions and not simply kicking the can down the road.
There will be no ceasefire with the current regime, or what is left of it. President Trump knows this must continue until we not only control the sky, but the ground as well. Not with Soldiers and Marines, but politically. The next few weeks will be interesting.
The current regime falls, and an interim government is put in place that allows an international coalition to verify the end of its uranium enrichment, seize and enrich uranium and destroy its missile-making capability.
I agree with Sherry 1. We weaken the current regime and cut off its ability to communicate and its access to funding. There are ethnicities, like the Kurds, who want autonomy over areas they already exert some control over. They can help smuggle in weapons to resisters closer to Tehran and other regime strongholds. We can also smuggle in internet devices so that people have access to information. Some in the regime want to be martyrs, but many do not and will look for ways out of the fight. The former Shah's son can lead a transitional government. This is very similar to 1979.
They are brave protestors. I don't think protesting by itself will lead to a ceasefire. It will unfortunately lead to the murderous regime killing more protestors.
Yes, they are. In regime change, which the people have been protesting for, the hope is the armed forces will refuse to kill their own people and join them in revolt. Iran’s IRGC, religious fanatics one and all, has to be taken ou first. If that happens, regular forces and regular police have a better chance of turning. Go to TousiTV.com for more insight. He has people and his father informing him from inside Iran and does very good reports.
I hope Alex reads these comments. No reasonable person watching this thinks any part of this was ever easy. Acting, or not acting, has enormous consequences. Presidents ignoring the problem of Iran, or trying to just get through their terms without having to make tough decisions left the world in this position.
I disagree with many of Trump's quirks and methods, but someone had to say "yeah, this is risky, and markets are going to be wild, and I may even get shellacked in the midterms, but I am not going to ignore this" I guess that TACO thing looks stupid now.
LA, agree completely. I was always a mediocre chess player. I'd make a move expecting my opponent to make "just the right mistake," rather than expecting him to make the best move possible.
Looking at some of the names in Trump's cabinet, not to mention the staff (particularly military) supporting him, it's patently ridiculous to assert (much less believe) that closing the Straits came as a surprise. Nor that they lacked contingency plans.
Likewise with tariffs, agree or disagree, they knew within a reasonable degree the likely market reaction.
Sadly, we live in a world where discussion and argumentation stem principally from inane rage and ill will. Ad hominem has become the most accepted form of rebuttal. Just listen to the Kimmels and their ilk.
And, virtue signalling the highest form of bravery.
Alex, you are really frustrating on this topic. I think it demonstrates your unresolved irrational dislike of Israel and maybe Jews in general.
When you about to enter an elevator and it is occupied by someone giving you a sense that you are in danger, it would be stupid to not ask the officer standing just outside to help ensure your safety instead of you being worried about the identity politics and just toughing it up and taking the risk for the sake of virtue signaling that you are good socially-aware person.
Now, it would be lunacy to ride the elevator when the thug in the elevator actually told you that he is going to try and kill you if you ride with him. And if he also told you that he is going to always be occupying that elevator and he is going to get some more dangerous weapons to bring along.
That is exactly the situation with Iran. The Iranian terrorist regime has for over four decades made it clear that they want to kill the US and Israel if it rides in the elevator, and Iran is pursuing more deadly weapons to make sure they do that killing well.
You are blaming and shaming the decision to prevent that. You are blaming the law enforcement to stop it from ever happening.
This isn't rational behavior. You seem to just want to ignore all the evidence of global malice and threats and image that Iran is just run by peaceful Mullahs.
If the Iran terrorist regime had not for years communicated its goals and intent to kill Americans and Israelis and destroy both countries, and has actually done so, as part of their fanatic extreme theocratic policies and proclamations, then I would 100% not support this joint operation to take out the threat.
Speaking as a former homicide detective, you cannot kill someone because you claim he was trying to acquire a gun, and once he did, he was going to shoot you. Even if you claim he had been paying the neighbors to key your cars, do drive-by shootings, and have their dogs poop on your lawn without picking it up; especially if the person cooperated with the police when you called and reported the threats, allowed the police to search him and his household, and the police wrote a report that found no evidence that he had a gun or was going to acquire one. I have had many people in handcuffs threaten that they were going to kill me and my family when they got out of jail. I didn't kill them and claim self-defense.
This thug has not just claimed but has done the killing already. Check history including Oct-7. As a homicide detective I would hope you would take seriously the threat of murder from someone that has murdered before.
We live in a system of laws to maintain an orderly society. We have a social agreement that we will obey those laws, otherwise society and the world devolves into a vigilante hellhole. One of those laws is that we only use deadly force when the threat of death or serious injury is imminent, not future. I knew who the gang members were. I knew they had weapons they weren't supposed to have because they were convicted felons. I knew they were committing robberies, drive-by shootings, and in some cases murders that I could not prove. I knew they may commit another robbery or murder in the future. I would try to lock them up on lesser charges if possible, and worked diligently to investigate their crimes, but I didn't storm their house and kill them in their beds based upon future threats to society.
Oh, come on now. US law enforcement has been taking out gangs for the clear threat of violence they represent. The job of law enforcement is primarily crime prevention. Yes, there is due process, but when the house holding the gang members is surrounded to apprehend them to bring them to justice, and they hold up and start random shooting at everyone from inside the house, then it is the duty of law enforcement to take them out to ensure the safety of the public.
Apples and Oranges. International security is not a homicide investigation. Besides, Iran wasn't just paying it's neighbors to do the dirty work. They have shown the ability, the willingness, and the actual military action of firing missiles into Israel themselves.
You are comparing apples with oranges. And you can detain someone who threatens to shoot someone with a gun even if you haven’t seen it. Especially if they have a history of mental illness.
If you pay someone to kill another, you are as guilty of murder as the one who pulled the trigger. If you do it over&over you are guilty every time of committing murder.
Iran has been paying proxies for 47 years to do their dirty work, all the while we pretend it’s not so and hope the oil continues to flow.
Iran, its leaders/rulers/whatever (not those held hostage to that corrupt ideology/religion), has been waging war mostly thru its proxies to get to this point: the ability to launch a nuclear war against its enemies and the world. Midnight Hammer may have stopped further processing (maybe) but the ability to create a nuclear weapon is still on the table.
Iran has been found guilty, it has had its appeals - now it’s time to finish the execution.
The next time an oil tanker is prevented from traversing the Strait, Karg (?) island should be leveled - take away its majority revenue stream.
When religious leadership has been fully purged (and executed), all nuclear material and technology removed, then the west can move in to assist in the erection of a renewed economy
Criminal law and international law/UN Charter actually line up very closely on this issue.
On the street, a police officer can't shoot someone because they’re a “bad guy” who talks tough and might get a gun someday, even if they have used illegal force in the past. Each use of force incident is evaluated separately. You need an imminent threat, no reasonable alternatives, and proportional force: Opportunity, Ability, Imminent Jeopardy, and Preclusion.
Internationally, it’s the same logic. The UN Charter only allows force in self‑defense against an actual or truly imminent attack. The Caroline standard says preemptive force is only lawful when the danger is “instant and overwhelming,” with “no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.”
In criminal law that's “gun coming out right now,” not “he might arm himself in the future.”
So no, it’s not asinine, it’s the exact same legal firewall between fear and justified force.
No one understood many things about Islamic fundamentalism until 9/11- and if the Iranians set off a small nuke in NY harbor we'd all be outraged that our government did nothing to prevent it. These folks are a death cult and willing to kill everyone - especially women- who do not adhere to their version of Islam.
Have you read anything by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? That sort of flip comment suggests you no nothing about the treatment of women in fundamentalist Islamic countries.
The Quran tells them they must kill the infidels. World domination is their goal and if they are ever in charge it will be convert to Islam and live by Sharia law or you will die. The Quran says girls as young 6 can be given in marriage to men. The Prophet Mohammed married his wife, Ayesha, when she was 6 and had sex with her when she was 9. They are not awful, they're evil.
Allow me to throw a wrench into your logic. Treasurer Scott Bessent making statements on CNBC’s Squawk Box about oil tanker traffic resuming in the strait amid the ongoing Iran conflict.
Key points from Bessent’s interview and related reports:
• The U.S. is currently “fine” with allowing some ships—particularly Iranian, Indian, and Chinese tankers—to transit the Strait of Hormuz to help supply global markets and ease oil price pressures.
• He noted that Iranian ships have already been getting through, Indian vessels are now transiting, and some Chinese ones are believed to have passed.
• This is seen as a “natural opening” where Iran is permitting limited traffic (especially for non-U.S./Israel/allied vessels), before any potential U.S. Navy escorts or international coalition efforts begin.
This overture means a wedge between Iran and BRICS partners who depend on oil from Iran. Should oil not flow, these partners are going to support regime change and that change would be necessary to keep America from becoming default controller of the straits (it’s a two way blockade). New regime would need to be friendly to Israel and American interests and that means no Nukes. The West has more than two levels to pull and Basset has already weakened Iran’s position. There are always more moves on a 3D strategic chessboard than meets the eye.
Today Trump announce a blockade of Hormuz following a failed attempt to negotiate a deal. Now we wait and see how the international community responds to having their oil flow severely inhibited.
If that is the case, we should ask ourselves how many innocent children are we willing to sacrifice to meet our ally's goals before even starting such an endeavor.
I don't know, what's the acceptable number of Americans killed by Iran? (I'll give you a hint, it's exponentially higher than this accident). Stop with the silliness. Zero is acceptable, we both know that before you started typing. After 47 years of terrorizing the Middle East and threatening world security, you can't let suicidal lunatics have nuclear weapons because a bad accident might happen. That's on Iran, not us.
I have to ask what would be gained from such an apology? It would give MSM a field day and a way to make Trump a child killer also IMO, nothing good would come of it and the kids would still be dead, Sorry.
See Matt Tardio's analysis on YouTube or X of the missile that hit the school and its trajectory. The wings of the missile are set 40% from the nose, while the wings of Tomahawk are 50% back from the nose. The missile has a fan jet underneath, while Tomahawk does not. The dive angle is 80 degrees while the limit of the Tomahawk is 70 degrees. The missile came form the north, while Tomahawks from the ships would have arrived from the south. See "Speak the Truth" in YouTube.
You should pass along this link to the Pentagon. They are (foolishly) stating that they did, in fact, hit the school and it was a "targeting error based on outdated intelligence."
If only they knew that the Tomahawk wings are 50% back from the nose! Fools!
The Pentagon is investigating this and they will likely arrive at the correct conclusion. They have to be very careful and detailed in their investigation because their results will be challenged. I recommended that you see Matt Tardio's analysis video in "Speak the Truth". It is subtitled "Iran Kills Children" and it was about 5 days ago.
Read Jeff Childers’ Coffee and Covid newsletter from several days ago for his in depth analysis of the school bombing, if you’re interested in another perspective and additional information you won’t hear anywhere else, Brian.
I thought the dems were against fossil fuels so it serves the purpose if we have higher gas prices, like here in California where, because of Newsom, we have the second highest gas prices in the country.
And I thought they hated Trump's campaign promises, but yesterday one made a stink that he broke his no-war campaign pledge. Unfortunately, I was too dimwitted to point this out.
She also spoke about the gas shortages, or maybe that was the other Democrat at the table.
Alex , everything you just wrote proves Trump is smarter than Bush. Everything indicates Iran does in fact , have , or have the ability to make a “ weapon of mass destruction “
Yet Trump , learning from history , has not used those words. It also explains why the invasion was necessary.
Their incessant chants of death to America were finally countered. Good will win over here. And Iran is now terribly weakened to make sure that it does.
It was always risky. I'll agree with you there and nothing will be easy from here. I agree, too. But I imagine Israel will put boots on the ground and we might help with special forces, but if you are right about all this, this is why he acted at all. These people are not balanced and they intended terrible things. You can't just let them keep doing it.
Trump is the first president in 47 years who is trying to stop the 8th century barbarians from going nuclear instead of kicking the can down the road.
AND for our President to act to finally put an end to the Iran nuclear threat takes guts. War is expensive & risky & a bad outcome puts his presidency & party at risk. Few would do the right thing to disarm Iran for those odds.
I'm not convinced that Iran was an "imminent threat" to the United States. They have never tested a nuclear weapon, and even if they've managed to assemble one small enough to put on a missile or one of their ubiquitous drones, none of their delivery systems has anywhere near the range to reach the United States.
I can see how Israel might have felt threatened, but don't they have between 80 and 400 nukes stockpiled, some of which are ready to go? Wouldn't this be enough to deter the mullahs from launching one at Israel?
Is it truly your opinion that the religious fanatics that have ruled Iran for the last 47 years operate on the sort of rational calculus that normal governments do?
Who said Trump has an easy way out? We couldn't wait until the nukes started flying anymore. This is something that should have been done 47 years ago. This is a VERY risky proposition, but a necessary one. I believe we have a real chance for lasting peace in the Mideast and the world, thanks to Donald Trump. He is the only one with the guts to do what has been necessary for a long time.
The ONLY person on the planet who can find a way is Trump...everyone KNOWS it. No one else had the fortitude to do what should have been done long ago. Will this end in nuclear devastation...perhaps, but not probable. I see the THREAT as less than what it would have been if nothing was done in the larger perspective. Just interesting to me how so MANY in America bought the whole IRAN rhetoric they were NOT enriching and for a purpose. The enablers and deniers in America is what it is.
Agree. And what is the alternative, to go back to Obama/Biden's policy of appeasement? That, to me, is suicidal.
So 47 years of talking, placating, and bribing has brought us to the precipice we were desperately trying to avoid.
47 years of trying to "put us in their shoes" instead of accepting that these people are religious fanatics who want literally to wipe out all civilization. Even theirs if it means " glory to Allah".
These people cannot be reasoned with. Their own ideology requires they lie and cheat to achieve their dominance.
There is only one solution and now is the opportunity to achieve that.
Oh, and what about women and 30,000 people he just murdered. Turn a blind eye? These people are really horrible and they are a case in point about the second amendment. If they had it, it wouldn't be at this point most likely. So I imagine Israel will do boots on the ground with our air support or some limited special forces and perhaps we'll arm their people. But no easy answers. There never were.
There are lots of bad national leaders in the world, Putin, Xi, etc., but most of them are rational. The Iranian theocrats are not rational. They hate us so much that they are willing to accept huge amounts of pain and destruction for their people. If Alex is right and they have a Hiroshima type nuke, they will deploy it against the United States as soon as they figure out a way of getting it here. Conclusion: either the theocrats surrender (very unlikely) or they must be destroyed. Waiting until New York City is nuked by Iran is waiting too long.
Yeah, I tend to think they have, as a nation, been at war with us for decades and they clearly have bad intentions and no respect even for their own lives. Definitely irrational.
30,000 people (Persians) massacred by the insane clerics. The MSM does not tell that truth often enough and the DEMS seem not to care. 😢😭
I'm listening to Glenn Greenwald and Tucker going on about how free speech is being curtailed in favor of Israel and that's happening in universities. I TAUGHT there and I can tell you it is exactly the opposite! They are teaching an "oppressor/oppressed" post colonial theory, DEI theories of all minorities, and Israel and white people are now the "oppressors." It's simply not true. People like Tucker and Glenn are helping this. And I don't see where Glenn or Tucker are being censored at all here. In Europe, lots of censorship is going on for all kinds of issues. Maybe that's a pov, but Tucker and Glenn never never mention Oct. 7th with any kind of compassion, or as relevant in ANY way, and call all Israel's actions "genocide" not war. They haven't said a thing about this attack on the synagogue in Michigan and there are worrisome things happening here. I just don't get it. I get Alex's reluctance and worry over this war, and I don't agree with all his statements, or wonder if anyone knows the right thing, but I just don't understand this demonization of Israel to this degree. I haven't heard Alex do that. And they are absolutely wrong about universities. Megyn Kelly called Mark Levin a micro-penis, or micro-prick? She worried me when she did Howard Stern, but she and Candace and Tucker and MTG are off the deep end now. And they sure as hell are not being censored. Glenn isn't quite as nuts; I just think he's wrong about the US at least. There IS antisemitism here, anti white sentiment and sometimes discrimination against Asians. And they simply ignore that.
There is rampant antisemitism in Canada, too. Started up with a constant barrage of paid Pro-Palestine protesters in our streets who actively march through Jewish neighborhoods and harass people in front of Synagogs. No clue why the police do NOTHING.
Maybe you were asking a rhetorical question, but the police were told to do nothing.
Yes, so I do not see the Jews OR Israel being favored like they claim. If anything, it's people like Glenn and Tucker doing the reverse when they should be objective.
It is actually rather simple, follow the money. They are antisemitic Israel bashers because it brings more clicks thus more money. This actually makes them even more despicable in my opinion.
I had a hard time believing Tucker would do it for that reason, but I can't figure out any other anymore. Glenn, though, I think believes this. He's just mistaken about a lot of it, especially within universities. White liberal professors are into this oppressed/oppressor thing, post colonial theory -- and that means they don't like white people or Jews (Jewish people can't win for losing; NOW they are oppressors). So Glenn is just mistaken. Free speech does get a little tricky because hate speech is protected and students who are citizens certainly get to say what they want as long as they break no rules. But the thing they are missing is that universities are no longer places of debate and ideas--almost all the professors are leftist activists and are not allowing that exchange--and it is FAR from pro-Israel.
Any theories on why MSM doesn’t seem to care? Is their hate for Trump so great? or loss of power?
CNN did a 4 minute clip featuring an Iran State propaganda station. It is like they are saying, see? We are not winning, they still have their TV stations up and running. Yes. It is pure TDS. Their ratings suck and I hope they go broke from their woke. 😡
I think it’s time we start taking out their Iran’s media. I know it’s been a balancing act for the Trump Administration to inflict maximum military damage while trying to minimize damage to the public structure.
I'm trying to square yesterday's article with this one. You know, where Trump goes to the Democrats and The Squad to ask permission, and they listen to him instead wanting to talk about Jeffrey Epstein in order to save humanity. You know, because the framers of the constitution insisted.
Very interesting discussion of uranium enrichment. But it just makes me madder that US presidents for the last 47 years have been so damn timid. This regime has always been dangerous & irrational and it should not have been allowed thrive & fester. Not to mention sending pallets of cash in the dark of night.
The best we can hope for is a new, cooperative regime birthed by a popular uprising in Iran. And that's not looking promising at the moment. We're in a difficult position but that I think action was necessary.
Not clear if this is knowledge the public didn't already have access to if it looked (people are too lazy and complacent to do the work required). The point you may be making is there is solid rationale for the attack - yet you and many others still try and suggest otherwise. How are you squaring that circle???? Have you now shifted your views on the attack? Very unclear from your summary. In any event it proves the point that it isn't easy being President and thank God we have one who is comfortable making tough decisions and not simply kicking the can down the road.
There will be no ceasefire with the current regime, or what is left of it. President Trump knows this must continue until we not only control the sky, but the ground as well. Not with Soldiers and Marines, but politically. The next few weeks will be interesting.
How does controlling the ground politically without large numbers of US ground forces work?
The current regime falls, and an interim government is put in place that allows an international coalition to verify the end of its uranium enrichment, seize and enrich uranium and destroy its missile-making capability.
How does the current regime fall? Without large numbers of US ground forces?
I agree with Sherry 1. We weaken the current regime and cut off its ability to communicate and its access to funding. There are ethnicities, like the Kurds, who want autonomy over areas they already exert some control over. They can help smuggle in weapons to resisters closer to Tehran and other regime strongholds. We can also smuggle in internet devices so that people have access to information. Some in the regime want to be martyrs, but many do not and will look for ways out of the fight. The former Shah's son can lead a transitional government. This is very similar to 1979.
The people who have been in the streets since December. Protesting this murderous regime.
They are brave protestors. I don't think protesting by itself will lead to a ceasefire. It will unfortunately lead to the murderous regime killing more protestors.
Yes, they are. In regime change, which the people have been protesting for, the hope is the armed forces will refuse to kill their own people and join them in revolt. Iran’s IRGC, religious fanatics one and all, has to be taken ou first. If that happens, regular forces and regular police have a better chance of turning. Go to TousiTV.com for more insight. He has people and his father informing him from inside Iran and does very good reports.
Have you not been paying attention at all?
I've been trying to.
But I don't understand how controlling the ground politically without large numbers of US ground forces would work.
A brief explanation from a knowledgeable person like yourself would be much appreciated.
It's probably above all of our pay grades.
I hope Alex reads these comments. No reasonable person watching this thinks any part of this was ever easy. Acting, or not acting, has enormous consequences. Presidents ignoring the problem of Iran, or trying to just get through their terms without having to make tough decisions left the world in this position.
I disagree with many of Trump's quirks and methods, but someone had to say "yeah, this is risky, and markets are going to be wild, and I may even get shellacked in the midterms, but I am not going to ignore this" I guess that TACO thing looks stupid now.
LA, agree completely. I was always a mediocre chess player. I'd make a move expecting my opponent to make "just the right mistake," rather than expecting him to make the best move possible.
Looking at some of the names in Trump's cabinet, not to mention the staff (particularly military) supporting him, it's patently ridiculous to assert (much less believe) that closing the Straits came as a surprise. Nor that they lacked contingency plans.
Likewise with tariffs, agree or disagree, they knew within a reasonable degree the likely market reaction.
Sadly, we live in a world where discussion and argumentation stem principally from inane rage and ill will. Ad hominem has become the most accepted form of rebuttal. Just listen to the Kimmels and their ilk.
And, virtue signalling the highest form of bravery.
I still see a few in other forums using TACO. The level 4 TDS types of course!
Alex, you are really frustrating on this topic. I think it demonstrates your unresolved irrational dislike of Israel and maybe Jews in general.
When you about to enter an elevator and it is occupied by someone giving you a sense that you are in danger, it would be stupid to not ask the officer standing just outside to help ensure your safety instead of you being worried about the identity politics and just toughing it up and taking the risk for the sake of virtue signaling that you are good socially-aware person.
Now, it would be lunacy to ride the elevator when the thug in the elevator actually told you that he is going to try and kill you if you ride with him. And if he also told you that he is going to always be occupying that elevator and he is going to get some more dangerous weapons to bring along.
That is exactly the situation with Iran. The Iranian terrorist regime has for over four decades made it clear that they want to kill the US and Israel if it rides in the elevator, and Iran is pursuing more deadly weapons to make sure they do that killing well.
You are blaming and shaming the decision to prevent that. You are blaming the law enforcement to stop it from ever happening.
This isn't rational behavior. You seem to just want to ignore all the evidence of global malice and threats and image that Iran is just run by peaceful Mullahs.
If the Iran terrorist regime had not for years communicated its goals and intent to kill Americans and Israelis and destroy both countries, and has actually done so, as part of their fanatic extreme theocratic policies and proclamations, then I would 100% not support this joint operation to take out the threat.
So very well stated!
Speaking as a former homicide detective, you cannot kill someone because you claim he was trying to acquire a gun, and once he did, he was going to shoot you. Even if you claim he had been paying the neighbors to key your cars, do drive-by shootings, and have their dogs poop on your lawn without picking it up; especially if the person cooperated with the police when you called and reported the threats, allowed the police to search him and his household, and the police wrote a report that found no evidence that he had a gun or was going to acquire one. I have had many people in handcuffs threaten that they were going to kill me and my family when they got out of jail. I didn't kill them and claim self-defense.
This thug has not just claimed but has done the killing already. Check history including Oct-7. As a homicide detective I would hope you would take seriously the threat of murder from someone that has murdered before.
We live in a system of laws to maintain an orderly society. We have a social agreement that we will obey those laws, otherwise society and the world devolves into a vigilante hellhole. One of those laws is that we only use deadly force when the threat of death or serious injury is imminent, not future. I knew who the gang members were. I knew they had weapons they weren't supposed to have because they were convicted felons. I knew they were committing robberies, drive-by shootings, and in some cases murders that I could not prove. I knew they may commit another robbery or murder in the future. I would try to lock them up on lesser charges if possible, and worked diligently to investigate their crimes, but I didn't storm their house and kill them in their beds based upon future threats to society.
Oh, come on now. US law enforcement has been taking out gangs for the clear threat of violence they represent. The job of law enforcement is primarily crime prevention. Yes, there is due process, but when the house holding the gang members is surrounded to apprehend them to bring them to justice, and they hold up and start random shooting at everyone from inside the house, then it is the duty of law enforcement to take them out to ensure the safety of the public.
Apples and Oranges. International security is not a homicide investigation. Besides, Iran wasn't just paying it's neighbors to do the dirty work. They have shown the ability, the willingness, and the actual military action of firing missiles into Israel themselves.
You are comparing apples with oranges. And you can detain someone who threatens to shoot someone with a gun even if you haven’t seen it. Especially if they have a history of mental illness.
If you pay someone to kill another, you are as guilty of murder as the one who pulled the trigger. If you do it over&over you are guilty every time of committing murder.
Iran has been paying proxies for 47 years to do their dirty work, all the while we pretend it’s not so and hope the oil continues to flow.
Iran, its leaders/rulers/whatever (not those held hostage to that corrupt ideology/religion), has been waging war mostly thru its proxies to get to this point: the ability to launch a nuclear war against its enemies and the world. Midnight Hammer may have stopped further processing (maybe) but the ability to create a nuclear weapon is still on the table.
Iran has been found guilty, it has had its appeals - now it’s time to finish the execution.
The next time an oil tanker is prevented from traversing the Strait, Karg (?) island should be leveled - take away its majority revenue stream.
When religious leadership has been fully purged (and executed), all nuclear material and technology removed, then the west can move in to assist in the erection of a renewed economy
As a retired police officer this is the most asinine embarrassing comparison I have ever heard.
Criminal law and international law/UN Charter actually line up very closely on this issue.
On the street, a police officer can't shoot someone because they’re a “bad guy” who talks tough and might get a gun someday, even if they have used illegal force in the past. Each use of force incident is evaluated separately. You need an imminent threat, no reasonable alternatives, and proportional force: Opportunity, Ability, Imminent Jeopardy, and Preclusion.
Internationally, it’s the same logic. The UN Charter only allows force in self‑defense against an actual or truly imminent attack. The Caroline standard says preemptive force is only lawful when the danger is “instant and overwhelming,” with “no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.”
In criminal law that's “gun coming out right now,” not “he might arm himself in the future.”
So no, it’s not asinine, it’s the exact same legal firewall between fear and justified force.
International Law? You're kidding, right? Are you going to call the international police for a violation?
All the homicide detectives I knew operated on logic. I don't know what universe you're operating in but it isn't a logical one.
No one understood many things about Islamic fundamentalism until 9/11- and if the Iranians set off a small nuke in NY harbor we'd all be outraged that our government did nothing to prevent it. These folks are a death cult and willing to kill everyone - especially women- who do not adhere to their version of Islam.
They're so awful they'd probably bomb a school of girls.
Have you read anything by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? That sort of flip comment suggests you no nothing about the treatment of women in fundamentalist Islamic countries.
Ayaan is great!
You might be surprised to discover that I can find the Iranian regime detestable AND am against unnecessary wars at the same time.
The Quran tells them they must kill the infidels. World domination is their goal and if they are ever in charge it will be convert to Islam and live by Sharia law or you will die. The Quran says girls as young 6 can be given in marriage to men. The Prophet Mohammed married his wife, Ayesha, when she was 6 and had sex with her when she was 9. They are not awful, they're evil.
Allow me to throw a wrench into your logic. Treasurer Scott Bessent making statements on CNBC’s Squawk Box about oil tanker traffic resuming in the strait amid the ongoing Iran conflict.
Key points from Bessent’s interview and related reports:
• The U.S. is currently “fine” with allowing some ships—particularly Iranian, Indian, and Chinese tankers—to transit the Strait of Hormuz to help supply global markets and ease oil price pressures.
• He noted that Iranian ships have already been getting through, Indian vessels are now transiting, and some Chinese ones are believed to have passed.
• This is seen as a “natural opening” where Iran is permitting limited traffic (especially for non-U.S./Israel/allied vessels), before any potential U.S. Navy escorts or international coalition efforts begin.
This overture means a wedge between Iran and BRICS partners who depend on oil from Iran. Should oil not flow, these partners are going to support regime change and that change would be necessary to keep America from becoming default controller of the straits (it’s a two way blockade). New regime would need to be friendly to Israel and American interests and that means no Nukes. The West has more than two levels to pull and Basset has already weakened Iran’s position. There are always more moves on a 3D strategic chessboard than meets the eye.
Today Trump announce a blockade of Hormuz following a failed attempt to negotiate a deal. Now we wait and see how the international community responds to having their oil flow severely inhibited.
One really must wonder about our prior soft-stances mustn't one...
Maybe some people don't like bombing schools on behalf of an "ally" on questionable intelligence?
Neither does our military or our political leadership. There hasn't been a war fought yet where an accident like that doesn't happen.
Yes and the building of schools and hospitals over or next-door to obvious military targets is a tactic chosen by evil regimes themselves.
If that is the case, we should ask ourselves how many innocent children are we willing to sacrifice to meet our ally's goals before even starting such an endeavor.
What would you suggest is an acceptable number?
I don't know, what's the acceptable number of Americans killed by Iran? (I'll give you a hint, it's exponentially higher than this accident). Stop with the silliness. Zero is acceptable, we both know that before you started typing. After 47 years of terrorizing the Middle East and threatening world security, you can't let suicidal lunatics have nuclear weapons because a bad accident might happen. That's on Iran, not us.
It has not even been determined that this was our bomb. Head over to Coffee Nd Covid, several days ago, for the full analysis and map view.
We could at least apologize for it.
Agreed, but why don't we wait until the ink dries on the assessment report on the incident?
I have to ask what would be gained from such an apology? It would give MSM a field day and a way to make Trump a child killer also IMO, nothing good would come of it and the kids would still be dead, Sorry.
See Matt Tardio's analysis on YouTube or X of the missile that hit the school and its trajectory. The wings of the missile are set 40% from the nose, while the wings of Tomahawk are 50% back from the nose. The missile has a fan jet underneath, while Tomahawk does not. The dive angle is 80 degrees while the limit of the Tomahawk is 70 degrees. The missile came form the north, while Tomahawks from the ships would have arrived from the south. See "Speak the Truth" in YouTube.
Amazing Analysis! Insightful technical detail!
You should pass along this link to the Pentagon. They are (foolishly) stating that they did, in fact, hit the school and it was a "targeting error based on outdated intelligence."
If only they knew that the Tomahawk wings are 50% back from the nose! Fools!
The Pentagon is investigating this and they will likely arrive at the correct conclusion. They have to be very careful and detailed in their investigation because their results will be challenged. I recommended that you see Matt Tardio's analysis video in "Speak the Truth". It is subtitled "Iran Kills Children" and it was about 5 days ago.
Read Jeff Childers’ Coffee and Covid newsletter from several days ago for his in depth analysis of the school bombing, if you’re interested in another perspective and additional information you won’t hear anywhere else, Brian.
I read C & C all the time. I love his optimism. But that doesn’t mean he is always right.
I agree, Tom. I did not say he was always correct. I recommended this for another perspective.
I thought the dems were against fossil fuels so it serves the purpose if we have higher gas prices, like here in California where, because of Newsom, we have the second highest gas prices in the country.
What state has higher gas prices than CA? Closing refineries that are leaving CA isn’t helping the situation either. CA is a mess.
Hawaii
Just checked and actually CA does have the highest gas prices. 🙏🏽
I was going to comment on that because every time I have been there in the past several years, their prices have been lower than ours in CA.
And I thought they hated Trump's campaign promises, but yesterday one made a stink that he broke his no-war campaign pledge. Unfortunately, I was too dimwitted to point this out.
She also spoke about the gas shortages, or maybe that was the other Democrat at the table.
Alex , everything you just wrote proves Trump is smarter than Bush. Everything indicates Iran does in fact , have , or have the ability to make a “ weapon of mass destruction “
Yet Trump , learning from history , has not used those words. It also explains why the invasion was necessary.
Their incessant chants of death to America were finally countered. Good will win over here. And Iran is now terribly weakened to make sure that it does.