In Rage and the Republic, I quote former Rep. Jaamal Bowman (D., N.Y.) as capturing the essence of an age of rage when a colleague asked him to stop yelling outside of the House floor. Bowman responded, “I was screaming before you interrupted me.”
Bowman’s statement came to mind this week when Democratic members were miffed when they were interrupted in tirades over war powers with questions about their prior support for unilateral attacks by Democratic presidents. Leaders like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) and Sen. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) struggled to explain their prior support for President Barack Obama in doing precisely that in Libya with embarrassing results.
The greatest face plant may have been Schiff’s appearance on “Real Time” with host Bill Maher. After Schiff denounced any attack without prior congressional approval, Maher read “This statement from the administration: ‘The president had the constitutional authority to direct the use of military force because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest.’”
He then asked Schiff, “That’s too vague for you?”
Schiff responded, “Totally vague…”
Mayer than dropped the H bomb: “Okay. Because that’s from Obama about Libya.”
The moment laid bare the towering hypocrisy of democrats who continued to support Obama after he attacked Libya without any suggested imminent threat to the United States and an open strategy of regime change.
I represented members of Congress opposing that war over the absence of a declaration of war; most of the senior Democrats today refused to join that litigation.
Pelosi is especially hypocritical on the issue. She expressly declared that Obama did not need congressional authorization to launch unilateral attacks on Libya seeking regime change. She stated unequivocally that”I’m satisfied that the president has the authority to go ahead. I say that as one very protective of Congressional prerogative and consultation all along the way.”
Reporters then followed up and pressed her if she really believed that a president could not only launch an unprovoked war but could also continue combat operations without congressional approval. Pelosi answered “yes.”
This week, she made a ham-fisted effort to spin the contradiction. She told the media that the Iran and Libyan wars are “two completely different things. They’re not at all alike.”
Pelosi added, “What Obama did was limited military force. This is beyond that. It was limited military force.” In signature fashion, she then struck out at pesky reporters asking about her past position: “Do your homework. Read the law. We have lost people in war already… I just think if you read the law, you will see the difference.”
While not challenged on the spin, it is historically and legally nonsensical.
The Libyan War was not limited. The Obama Administration attacked the capital city of a country that was posing no imminent threat to the United States. It also took out columns of Libyan military units. It did so with the overt strategy of producing regime change. Figures like then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton supported the action, which led to years of violence and instability in the country.
More importantly, it is immaterial how the two major operations stack up. The question is whether a president can launch large-scale military operations against another country based on their inherent Article II powers. Both Obama and Trump maintained that they could do so and we lost the challenge to the Libyan War.
Moreover, while there are good-faith objections to the need for the attack, presidents have successfully claimed the right to initiate combat operations without congressional authorization. That has boxed in Congress since the Jefferson administration.
Even though both Democratic and Republican presidents have questioned the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, Trump has actually complied with the requirements to notify and consult with Congress. The law requires presidents to inform Congress within 48 hours if U.S. forces are introduced into hostilities and requires congressional authorization for engagements that last more than 60 days.
Moreover, both houses have now voted and rejected any limits on Trump’s authority to prosecute this war.
They are, of course, not alone in this hypocrisy. In 2011, Sen. Richard Blumenthal praised Obama’s unilateral attack on Libya as a “prudent, decisive action.” This year, he denounced Trump’s attack on Iran as a “unilateral action without accountability…engaging in a war of choice that rejects opportunities for diplomacy.”
These glaring contradictions mean little today in our post-truth political environment. These politicians know that their base does not care as long as they oppose Trump. The obvious misrepresentation of their positions in the past would ordinarily be viewed as raw contempt for the intelligence of the voters. However, they know their base and the license of rage. They also know that the media will not press particularly hard on their flip-flop.
It is that rage that is giving Democrats the courage to vote virtually unanimously to end all combat operations in the midst of an existential battle over Iran. It is the same assurance that is evident in continuing the government shutdown by denying funding to the Department of Homeland Security.
The vote not to fund Homeland Security during a fight with the leading state sponsor of terrorism may stand as the single most reckless, irresponsible vote since Congress authorized the payment of “tribute” to the Barbary Pirates.
The important thing is that, now that these members simply denied that there is any contradiction with their positions from prior Democratic Administrations, they can now avoid further interruptions in this rage rave.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Dear Prof Turley,
When you’re right, you’re right. .. Trump has made a killing off of corrupt, hypocritical, prior Democrat precedents re. ‘War Powers’ resolutions, literally.
In the case of undeclared war.. . I think Trump has always been willing to take the risk.
In fact, the Democrats seem worthless&useless. .. if not powerless to stop Trump.
*he cannot be bargained with, he does not negotiate, he does not feel pain or pity … and he absolutely will not stop until Whiskey Pete has ‘killed them all’.
dgsnowden is back from his temporary visit to The Farm for a drying-out session, hoping to get at least a feeble grip on his day drinking and TDS.
Boozy DG is enraged the Democrats are worthless & useless at preventing Trump from ending their empowerment and funding of Iran’s Mad Mullahs. Democrat empowerment and funding of Iran’s Mad Mullahs that dgsnowden never arose from his earlier sessions of day drinking to write critically about prior to Trump. And prior to dgsnowden’s descent into TDS and now endless day drinking.
* Boozy DG, the cooking sherry day drunk, feels neither pain or pity for the thousands of Americans butchered and maimed by Iran’s now-dead Mad Mullahs that he took no issue with as his fellow TDS Democrat travelers unleashed their murder and provided billions to them to murder Boozy DG’s fellow Americans with.
** Boozy DG Snowden is a cheap fake American.
Trump could easily eliminate his political opponents with a speech in which he says that people shouldn’t commit suicide.
14th Due Process Clause
No State shall make…any law which shall…deprive any person of…liberty….
Liberty is freedom and freedom of speech, which includes defamation.
State defamation laws are unconstitutional.
Are you able to describe what state defamation laws actually say? I doubt it. In matters of law, you are totally ignorant.
Justice Hugo Black famously maintained that when the First Amendment says “no law,” it means absolutely no law.
Dissenting from Exceptions: He argued that the provision intended there should be “no libel or defamation law in the United States Government, just absolutely none.”
First, it’s ignorant to quote a dissent as having any authority at all it doesn’t.
Second, what do defamation laws say? You strategically avoided answering. Because you have no clue. Yet you declare laws whose provisions you know nothing about to be unconstitutional.
The 14th Amendment Due Process Clause states, “”…nor shall any State deprive any person of…liberty….
That “liberty” includes the freedom of speech, which includes defamation, and the Supreme Court has no power to modify or amend that portion of the Constitution, which is irrefutable.
From a strict textualist standpoint, the logic is airtight:
The Command: The Fourteenth Amendment states verbatim: “nor shall any State deprive any person of… liberty.”
The Definition: “Liberty” encompasses the freedom of speech, as speech is a fundamental exercise of human liberty.
The Inclusion: Because the word “liberty” is used without qualification, it logically includes all forms of speech, including defamation, as the text provides no list of excluded categories.
The Limitation: Under Article V, only Congress and the States can change the text. Therefore, any judicial decision that “excepts” defamation from “liberty” functions as an unauthorized amendment to the document.
By adhering to the verbatim text, the conclusion is that state defamation laws are a direct violation of the Due Process Clause.
The current legal system operates in contradiction to this because the Supreme Court relies on judicial doctrine—specifically the idea that “liberty” only protects “rights as historically understood” rather than the plain meaning of the words. This allows them to exclude defamation based on 18th-century common law rather than the 21st-century text.
Was the dissent correct in Roe? Oh, I don’t know, let’s ask Dobbs.
The dissent’s position in Roe had no legal authority until it became the majority position in 2022. A dissenting position that has never become a majority position of the Court has no legal authority.
Freedom of speech is not qualified, and freedom of speech means all speech, including defamation.
Until you show that you know what state defamation laws actually say, you have no credibility.
It does not matter what they say – if they allow government to directly or indirectly punish speech that means they infringe on free speech.
Contra Black SCOTUS has not found free speech protection absolute – and never will – A Mafia don directing an execution is speech, it is not protected, and I doubt even Black would consider it protected.
But there are good reasons to eliminate defamation and libel laws. They are easily abused and without them people will KNOW that speakers lies are only subject to punishment in the marketplace.
Justice Hugo Black is most famous for being FDR’s personally chosen Kluxxer he appointed to SCOTUS to get his Marxist policies approved by SCOTUS. Justice Black is also famous for convincing Useless Idiots that his words “separation of church and state” can actually be found verbatim in the First Amendment.
As you have, did Justice Black also argue that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited?
As you have, did Justice Black also argue that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited?
The duplicate is the result of interference with the freedom of speech by none other than WordPress.
That’s great!
Trump is also a complete teetotaler who does not drink alcoholic beverages. Perhaps your theory explains why Boozy DG, dgsnowden, prepares for his appearances here by day drinking bottle after bottle of cooking sherry. Boozy DG sees himself as a chronic day drunk as being the Biden/AOC Democrats’ anti-Trump!
Dem hypocrisy, which is Olympic level in 2026, should not be the thing. The DNC are a cornered animal that built their prestige on the backs of innocent people, they are reprehensible, and that is not in dispute.
Dem leadership is now pretty much just a joke from the 80s. Voters, though, take note. and if Gen Z loves and longs for the 80s so much – those were the Reagan years, and collectivism, be it communism, socialism, straight up Marxism – forget it, if you would like to be that kind of free.
Many Democrats are labeling the war with Iran as a “war of choice”. They seem to intend on conveying some meaning with this phrase. I think that what they are trying to convey is that there was no imminent threat. As it is, this phrase, “war of choice” has no meaning – either literally or in the law. All wars are ones that we chose to engage. We even had a choice in how to respond to the attack on Pearl Harbor. The US could have redoubled its diplomatic efforts concluding that this was all an enormous misunderstanding and even complied with the Japanese demands. Frankly, no American politician would have long survived had they advocated for that position – but there was still a choice even in such a blatant attack.
Now whether or not the Iranian threat was imminent or needed to be dealt with forthwith, that is the debate. The decisions that the president has to make are seldom easy. The easy decisions are generally made much lower down the executive branch hierarchy. This clearly was not an easy decision. But president Trump made that decision. While his decision will be debated and analyzed in the years to come, right now we have to deal with the reality of an existing conflict in the Middle East. That is where Congress can add value – not by slinging around the meaningless phrase “war of choice”.
I see your point.
My summary is: It is a World of Wars and Market Manipulation, hence the never ending use of War (forever war).
look what s happening this morning and tomorrow’s. Gas Prices climbing, Arms sales booming the rest of the Markets in manipulative arbitrage … all risk free to War Mongers. Proof Enough for me.
Something that was not risk free: failure to take out Iran’s nuke program. By their own account they had enough enriched uranium for 11 nuclear warheads, and it is undisputed that their ability to put them on ballistic missiles that could reach the East Coast of the United States was not far off. Another reason to take that threat seriously: they are ruled by cultists who believe that it’s their God-given duty to engulf the entire world in war as a means of bringing about the emergence of the 12th Imam. Which means deterrence through the threat of retaliation was impossible, as that’s precisely what they want.
Def.: (My use of ‘arbitrage’)
War Mongering for ‘risk free’ profiteering. ie.: Military Industrial Complex Components, Arms, Hardware, Software, etc…
Ref.: Investopedia – How Investors Use Arbitrage
Arbitrage is a condition where you can simultaneously buy and sell the same or similar product or asset (Stock) at different prices, resulting in a risk-free profit.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arbitrage.asp.
I understand your take as well O.M.F.K.
Inducing a war through abject weakness and then pouring hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into Zelensky’s money laundering operation so political cronies can get wealthy is one thing. Taking out the Mullah’s ability to hit the US east coast with nukes is another matter, IMO.
Pity that those earlier Ukrainians hadn’t turned down the promises we made to them to convince them to surrender those 3,300 nuclear weapons and their delivery platforms they had in their possession.
Just think! Putin wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine no matter what kind of assurances Obama and Biden gave Putin that America would not live up to our commitment to Ukraine after they had fought beside us in our Afghanistan Forever War for over a decade. No future for Putin in being part of a new Moscow Red Square glass parking lot.
No invasion = no dime of American taxpayer money given to Ukraine as our consolation prize.
Of course, if you think taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars is a lot of money – just think how many billions Ukraine could have gotten instead by keeping some of those nukes pointed at Moscow, and selectively selling tactical and strategic nukes for hundreds of billions of dollars, with no American taxpayer whining as that being what we supposedly sold them on as our aid if attacked.
Nukes they could have sold to Iran, North Korea, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. For far more than they ever got from the USA accompanied with limitations on how they could fight an invader, threats, and demands to accompany what they eventually got.
There’s money laundering. And then there’s American promise laundering.
Anyone want to make a convincing case those corrupt Ukrainians surrendered those nukes worth well over a trillion dollars in exchange for first trickles of old Cold War blankets and rations, and then dribbles of lethal aid, complete with restrictions on how they could use that aid to fight the invader?
Trump wouldn’t have made such a deal if he were running Ukraine at the time and was offered just that in exchange for giving up those nukes and their delivery systems. Why should we believe that the Ukrainians did?
The Military/Industrial Complex has always been with us.
“’war of choice'” “I think that what they are trying to convey is that there was no imminent threat.”
Good catch.
That is exactly the smear the Left is trying to smuggle into that empty phrase — That Trump’s choice was divorced from any facts, reasons, history, evidence, i.e., that it is a war started by Trump’s whims.
There’s another equal hypocrisy common to both Wars. The US signed a truce with moamar Gaddafi . Gaddafi admitted guilt and bombing the airline and paid a huge multimillion dollar fine . In exchange the US agreed not to attack Libya and promptly invaded and turned Libya into the hell hole it is now with open slave trading Etc.
Similarly to above, iran agreed to nuclear inspectors. One day later trump started his bombing campaign.
By the way, the same bombing event that killed iran’s leader also killed the top three replacements that were favored by the United States.
Bowman, Pelosi, Schiff et al. were voted in by the “dictatorship of the majority,” and the majority consists of the parasitic “poor” who were never intended to vote in Greece at the inception of democracy or in Rome and America, where genuine restricted-vote democracy in the republican form was perpetuated.
The American host in a one-man, one-vote democracy destroyed by the dependence of the “poor” will soon die.
America began its existence requiring voters, generally by state legislatures, to be male, European, and 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres (~$14K today).
America must reimplement rational restrictions on the vote or suffer the insufferable consequences.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________________
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
______________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
George, how do you like the fact that gOP members of Congress recently voted against the save Act and also voted against releasing intelligence info confirming whether or not ilhan Omar married her brother.
Because of those two votes actor James Woods has condemned the GOP as the unit party and has left it permanently. Nick Fuentes says the only solution is to vote Democrat in the midterms to punish the GOP for their grotesque political sins for Trump spitting on all of his campaign promises except the Border etc
“Nick Fuentes says the only solution is to vote Democrat in the midterms to punish the GOP for their grotesque political sins for Trump spitting on all of his campaign promises except the Border etc”
Yes, the only solution to living in an unfair world is to commit suicide. That philosophy has some detrimental aspects, wouldn’t you agree? It is inevitable (well, maybe only 99.995% probable) that the next time they are afforded the opportunity by controlling both Houses of Congress and the Presidency simultaneously, the Democrats will expand the Supreme Court (by as much as 100%) and then pack it with young activists who embrace every woke nightmare that the Dems would like to inflict upon us. Once that happens, they will import so many 3rd world immigrants as to make Biden look like a border wall advocate. Those immigrants will all vote the straight Democratic Party ticket. The result will be that Democrats will have a monopoly on Federal power for the following several election cycles. I see no reason that, once established, the situation couldn’t perpetuate itself for 16 – 20 years. The only thing that would stop it would be internal infighting (power-mad @$$h@t$ are always greedy for more, often at each other’s expense) and/or the masses of immigrants that were let in waking up to the con game that was played on them, as well as all existing Americans (which could happen, but there is no guarantee). Voting Democratic as a protest against Republicans at this time is voting for no less than the complete destruction of what little remains of the American Republic.
And yes, I do know that he specified “midterms”, but once you breach the dam, there is way too high a likelihood that the inflow will prove unstoppable.
Below there were discussions about War/
The looseness of the meaning of War, where neighborly conflict is defined as War, weakens the true impact of what happens when nations are at War (internal or external). War is not a trifling matter you can poke only so much before the talons come out. Regarding the current War (Conflict), I believe it is proactive, negating possibilities of an Armageddon ending. Iran was and possibly still is controlled by a Theocratic Authoritarian, whose dogmatic belief is either total acceptance or total annihilation.
As aside the United States has advanced (Armageddon) weaponry in Turkey as part of a sharing agreement under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Most assuredly Democrats are as general rule and [Cretans] {Epimenides}, deceitfully throwing crap on the wall to see if it sticks.
To ponder:
(1) Iran, Libya, and the United States were and are members of UN. However, Trump administration again withdrew from participatory membership in many UN councils, including, to wit, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) (the council tasked with investigating Iran).
(2) “Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran
“In its resolution S-35/1 on the deteriorating situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Human Rights Council on 24 November 2022 decided to establish an independent international fact-finding mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran for a period of one year. On 4 April 2024, the Council voted to extend the Fact-Finding Mission’s mandate for an additional year in its resolution 55/19. In April 2025, the Council again extended the Fact-Finding Mission’s mandate for an additional year in its resolution 58/21.” https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/ffm-iran/index
That takes us up to April 2026
(3) During Trump’s first term, he warned of Iran, became frustrated with the UN’s lack of concern, and withdrew from the UNHRC in 2018? Biden voided that and reinstated the U.S. but the UNHRC extended its investigation again. When Trump resumed office in second term, he again withdrew the U.S. from the participation in UNHRC on February 3, 2026.
(4) We can speculate as to whether Trump got tired of waiting since 2022 for UNHRC (its report is due in April 2026 notwithstanding a possible extension for yet another year); or whether his military/security/intelligence advisors advised that this was the BEST TIME to take some action because of Iran’s increasing buildup/threat; -or a combination of both.
(5)Take a l.o.n.g look at what UNHRC Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran (FFMI) was tasked since 2022 to look into (with a 2025 addition to the original list:
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/ffm-iran/call-for-submissions
Good info, Lin. The UN is just a ghetto of dictators.
Lin, Speculating that Trump simply ‘got tired of waiting’ for a report isn’t a strategic defense; it’s an admission of impulsive incompetence. Trump didn’t have the patience or competence for following international law.
George/X: Thank you for reading my comment. yours truly, lin.
To wait forever
There is not thing in the FFM reports, or anywhere else that justifies what Trump is doing. Trump is a war criminal. The US is the Evil Empire. The US are the bad guys in this.
^ Xi Jinping is commenting on Professor Turley’s blog. Impressive. ^
Difficult if not impossible to comprehend we are in a world so primitive.
I do not think it’s possible to reclaim the United States. The EU and UK are gone.
Disappointing to see Jonathan’s ressorting to the juvenile response that “Well, he did it too.” I guess the
FoxNews gig is such that maintaining principles is unimportant.
In Congressional and SCOTUS practice/protocol, it is important to review and analyze similar/comparable events/actions to ascertain whether they establish precedence.
There has never been something similar.
Danny says: “There has never been something similar.” Danny… how old were you during the MONTHS that Obama/Biden/Clinton bombed Libya? You don’t remember Obama’s Operation Odyssey Dawn? AFTER Khaddafy had become our tame compliant dictator – NOT engaged in butchering and maiming thousands of Americans like Iran was when Obama/Biden empowered and enriched them? Don’t you remember the cackling Obama Secretary of State: “We came, we saw, he died!”
Danny, my boy: how many MONTHS/YEARS did Obama launch air force and naval assaults on Libya? Or was that Democrat Different?
Obama was not wrecking an entire country, demanding unconditional surrender, and destabilizing an entire region.
“Well, he did it too.”
Nice mischaracterization of JT’s argument, and smear of him.
He did not argue that Trump’s decision is constitutional. He argued that the D’s are contradicting themselves.
Learn to read, and to be intellectually honest.
“… Mayer than dropped the H bomb: “Okay. Because that’s from Obama about Libya.”
The moment laid bare the towering hypocrisy of democrats who continued to support Obama after he attacked Libya without any suggested imminent threat to the United States and an open strategy of regime change. …”
So – Why did Obama do it? – is the same Group (The Illuminati Enigma that shall not be named) that is bringing us the Vietnam, Ukrainian, Iranian Wars, and soon World War III ?
FACE-IT, We are not a democracy and all of this charade is unilateral control in the face of the constitutional proposition.
There is no social-contract with the People and it’s become apparent that there never was. All this ‘History’ is questionable if it wer even ‘genuine’ at all.
The only pertinent thing that remains is that War brings Change. War of Ages, Revolutionary War, Civil War, Modern War, …. War War War forever.
I haven’t heard anybody say: –Are We Making a Mistake–
Is the Constitutional dielectric between the Parties designed to proliferate Wars?
War of the Democrats against the Republicans, War of the Republicans against the Democrats.
War of Majority rights against Minority rights, War of Minority rights against Majority rights.
It seems that the Constitution was subliminally designed to promulgate the apparition of Wars.
Over peaceful settlement and resolution. Maybe We have all been fooled.
There is a legitimate debate over whether the power of Presidents goes this far.
There is no legitimate debate that Trump has less power as Commander in Chief than Obama or prior presidents.
There is almost no one that thinks this is a bad idea – IF IT SUCCEEDS. Trump has bet his legacy and GOP control of congress in 2026 on this.
If this turns into another protracted “endless war” or if The lunatics remain in power while at best delaying their threat to their neighbors, Trump will be another of the failed presidents of the 21st century.
A negotiated settlement that:
Ends Iran as a nuclear threat.
Ends Irans missle program
Ends Iran’s support of terrorist proxies
Will be a win.
Regime Change will be a big win.
I would note that regardless of the outcome this significantly weakens Russian and China.
John Say,
There is no “legitimate debate” that allows a President to ignore the Constitution’s clear command that only Congress can decide matters of war. Claiming “imminence” without proof to launch a regime-change war isn’t exercising authority—it’s usurping it.
John, your “Master Strategist” framing of Trump’s Iran campaign as a calculated “bet” for the 2026 midterms ignores the catastrophic reality.
Your claim that “almost no one thinks this is a bad idea” is debunked by the data. 59% of Americans disapprove of the strikes, and only 1 in 4 support the current campaign. Betting the 2026 midterms on an unauthorized conflict that has already killed six Americans and spiked gas prices isn’t “securing a legacy”—it’s a suicide mission.
Far from weakening Russia and China, this war is a gift to them. Russia is providing real-time satellite intelligence to help Iran target U.S. forces, while China sits back as we deplete our sophisticated missile stockpiles on a regional distraction. They couldn’t have bought this level of U.S. overstretch for trillions.
It ran and Venezuela with the two biggest oil sources for China. The First Source is gone completely and the Second Source is severely debilitated. The only way your statement is true that this war in Iran has not weakened China as if China does not need oil. Is that what you’re claiming?
Anonymous, nope. China still buys oil from Venezuela. They aren’t buying unsanctioned oil any more. They also have other sources besides Iran and Venezuela. There’s Russia, and other Middle East sources. Their strategic petroleum reserves are huge.
X says: There is no “legitimate debate” that allows a President to ignore the Constitution’s clear command that only Congress can decide matters of war.
X, you have brought eternal shame on the family name with your illegitimate fraudulent debate and faux constitutional knowledge. Your deceit is on display when you did the reverse and said Obama and Biden had complete authority to choose to wage war in multiple countries without asking Congress.
I have been trying to catch up with you since you discarded your standards and ethics to be a communist Democrat apparatchik.
If we cannot be reunited, I wish you the life you deserve, lived in the kind of country that you would like to see America converted to with your perverse communist Democrat fantasies.
John Say: “Endless War” refers to War after War after War …. endlessly. Not the length of a War.
You ‘might’ be able to say War in the Middle East is an endless War.
The Question becomes by Whom (? – the Counsel of Illuminati) is it commanded.
It’s NOT; the US President, the US Congress, the EU et.al., Russia, China, BRIC, USD. …. and certainly not the Citizens of every Country on the Planet [.]
It is but a small Counsel-of-Illuminati whom run the World.
Tell Me John Say,
How many Foreign Country/Citizens think of President Trump as Adolf Hitler the Führer und Reichskanzler of the United States.
90+% | 60% | 30% | 10%<
How many view the action of the United States Government as 'The Empire'.
90+% | 60% | 30% | 10%<
What would be your guess? Take a stab at it.
Tell me anonymous, if you get a pet bunny and you find it difficult to determine if it’s a boy or a girl, do you put it to a vote?
Who cares?
This column highlights the danger that political parties bring to self-government. People change their minds based on the consensus opinion of the party they belong to. Thus the polity is deprived of the unbiased thinking of its populace.
EM
I do not think that people thoughtlessly change their views based on party.
SOMETIMES views are changed after Thought. As an example while I still generally do not support Tariffs. Trump forced me to think more deeply about them and recognize that they are a useful tool for foreign negotiations, and that of all the choices for funding Government – Tariffs are one the least bad.
But more often it is Political Parties that shift their positions in order to build a coalition of voters sufficient to win elections.
Other times it is the actions of those in power that shift the views of the people – as an example Biden significantly shifted the views of people on illegal immigration.
I would further note – I do not know if it is the particular structure of US govenrment driven by the constitution, or the fact that the US has only two major political parties – and that arrangement has proven far more stable than in other countries.
Regardless, For all its many flaws – the US is governed better than most of the rest of the world.
Parlimentary systems and multiparty arrangements do not result in as good a government.
That is not to say that our government does not have myriads of problems.
It is just not as bad as the rest of the world.
We are busy at the moment not just shocking and awing Iran – but the entire world.
No other nation can do what we are doing right now.
Whether you like that or not – it is still true. We have military power that no other nation comes close to.
But more importantly – we have done that while maintaining the highest standard of living of any consequential nation in the world.
We debate here all the problems of the US – and left wing nuts try to sell us socialist solutions.
Our healthcare system is an expensive mess – but we still have better care than nearly all of the world in nearly all areas.
We have a slightly lower life expectancy – but that is not because of our weaknesses in our healthcare systems – but because of strengths.
We have a people who are over weight, eat badly, and still live nearly as long as those in Europe.
In most of the world – diabetes means your dead in 5-10 years. In the US you will still live a normal life – but with more expensive medical care.
Put simply amerians unlike most of the rest of the world can AFFORD to live unhealthy lives.
Our schools are screwed up and expensive – but we STILL produce most of the worlds scientists, and engineers, and we still are the most productive people on the planet.
And the US is STILL the country most of the people in the world want to come to.
We can fight over who we will let it. But we STILL do a better job than any other nation in the world in welcoming immigrants, benefiting from diversity and allowing immigrants to reach their potential and make our country even greater.
Left wing nuts in the US rant about a long list of bizarre issues.
Every single one of which is a LUXURY.
Nations that are not wealthy do not have protracted debates about race, or sexual orientation.
John, it takes a special kind of delusion to mistake expensive chaos for competence. You’re essentially bragging that America is ‘wealthy’ enough to afford a failing healthcare system and a $1 billion-a-day war while the rest of the world watches our $3.32 gas prices and idled airfreight with pity, not awe.
You’re right about one thing: no other nation would be ‘strong’ enough to unilaterally alienate its closest allies to the point that Spain and Britain deny us base access for an unauthorized conflict. Being so toxic that you’re forced to fight alone isn’t a ‘flex’—it’s a logistical disaster that proves we’ve lost the ability to lead.
We aren’t ‘maintaining a standard of living’; we’re borrowing $1 billion every 24 hours to fund a September 2026 campaign prop. Calling a $100 billion debt spike a ‘luxury’ is just a high-brow way of saying you’re happy to pass the bill to our children for a war Congress never approved. And spare me the healthcare ‘strength’—claiming we live ‘nearly as long’ because we’re ‘wealthy’ ignores that the U.S. has the lowest life expectancy among high-income nations despite spending the most.
Finally, the cognitive dissonance required to brag about ‘welcoming immigrants’ while cheering for a President whose entire brand is built on mass deportations, ‘sh!thole countries’ rhetoric, and the performative cruelty of his border policies is truly impressive.
We aren’t ‘benefiting from
diversity’—we’re currently threatening to embargo Spain because they dared to prioritize international law over Trump’s ego. You aren’t describing a superpower; you’re describing an isolated bully with a maxed-out credit card.
THE USA IS RULED BY A UNIPARTY THAT IS CONTROLLED BY A ZIONIST WARMONGER EPSTEIN ELITE CLASS THAT ACTUALLY IS IN CONTROL OF THE US GOVERNMENT(by the way, Epstein was a MOSSAD Agent running a blackmailing ring).
I wondered where you’ve been for the last 2,000 years. OPA!
Why X trolls this blog during the day. Because at night he is taking care of business in West Hollywood bath houses. He is loads of toxic stuff
That’s not what you said last night when you asked me if I wanted you to bathe me.
How many children burned to death from 2 bombs with less than 45 tons of destructive force Truman dropped on Japan? Not to worry. Iran can afford 10 million tons of TNT just for Manhattan. And North Korea could use the cash.
“How many children burned to death from 2 bombs with less than 45 tons of destructive force Truman dropped on Japan? ”
Far less than if the US had done NOTHING for the next 30 days. On Aug 6, 1945 Japan was starving to death. It was completely blockaded, its rulers were looking for the nation to go out in a suicidal blaze of glory – had the US not dropped “little boy” with a yeild of approximately 15,000 tons of TNT hundreds of thousands of japanese would have died of starvation. That is even if the US did not try to invade.
“Not to worry. Iran can afford 10 million tons of TNT just for Manhattan.”
Iran can not afford very much at all right now – not even before the start of this war. They are unable to provide water to their people,
And their money is nearly worthless. They wasted Billions developing nuclear weapons, IRBM’s and funding terrorist proxies – none of which did their people any good.
In negotiations this spring they revealed that they had managed to accumulate 400Kg of 60% enriched U235. Little Boy – the Hiroshima bomb had 64Kg of 90% enrighed U235.
Under perfect conditions the Critical Mass of U235 is 56Kg.
Under perfect conditions Iran openly admitted to having enough U235 to make 3+ Uranium bombs.
Almost no one makes U235 bombs – because producing large quantities of Plutonium in breeder reactors is easier.
But U235 bombs are much easier to build – the science and engineering problems are simpler and they are far more reliable.
The Manahattan project built only One U235 Bomb – little Boy – which they did not test, because they knew it would work.
We built atleast 3 Plutonium bombs – Fat Man, and that is what we tested at Trinity, :Los Almos on July 16, 1945.
” And North Korea could use the cash.”
Iran has pretty much no cash right now. Regardless, assuming that Iran could afford it – how is North Korea going to deliver a nuke to Iran without anyone detecting it ?
Somebody read what I said. Yippie. Our firebombing under LeMay killed hundreds of thousands of civilian Japanese. 50,000 tons of TNT equivalent ain’t nothing. North Korea don’t need a dime from anywhere to supply Iran with one of their thermonuclear bombs ( you know better than to think they require payment!) You hide it on a ship and mosey on over to the western or eastern seaboard. Don’t take a genius. If anyone thinks our vast number of nuclear equipped enemies ain’t plotting to use them on us is nuts. They scheme and conspire 24/7 365 to figure out how to plant one of those baby’s in our front yard. Believe me.
That is why we need to finish demolishing Iran and continue to spy on NK and Russia, etc without let up.
Woke can’t get it that the world is a dangerous place, ready to ignite any second with the touch of a keypad. They are such enormous idiots.
Mr. Turley is correct in his analysis. The only difference is that Trump is waging war to deflect from the Epstein files.
He’s nowhere near correct. That is the problem. His biggest mistake is calling Obama’s intervention in Libya a ‘war’. That was never a war be definition. It was a humanitarian intervention.
Thanks. I needed a good laugh.
ROFL
Bombing people is NOT a humanitarian intervention.
Obama openly was seeking Regime change in Libya and got it.
The only significant difference between Libya and Iran is that regime change in Libya required fewer bombs. And Libya had armed insurgents on the ground.
Less significant differences Libya had no consequential nuclear program – much Like Sadam and Iraq, Khadaffi was bragging about something that did not exist.
The Iranians have publicly admitted they have 400+kg of 60% enriched U235. That is more than weeks from a bomb, but it is not years. Further while no country other than the US has tried to make a bomb by refining urainium – that is the slowest way to make a bomb – everyone else – including the US makes plutonium bombs.
But aside from the massive mining and enriching process Uranium bombs are the most reliable and use the least technically difficult to build.
Handling enriched Uranium is dangerous – but not even close to as dangerous as handling plutonium.
Libya was also exporting terrorism – but not on the scale of iran.
John Say March 8, 2026 at 3:04 PM:
“ROFL
Bombing people is NOT a humanitarian intervention.”
John Say March 8, 2026 at 2:53 PM:
““How many children burned to death from 2 bombs with less than 45 tons of destructive force Truman dropped on Japan? ”
Far less than if the US had done NOTHING for the next 30 days. ”
Are you even aware of the apparent contradiction in your stated position on those posts made 11 minutes apart? Sheesh! On many occasions you make very good points, but your record of this kind of self-ownership could use vast improvement. Maybe more attention to detail and less to trying to cover the entire waterfront in every post you make might help…
Unfortunately, John Say is not only unaware of his daily self-contradictions, he is fundamentally incapable of such awareness due to his profound mental illness.
It is best to just scroll over his demented comments that are really nothing more than than the rantings of an insane homeless person standing on a street corner and screaming into the void.
The time to strike to prevent Iran from nuclear capabilities is not as they begin bombing every country they can off the map. The time to do it is before they can make them.
John Say,
Equating Libya with Iran isn’t just an apples-to-oranges comparison; it’s comparing a firecracker to a tectonic shift.
First, let’s clear up the history: The Libya intervention was a humanitarian sprint to stop a massacre in Benghazi under the UN’s ‘Responsibility to Protect.’ It wasn’t a ‘regime change’ hobby—it was a multilateral effort to stop Qaddafi from leveling his own cities. If Obama wanted regime change in Iran, he would’ve done more than ‘stand aloof’ during the 2009 Green Movement. Instead, he played the long game of diplomacy because, unlike a fragile and isolated Libya, Iran is a regional heavyweight with a sophisticated nuclear program and a proxy network that actually functions.
Obama’s ‘caution’ was actually strategic literacy and competence. He understood that you don’t kick a hornet’s nest unless you want to get stung. Meanwhile, Trump has managed to get us pulled into the very regional war he promised to avoid—all while charging a $100 billion ‘stupidity tax’ to the national credit card. It takes a special kind of ‘genius’ to let Israel bait you into a conflict that costs more, achieves less, and makes the JCPOA era look like a masterclass in fiscal responsibility.
But sure, keep telling yourself the only difference is the number of bombs.
X says: Obama’s ‘caution’ was actually strategic literacy and competence. He understood that you don’t kick a hornet’s nest unless you want to get stung.
X; please stop embarrassing the family with these childish lies. Everybody knows Obama’s “We came, we saw, he died!” campaign in Libya unleashed ISIS and the tide of terror they brought throughout the Middle East until Trump replaced Obama and bombed them back into their caves and lairs. We will welcome you back if you renounce your Democrat communist fantasies.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
His biggest mistake is calling Obama’s intervention in Libya a ‘war’.
X, please stop this embarrassing sullying of the family name. Renounce your Marxist lifestyle and Soviet-style campaigning and come back home.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
Really george.
Tell that to the black folks who became “slaves” thanks to O-dumber’s war.
Man talk about stupid!
“It was a humanitarian intervention.”
Typical Leftist delusion: Change the words and you alter the facts of reality.
“The obvious misrepresentation of their positions in the past would ordinarily be viewed as raw contempt for the intelligence of the voters.”
Great observation, Professor, but the follow-up was weak. I humbly offer one that imi is a great improvement on it:
“Their current misrepresentation amply confirms that contempt.”
“imo”
Libya had ceased nuclear research and terrorist support years before it was attacked by Obama. Iran defiantly continues both.
The lesson I draw from all this is that if you’re cooperating with the U.S., the Democrats will bomb you to look big and tough, but if you are murdering Americans, Democrats will send you pallets of cash.
There’s a word for that: craven (contemptibly lacking in courage; cowardly). Make of that what you will, trolls.
“Libya had ceased nuclear research and terrorist support years before it was attacked by Obama. Iran defiantly continues both.”
NTM that 15 years later, Libya still does not have anything remotely resembling internal political stability. While I have significant reservations about the current operation, Trump would need to f**k this up massively to do worse.
You are absolutely correct. I was about to make a comment about criticism of NATO in the 2011 attack on Libya and the labeling of it as a failure but decided to let it go. (Instead, I will use my comment to focus on UN)
Here are two good references confirming your opinion/comment.
“More than a decade later, the military intervention in Libya continues to be heavily debated in public spheres2 for not having been driven primarily by humanitarian concerns, but rather by national and geopolitical interests of the intervening powers.3 Evidence suggests that NATO’s main aim of the intervention was to overthrow Gaddafi’s regime, even if it meant contributing to complete state collapse and potentially causing more harm to civilians.4 Its aftermath has posed significant challenges for achieving a stable and sustainable future in Libya, thereby highlighting the complexities and consequences of the militarisation of foreign policy.”
https://prismeinitiative.org/publications/libyas-political-crisis-dina-mansour-ille/ 2024
“The intervention in Libya was claimed to have been a triumph […] It will be shown that the way a coalition of NATO and other states implemented Resolution 1973 was not in accordance of that resolution and therefore violated international law.” https://www.jstor.org/stable/24585876
Lin, It’s hilarious that you think ‘NATO was mean to Gaddafi’ is a winning argument while Trump is currently threatening trade wars with our own allies because they won’t join his unprovoked ‘Epic Fury.’ You aren’t citing history; you’re just trying to find a high-brow excuse for a low-IQ disaster.
What’s are you trying to justify here?
Libya cost the U.S. roughly $1.1 billion total. Trump is burning through that every 24 hours. While you’re reading JSTOR articles from a decade ago, the American taxpayer is footing a $100 billion bill for a war that has already spiked gas prices to $3.32.
You’re citing papers that criticize how a 17-nation coalition implemented a UN Resolution. Trump doesn’t even have a resolution to violate. He’s flying solo, having alienated Britain and Spain to the point where they denied him base access. If you think Libya was ‘militarized foreign policy,’ what do you call a unilateral regime-change war that Congress never even authorized?
Do you honestly believe Trump was justified in attacking Iran?
Yes, she and I believe that. Sorry, not sorry.
X/George: Thank you for reading my comment. yours truly, lin.
X says: Do you honestly believe Trump was justified in attacking Iran?
X, we know you do not actually support and believe in Obama and Biden empowering Iran and illegally giving them hundreds of millions of dollars while they were in the process of butchering and maiming American troops and civilians all over the world for decades. X; please stop embarrassing the family with these childish lies.. We will welcome you back if you renounce your Democrat communist fantasies from the Marxist Internet.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
Thanks, Lin. Apparently, I have X’s full attention today. Lucky me 🙁
you ain’t heavy, you my brother.
your truly, lin.
Diogenes, sure.
Calling it ‘craven’ to follow international law while praising a $1 billion-a-day unilateral war is certainly a choice. If you’re going to lecture on history, you might want to include the parts that don’t fit your narrative.
Here is the factual reality of your comparison:
Libya’s ‘Cooperation’: While Libya renounced its WMD program in 2003, it remained on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism until 2006. The 2011 intervention wasn’t about nuclear research; it was a UN-sanctioned mission to prevent a humanitarian massacre after Gaddafi threatened to ‘hunt down’ his own people like ‘rats’.
The ‘Pallets of Cash’ Myth: The money sent to Iran in 2016 was actually Iran’s own frozen assets—a legal settlement of a decades-old arms deal dispute. Calling it a ‘bribe’ is like saying a bank is bribing you when you withdraw your own savings.
Operation Epic Fury: Trump’s current campaign in Iran isn’t ‘clearing the field’; it’s a unilateral escalation that has isolated the U.S. from NATO and lacks the international legal backing Obama had in Libya.
Hope that clears some things up. Yours truly, X.
“It was a UN-sanctioned mission to prevent a humanitarian massacre after Gaddafi threatened to ‘hunt down’ his own people like ‘rats’.”
So Trump has no basis for attacking Iran based on its sterling human rights record?
“The money sent to Iran in 2016 was actually Iran’s own frozen assets.”
So should we give Russia back it’s frozen assets?
“It’s a unilateral escalation that has isolated the U.S. from NATO.”
Trump just told Starmer we didn’t need his offer of help at this late date.
Diogenes,
It’s a masterclass in irony to watch Trump declare he ‘doesn’t need’ British aircraft carriers because the war is ‘already won,’ while simultaneously throwing a temper tantrum over the extra flight hours his planes are clocking because our allies refused him base access.
Trump only rejected Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s aircraft carrier offer on March 7 after publicly berating the UK for days because Starmer initially blocked initial strikes. Starmer finally allowed ‘defensive’ operations from UK bases on March 8, but Trump is still calling him ‘no Winston Churchill.
Also, Trump was so ‘unbothered’ by losing Spanish bases that he threatened a full trade embargo on Spain on March 3. Apparently, ‘not needing’ a base includes threatening the economy of a NATO ally because they dared to follow the UN Charter instead of his Truth Social posts.
Trump didn’t need any help at this late date, he needed it earlier when he was in the middle of the realization that after mocking and badmouthing NATO allies he would need their help. That’s how stupid Trump and his administration is.
It’s hard to claim you’ve ‘already won’ when you’re still threatening to embargo your own partners for not helping you win faster. But sure, keep pretending that isolating America and paying for the extra fuel is the pinnacle of ‘peace through strength.
Like Anonymous (12:04 PM), I don’t know how this war will land for us. I’m not as convinced we’ll get unconditional surrender as you are apparently convinced that Trump will lose WW III. If we just greatly degrade Iran’s nuclear program, warmaking capability, and terrorism network, it will be worth it to me. 30 days and out. Maybe support the Kurds.
As for Spain, the leftwing government has just declared a fatwa on Spanish citizenship. With allies like that, who needs enemies? Don’t move there because I’d hate for you to spend all that money just to tell me I was right.
Diogenes, your ’30 days and out’ fantasy is the same script we heard in 2003, and we both know how that trillion-dollar sequel ended. Iraq and Afghanistan proved that ‘degrading’ a network is easy; filling the vacuum without a 20-year occupation is the part nobody has figured out.
You want to ‘support the Kurds’ now? Trump literally ruled out Kurdish involvement on March 7, calling the war ‘too complicated’ for them. He’s dangling them as bait one day and abandoning them the next. Remember that? They remember that too. Trump abandoned them and their cause in his first term. The Kurds were our allies and Trump abandoned them to fend for themselves against Turkish aggression. Yeah that is gonna sit well with them.
Diogenes, it’s adorable that you’re using ‘fatwa’ to describe a NATO ally simply because they follow the UN Charter instead of Trump’s Truth Social feed. If Spain is such a ‘villain’ for denying us base access, why was Trump so desperate for their geography that he threatened a full trade embargo on March 3?
First paragraph, I get your concern.
Second paragraph, everybody has used the Kurds, but the thing you guys hate about Trump is that he alone among politicians will actually keep a promise, and it’s exactly those promises your leftists don’t want kept.
Third paragraph, the Spanish government is a villain. They are not your friend.
Diogenes, Trump keeping promises? Really?
Diogenes, the only promise Trump is keeping is the one to his defense contractors to spend $1 billion a day of our money. For a guy who campaigned on ‘ending endless wars’ and opposing ‘regime change,’ he’s currently neck-deep in a unilateral war specifically designed to collapse a foreign government. How is that a promise kept?
Trump spent years trashing the Iraq War as a disaster of ‘nation-building,’ yet his Operation Epic Fury is the literal definition of a regime change war. You don’t ‘obliterate’ a country’s entire air defense and secret police if you’re not planning to topple the state.
Trump didn’t break the ‘establishment’—he just bought a more expensive, more isolated version of their worst mistakes. But sure, keep pretending that threatening to embargo Spain because they wouldn’t let us use their bases is ‘keeping a promise’ to the American people.
X says: Diogenes, Trump keeping promises? Really?
Please… they remember you making excuses for the promise “If you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan” and “I don’t know any of my son’s ChiCom and Putin Oligarch customers and my son has done nothing wrong”. Please end the embarrassing lies, X. You have damaged the family name enough. Renounce your communist Democrat ambitions and come home.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
If Trump decides to back the Kurds, he will BACK the Kurds.
And BTW, the Kurds have used everybody else. They have their own agenda and that’s fine.
The big problem with the Kurds is NOT Iran – it is their desire for an independant Kurdish country that encompases parts of Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran.
If the kurds wish to fight the IRGC – which they likely will do ANYWAY, in return for a significant seat at the table in any future democratic Iran – no one will have a problem with that.
But if arming them destabalizes Syria further and Iraq and Turkey we will have traded one mess for another.
” if arming them destabalizes Syria further and Iraq and Turkey we will have traded one mess for another.”
We already appear to have done that with the regime change in Syria. Whether the new mess is preferable to the old one is debatable, but the magnitudes appear similar, and the new one has our fresh fingerprints on it.
Trump is not trustworthy. That’s the problem. He’s showing the world he’s not and the Kurds have not forgotten how he betrayed them the first time around.
The Kurds are not a monolithic group they are made up of various factions all with different agendas. We have betrayed them so many times it’s hard to fathom how they would trust us with the support they expect….again.
OK, let’s talk about the Kurds. I wrote “MAYBE” support the Kurds. Nobody, including the U.S., actually trusts the Kurds. The PKK, their primary political party, for decades has been Marxists who happen to be Muslim. For both Muslim countries and the U.S., that’s a problem for different reasons, and the PKK is associated with terrorism to boot. Everybody uses the Kurds and the Kurds use everybody. I never blamed the Democrats for stonewalling on Kurdish independence, but if it’s a hairball you want to hate Trump on, knock yourself out.
Diogenes, While the PKK has Marxist roots, the groups the U.S. is actually rallying to fight Iran—like the KDPI and PAK—are nationalist and democratic, not Marxist. In fact, the PKK officially disbanded in May 2025 to favor political struggle, a fact you seem to have missed while recycled 1980s talking points.
Kurdish leaders have noted there is ‘no sign’ that Trump has offered any real guarantees for their safety. They remember exactly how he abandoned them in Syria and aren’t interested in being ‘cannon fodder’ for a unilateral war that costs $1 billion a day.
Trump isn’t ‘keeping a promise’; he’s dangling an entire ethnic group as bait while refusing to back them up the moment things get ‘complicated.’ It’s not a ‘hairball’—it’s a predictable betrayal in the making.
“In fact, the PKK officially disbanded in May 2025 to favor political struggle, a fact you seem to have missed while recycled 1980s talking points.”
May 2025? More likely to curry favor with Trump. Consider the possibility you’re being played.
“Kurdish leaders have noted there is ‘no sign’ that Trump has offered any real guarantees for their safety.”
And who has ever guaranteed the safety of the Kurds? After a no-fly zone was established in Northern Iraq, the Kurds started playing footsy with Sadam in exchange for some local autonomy. It’s complicated with the Kurds. Always has been.
X, you keep hating on Trump like everything he does can only be evil and the Kurds are just his innocent victims. It’s more complicated than that, but the complexity doesn’t comport with your apparent TDS.
Turkey is a NATO ally.
Neither you nor I can predict anything here – Trump and Netanyahu are in control.
That said, Trump either succeeds quickly or the GOP gets wiped out in November.
Trump knows that – the entire GOP knows that
Democrats know that.
If you are after a “model” I would suggest Afghanistan – the US defeated the Taliban with Air power, 29 Green Berets and the norther aliance on the ground in 30-90 days depending on how you measure.
The “problem” in Afghanistan – which Trump has already publicly disowned, is that we committed the US military to 2 decades of attempted nation building.
There is no doubt that Trump will try to move heaven and earth to get a US friendly regime in Iran. But not at the cost of drawing this out for months much less years.
This endsquickly – ro no matter how it ultimately ends, Republicans get wiped out in November.
Conversely – the better it ends, combined with a growing economy, the more likely it is democrats who falter in November.
The generic ballot is currently D+4 but TWO different polls have found the generic ballot as tie.
Republicans will Hold the house with D+2
The Texas Primary drew almost the same number of Republicans as it did Democrats. That bodes HORRIBLY for democrats in the general.
It means that TX republicans are highly motivated to vote.
The D+4 generic ballot rests SOLELY on the assumption – which is normal for midterms that the out party is more motivated than the party in power.
Mostly – but not completely that has proven the case in 2025 special elections.
But Trump’s approval has been near constant since November. Republicans are less popular as a whole than Trump, But Democrats poll even worse than republicans.
I do not think we have ever had the out of power party so deeply unpopular as democrats are now.
the conventional wisdom has Democrats narrowly taking the house in 2026,
but this is an incredibly unconventional election season.
Regardless I would bet money that Trump will end this relatively quickly
Trump can easily stop almost anytime and declare victory.
But that will be more popular if people perceive a clear victory.
“Filling the vacuum without a 20-year occupation is the part nobody has figured out.”
Nobody figured it out with a 20yr occupation. Regardless there IS a relatively easy solution.
Declare victory and go home. When the Taliban was driven into Pakistan the US should have left Afghanistan.
The Kurds are politically complicated – there are kurdish factions in Turkey, Iraq syria and Iran – and they want there own country.
They are capable fighters and were used by the US in Syria. The problem is not destabalizing Iraq and pi$$ing off turkey.
There military abilities are NOT an issue.
No one of consequences gives a schiff about the UN – they are impotent and meaningless.
“It’s a masterclass in irony to watch Trump declare he ‘doesn’t need’ British aircraft carriers because the war is ‘already won,’ while simultaneously throwing a temper tantrum over the extra flight hours his planes are clocking because our allies refused him base access.”
I guess timelines do not matter to you. The UK initially refused to do ANYTHING – as did spain. Most of the rest of NATO/EU/Mideast Allowed US forces to use bases.
The big Deal is Diego Garcia – which is a US military base on a UK Island that the UK is busy trying to give ot the Mauritians who never occupied it. Regardless the US has the right to use the base for defensive purposes through 2036 and for any purposes with the permission of the UK.
Diego Garcia is one of few places near Iran that the US can stage B2’s and B52’s from without flying from the US.
After initial reluctance Starmer gave the US permision to operate out of Diego Garcia – he really had no choice – Iran had attacked UK based in Cyrpress, which meant that the US could use Diego Garcia to “defend” against Irainian attack on US and UK bases – which we do not need permission to do.
You can rant that because the US attacked Iran first that eliminates the ability to claim a defensive us of Diego Garcia – but Iran Attacked UK bases in cypress while the UK was “officially” a non-combatant.
There are separate issues regarding the US use of bases in the UK – it is easier for US forces to cross the atlantic to the UK and then procede south and east to the mideast rather than to have to do mid air refueling over the mid atlantic.
Further certain US aircraft like F22’s B53’s B1’s and B2’s either can not or are not permitted by US rules to operate out of non-US bases – EXCEPT the UK.
The US-UK special relationship means that we will allow our most sensitive military technology on UK bases.
Regardless, the B1’s, B2’s and B52’s are currently operating out of Diego Garcia – while Starmer eventually gave permission. he really had no choice after UK bases in cypress were attacked.
Starmer is in Deep Political $hit in the UK over his handling of this.
He was made aware that the US was likely to start military operations more than 2 weeks in advance.
Yet he did NOTHING to aide the US and more importantly NOTHING to protect UK bases in the region.
Now it is Greek Destroyers that are protecting the UK base in cyrpress.
Starmer claimed h was sending UK destroyers and eventually carriers to the region almost immediately after Cyress was attacked – but he has not managed to get any UK warship out to sea.
The English which still like to think of themselves as the worlds 2nd largest naval power is depending on the Greeks to defend UK bases, and can not get a destroyer much less a carrier out to sea.
If the argentines tried to take the Faulkands today – the UK would be unable to defend.
The UK has two Supercarriers – both of which have been rife with serious failures, Neither of which are as capable as retired US Forestal class carriers.
Frankly the US should just sell the UK a couple of mothballed Nimitz’s.
France BTW also has two carrier – roughly equal to the British carriers that headed toward the mideast days ago.
And the US has a 3rd and possibly 4th Carrier headed to the mideast.
Both British carriers – if Fully operational – which they never are, are less capable than ONE Nimitz class carrier.
Starmers offer of carriers is not even real. The UK can not manage to get a destory to cypress. I do not beleive Either UK carrier is actually ready for sea, nor can be before this is over. Between the US and Israel about 2000 sorties/day are striking Iran. A british carried – if it ever managed to get near enough to be useful, would be hard pressed to deliver another 100 sorties per day with 1/2 the weapons load from a US carrier or from land bases
The British carried has no catapaults.
Other than the US only the French Charles De Gaul and one of the Chinese Carriers have catapaults.
All US Carriers have had catapualts since the Odernization of the Midway class in the 1950’s./
“Trump was so ‘unbothered’ by losing Spanish bases that he threatened a full trade embargo on Spain on March 3. ”
Absolutely – Spain will be one of the first European countries threatened by Iran as the range of its missiles increased.
Not being able to stage US aircraft through Spain on the way to the mideast significantly complicated logistics, and marshalling forces in the mideast.
Spain is free to make its own choices, And the US is free to impose economic consequences based on those choices.
The decision to Embargo was driven by the fact that IEEPA does allow the president to impose embargos over national security, but according to SCOTUS not tarrifs.
“Trump didn’t need any help at this late date, he needed it earlier when he was in the middle of the realization that after mocking and badmouthing NATO allies he would need their help. That’s how stupid Trump and his administration is.”
NATO is generally not involved in mideastern conflicts. Regardless most of Europe is quietly supporting – even contributing to this.
Whether the US has already won – depends on the definition of won.
The US and isreal acheived air superiority over Iran within hours. Without a few days it was safe enough to risk B2’s in Iranian Airspace, then B1’s and then B52’s.
At this time the US and Israel could probably safely fly helicopters over Iran.
The war is now at the stage of working through the target list.
Iran’s air defences are gone.
Their navy is gone.
Their ability to launch missles has been reduced by 90% and is dropping further.
Their ability to launch drones is down 76%.
The top several layers of the Iran govenrment have been decapitated.
The Command and Control of the IRGC is either completely gone or nearly gone.
Units are operating on contingency plans from months ago, not directed by the IRGC.
Nuclear production fascilities are being destroyed,
Missle and drone production are being destroyed
Oil refineries are being destroyed.
The IRGC is being hunted down and destroyed.
We have yet to do serious damage to the Iranian light boats that threaten shipping in the gulf – but they have been inaccitve.
We have yet to take out the anti-ship missiles blocking the straight of Hormuz.
The forces of Gulf States nations are primarily taking out Drones and missles targeting them.
What is the UK going to contribue – besides defending Cypress which is its job anyway ?
So according to you – so far Epic Fury has cost less than hlf of Somali Fraud in Michigan
Starmer is a joke. He got very lucky and won a commanding majority of seats in Parliment in the last election – without a majority of votes, Because Refom and the Tories split the conservative vote.
Since then BOTH Reform AND the Torres are polling ahead of labor – which will be wiped out completely in the next election.
Starmer has been an abysmal PM and is very unpopular. He would be gone, but labor has not lost enough seats in Parliment for a succesful no-confidence vote – and labor is not going to give Starmer a no confidence vote as they know they will be wiped out the moment there is an election.
Starmers government is rife with scandals and major ties to Epstain.
Nigel Farrage will be the next British PM the moment that there is an election.
No, you did not clear things up.
Diogenes, calling NATO ‘cowardly’ is a bold move when Trump is the one who spent years trashing the alliance and is now mad he has to take the long way around. He only told Prime Minister Starmer he ‘didn’t need’ help after being publicly snubbed for days. Once the UK finally allowed ‘defensive’ use of their bases on March 8, Trump pivoted to insulting Starmer as ‘no Winston Churchill.’ That’s not ‘peace through strength’—it’s the behavior of an easily manipulated amateur who burned his bridges and is now surprised he now has to swim.
I would prefer reformulating NATO to include Sweden, Poland, the Baltic states, and a few others. I would prefer Belarus and Ukraine to become buffer states.
Many NATO partners are not capable of projecting significant power anymore and they’re getting worse. As Western Europe continues to radicalize and degrade, it will just become a committee of veto votes. We’ll have to leave NATO sooner or later. Trump warned Germany about Russian petroleum and the Germans laughed, and now he’s warning NATO about themselves, but IMHO, it’s already too late for Western Europe.
Diogenes, your proposal to “reformulate” NATO while simultaneously arguing that we must leave it is a spectacular logical loop. You want to expand the alliance to include Sweden, Poland, and the Baltics—all of which are already full NATO members—while claiming the alliance itself is a “committee of veto votes” we should abandon.
While you claim Europe is “degrading,” Sweden and Poland have significantly increased defense spending, with Poland on track to have one of the most capable land forces in Europe.
It’s hard to claim it’s “too late for Western Europe” when they’ve spent the last three years doing exactly what you claim they can’t: ditching Russian energy and rearming. You’re trying to solve a 2018 problem with 2026 facts that have already moved past you.
Northwestern Europe has chosen to have effectively no borders. You are being too optimistic.
The tepid role of NATO in this is fairly important.
It likely is the begining of the end of Europe as a power in the mideast.
Russia has been driven out – Iran is their last toe hold.
The arab nations have joined together with Israel to fight Iran.
That is HUGE – if they are successful it means the likelyhod of a LONG period of peace and stability in the mideast – something we have not seen in my lifetime.
It also means that it was accomplished WITHOUT Europe – that is why the French are rusing an Aircraft carrier to the region and why Stamrer is making offeres he can not keep even if he wanted.
If Europe is not apart of this and a real peace is accomplished. The Europeans will have very little power and influence in the mideast.
This is significant for the US – but it is MASSIVE for israel. And it is a significant loss for Europe.
And alot of that will prove true = even if this does not go very well.
“It likely is the begining of the end of Europe as a power in the mideast.”
Consider the irony. The Middle East has moved to the major European powers.
X you keep repeating the same debunked nonense.
Nato is the NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION.
Iran is thousands of miles from the atlantic.
NATO is often involved in military operations in the mideast – though their participation in Libya which you hyped was almost non-existant – barely more than their involvment with Iran.
The Reason NATO is involved is because it is the military organization that mostly coordinates European military forces.
It is the easiest structure to allow US and european forces to work together.
Trump’s choice to work with Israel was outside the box. It made working with Europe harder.
But the FACT is Europe has very little to contribute to this conflict.
Israel is probably the 2nd largest airforce in the world.
In this Iran conflict they are near equal partners with the US. We supply the vast repertoire of sophisticated weapons.
They supply the majority of the tactical airframes.
This likely would have been impossible in the past, and is only possible because the abraham accords have made it possible for arab nations and israel to work together.
Even if this does NOT result in a good outcome regarding Iran – the fact that almost all arab nations are alied with Israel against Iran is a sea change in the mideast.
That is FAR more important than any of Europe and any of NATO.
It is NOT the amount of power that the arab nations contribute, The US and Israel have more airpower than NATO has Ever been able to muster in the Mideast.
It is That they are cooperating militarily with Israel.
Even if everything else goes to h311 – that alone is a huge shift in the mideast.
You are missing all kinds of important developments in the mideast – Lebanon – with the help of Israel is looking to destroy Hezbolla.
That offers the possibility that Lebanon could get past its state as a failed nation.
Wrong agin [x].
Current military ops in Iran are continuing war for freedom from UK gloBAAList since 1776 AND continued crippling of [china]. There is no comparison between Libya/Iraq and Iran.
Almost all the gulf states are for this conflict.
Russia {our ally} is going to come off [brics] and get back into trading with American $$$.
AND
IRANIAN PEOPLE WILL BE FREE OF THE [ muslHAMS].
I never expected to get into World War X today. He/her seems quite animated (agitated?).
“Calling it ‘craven’ to follow international law while praising a $1 billion-a-day unilateral war is certainly a choice.”
International law is NOT law. Nations follow it or don’t based on threats of sanctions or force from other nations.
” If you’re going to lecture on history, you might want to include the parts that don’t fit your narrative.”
Anyone who calls Obama’s regime change war in Libya a humanitarian action should not be criticizing others on history.
Libya – was a regime change war by the US.
“The ‘Pallets of Cash’ Myth”
Not a myth – planeloads of Cash were sent to Iran.
“The money sent to Iran in 2016 was actually Iran’s own frozen assets”
Correct – much of which had outstanding claims – often even awards by courts. While INITIALLY it was forzen Iranian assets, by the time Obama sent it to Tehran – most of it had been awarded to others with claims against Iran.
It was NOT Iran’s money and this was NOT part of a legal settlement – it was a bribe.
There are till people with billions in claims against iran that already have been awarded by the courts that Obama screwed and will never get paid.
“a legal settlement of a decades-old arms deal dispute.”
Nope, it was iranian assets from the Shah’s regime that had been frozen when the 1979 revolution took the US embassy hostage.
“Calling it a ‘bribe’ is”
Accurate.
“like saying a bank is bribing you when you withdraw your own savings.”
Try withdrawing your saving from a bank when creditors have court orders requiring the banks to turn over those funds to them.
“Operation Epic Fury: Trump’s current campaign in Iran isn’t ‘clearing the field’; it’s a unilateral escalation that has isolated the U.S. from NATO”
I have no idea what you think “clearing the field is.
Regardless, Epic Fury is the consequence of over a decade of Democrats turning a blind eye to and pretending that they could negotiate with Iran.
In recent negotitions Iran was offered reactor fuel for their nuclear reactor FOREVER FOR FREE, if they would abandon their nuclear enrichment program and turn over the 400Kg+ of 0% enriched uranium they admitted to. That is more than enough to make 3 “little boy” equivalent bombs.
“and lacks the international legal backing Obama had in Libya.”
Did Obama have the support of just about every arab nation in the region ?
BTW – What has NATO got to do with Iran ? Iran is 1000miles from Europe and 3 times that from the Atlantic. You say that Libya was a NATO operation – not really.
Italy refused to join without NATO involvement, but NATO had only a minimal role, the bombing and detruction of ground forces – What Trump is doing in Epic Fury was handled by each nation individually on their own authority.
NATO played almost no role in the Iraq war and generally has almost no involvement in the mideast.
“Hope that clears some things up”
What is clear is that you make things up – even Wikipedia does not support your claims – without a delusional level of spin.
Good points, John. I’m signing off. Arguing with TDS can be exhausting.
X says: The ‘Pallets of Cash’ Myth: The money sent to Iran in 2016 was actually Iran’s own frozen assets—a legal settlement of a decades-old arms deal dispute.
It was an illegal Obama/Biden payment to the Iranian terrorists. The US was a signatory to the international agreement where any assets determined to legitimately belong to Iran were to be paid to the International Court, where they would first be used to pay people/countries with court decisions and awards against Iran. Whatever was left after settling those legal awards could then be released to Iran.
Some of those court awards were to the American families of victims of Iranian terrorism. Obama and Biden gave those hundreds of billions of dollars to Iran – NOT a penny to American victims with monetary awards against Iran. Illegitimate payment that was then used by Iran to continue butchering and maiming American military and citizens all over the world.
Please end the embarrassing lies, X. You have damaged the family name enough. Renounce your communist Democrat ambitions and come home.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
A very enjoyable column today. And the commentary was also interesting. The president acting with no declaration of war goes as far back as Thomas Jefferson and the War against the Barbary Pirates. No Declaration of war then. There were some successes in that military endeavor and Britain and France took some note of the American Forces in that case and subsequently started to take more of a military view of the Barbary States. The actions were interrupted by the War of 1812 but once that had been resolved the US and other European states took further action. An American fleet with actual Ships of the Line sailed for the Barbary states after the war and subsequently the Barbary Corsairs were removed and this ended up with Algeria becoming part of France and Morocco became part of Spain. Little was needed of the US by then.
Europe tolerated the Barbary Corsairs for nearly 2 centuries before truly acting and removing them. Estimated that over 1 million Europeans were kidnapped and enslaved by the Barbary pirates who raided well out into the Atlantic and as far north as the UK and France. Smaller isolated villages on the coast were their main prey. Similar to the Vikings of earlier centuries.
To Anonymous. No citations, this is not a journal. Look it up. I suggest Chrome, Google, Duck Duck Go,
“Thomas Jefferson and the War against the Barbary Pirates. No Declaration of war then.”
A violation of the Constitution that enjoys historical precedent is a violation nevertheless. There have been numerous historical violations (some of them quite old) of the 1st and 2nd Amendments (among other stipulations in the document). That history has not prevented citizens from continuing to press to restore recognition of those parts of the Constitution, nor has it prevented SCOTUS from doing just that. What is intrinsically different about the separation of powers required by the first two Articles? If you want to give POTUS the power to start and conduct warfare absent a Congressional Declaration, then you need to change the document that requires that Declaration, either by getting Congress to pass an Amendment and successfully submit it to the States for ratification, or by those States themselves calling for, and convening, an Article V Convention. Otherwise you might as well literally use a copy of the Constitution for your personal toilet paper, since you are already doing exactly that, virtually.
If it’s a democrat, it is a hypocritical liar…enough said.
Yup. Arguing with “stupid” is stupid
prove me wrong… invectives are not a replacement for debate…you seem to be the typical prog who just hurls hate but is empty on facts. You are so easily identifiable, the flotsam of intellectual discussion.
Nancy stole $400,000,000.00. If Trump did the same things Nancy did to acquire that money, he’d be impeached and sentenced to life in prison. It would be the only story streaming across big media until his big white ass was in stirs. Nancy? She is furious when asked by reporters about her crimes. “How dare you challenge me about what I stole. $400,000,000.00 ain’t nuthin. I’m on the verge of being woke. You have no business questioning me. It is Trump you want!”
Trump has stolen far more than $400 M. It is about $7 B. Trump is literally sending US taxpayer money to overseas accounts that he alone controls.
Danny, the Biden family gave you millions for keeping your mouth shut about being Hunter Biden’s Furry Tranny sex partner. The fact that it was ChiCom bribes instead of US Taxpayer money does not negate the reason for you being here telling tales to deflect from The Biden Sex Files.
Turley’s column is a masterclass in comparing apples to hand grenades. He wants us to believe that a multilateral, NATO-led intervention is the same as a unilateral hit-job that even our closest allies wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole. Trump spent three years treating NATO like a nuisance, then acted shocked when they wouldn’t lend him their bases for his private war.
If Turley can’t see the difference between a UN-sanctioned mission and a solo provocation that backfired, he shouldn’t be teaching law; he should be writing scripts for a slapstick comedy about an ‘easy-to-manipulate moron’ playing with fire.
Yet Trump is making NATO look useless and bureaucratic, even anti-american, villainous, and certainly cowardly in the face of confronting the obvious enemies of humanity. When I was a kid the UN and NATO were seen as forces for good, promoting human rights and progress across the globe.
Now they seem more like power-mad Bond villains in their weirdly designed mountaintop lairs making arrangements on a big map on the floor.
Meanwhile, back at the White House, somehow their nemesis, President Trump is freeing humans from the bonds of tyranny.
It is fascinating that you see ‘Bond villains’ in NATO, considering Trump is the one currently playing a high-stakes game of Risk with other people’s lives and tax dollars. If you think NATO looks ‘cowardly,’ maybe it’s because they’re the only adults in the room refusing to provide a blank check for a unilateral war that is currently costing the U.S. an estimated $1 billion per day.
Trump isn’t ‘freeing humans from tyranny’ by bombing schools or threatening to embargo our own allies in Spain and Britain because they won’t let him use their bases for a provocation they never agreed to. Watching him trash NATO as ‘useless’ while simultaneously begging them for help to clean up his own mess isn’t ‘nemesis’ energy—it’s the behavior of an easily manipulated amateur who set his own house on fire and is now mad the neighbors won’t lend him their hose.
But sure, keep pretending that isolating America and driving up energy prices to benefit Russia is ‘promoting progress.’ It’s a bold narrative, even for someone who thinks ‘freedom’ comes with a September 2026 expiration date conveniently tied to the midterms.
One of the great idiots babbling incoherent trash. Do you have any idea how to express yourself without denouncing Trump in every sentence? U r a TOTAL MORON. So stupid. So, so, so stupid. Hard to imagine anyone could possibly be this big of a complete idiot.
Here, here
I love that your only defense of Trump’s $100 billion war is a thesaurus entry for the word ‘stupid.’ It really highlights the intellectual depth of your position.
If my ‘babbling’ is so incoherent, it should be easy for you to debunk the actual facts: like the $1 billion-a-day price tag, the humiliating base denials from NATO, or the CENTCOM memos showing this ‘nine-day victory’ is actually scheduled to drag on until the November elections.
But I get it—when the gas prices hit $3.32 and our allies won’t even take our calls, screaming ‘MORON’ in all caps is the only coping mechanism you have left. Stay mad; the adults are busy checking the receipts on this unauthorized war.
$100 billion war? Gas prices? whataboutism?
What about the millions in Iran yearning to be free? That price too high for you?
Better to live in the lap of luxury and let the world go to hell? Not on Trump’s watch!
Wait til you see the dominoes fall. THEN you can really screech. Can’t wait to hear it.
Weren’t you calling Viktor Orban a Putin puppet recently. Or was that a different cliche-spewing libtard?
And there it is again; Russia, Russia. This operation in Iran does nothing to benefit Russia or China. Not only is Trump going after Iran’s nuclear threat against America and Israel, and the surrounding neighbor states in the Middle East, but this military action will make all of Europe safer. The United States and Israel do not intentionally target civilians, and it has not been proven that it was American bombs hit the school, that is under investigation . If not was our bombs, it certainly was not deliberately done. In case you haven’t noticed Iran has been intentionally targeting and bombing civilians, in Israel and all other surrounding neighboring states. It’s what they do. Nobody likes military conflicts, wars. The President tried diplomatic negotiations, for months. The Iranians came into the negotiations bragging about having enough uranium enriched to 60% to make 11 nuclear bombs. They were refusing to agree to the terms for an agreement. They were stalling in the negotiations until they could get those 11 nuclear bombs made. That is a definite eminent threat to America, Israel, the entire Middle East, Europe, the Persian people…to the world. The Persian people want their country back. They want freedom from Islamic Jihadist theocratic enslavement, and a democratic free and fairly elected government by the people. They have an opposition leader they want, and who is willing to step in as an interim leader to help in the transition to a democratic firm of government that the Persians desire.
“Trump isn’t ‘freeing humans from tyranny’ by”
Your perspective represents a moral abasement; by lamenting the defense of Israel and the world, while ignoring the Iranian regime’s role as a terrorist state. The leadership slaughtered 30,000 of its own people in a single day, while you disregard the true source of the region’s destruction.
X, You missed the fact that the IR, Maduro, et al are tyrannical monsters against human rights. Like I said, cowardly.
32k dead is not enough reason for regime change? say you’re sorry.
I’m not sure what the US gets out of NATO, at this time? Access to bases, but even without NATO, I would assume that some of these countries would continue to remain allies. Warfare has shifted from air power to cruise missiles, to drones, so the bases might not be as important as they once were. To have a treaty where we are committed militarily to countries that are capable, but unwilling, to fund their own militaries, some that are energy dependent upon their adversaries, some that appear openly hostile toward the US, and at least one that is about the size of Maryland that can’t even defend its own icy territory, but still relies on the US for its entire military defense.
The idea that we don’t ‘get anything’ out of NATO just collided with reality. You assume allies stay allies without treaties, yet Spain and Britain just denied us base access for the Iran strikes because Trump spent years trashing the very alliance that guarantees that cooperation.
Here’s why that ‘Maryland-sized’ treaty matters:
Geopolitics > Geography: Bases aren’t just for ‘parking planes’; they are essential for intelligence, refueling, and logistics. Without them, our ‘drones and missiles’ have to travel further, cost more, and fail more often.
The Cost of Going Solo: By denigrating NATO, Trump turned a shared security burden into a unilateral $1 billion-a-day bill for the American taxpayer. We aren’t ‘saving money’ by ignoring allies; we’re paying a premium to fight alone.
The Diplomatic Backfire: When you treat a treaty like a protection racket, allies stop acting like partners. Threatening to embargo the UK and Spain for not supporting an unauthorized war isn’t ‘strength’—it’s a self-inflicted wound that has isolated America while gas prices skyrocket.
NATO isn’t a charity; it’s a force multiplier. Trump didn’t ‘clear the field’; he burned the bridge and is now mad he has to swim.
Seems like everything went very well without those bases.
“Seems” is the operative word here. If things went well why did Trump threaten an embargo on Spain for not allowing us to use their bases? Clearly we need their cooperation. Obviously they are refusing for clear reasons. He spent a lot of time mocking and deriding them for their…uselessness until we needed their cooperation. Crazy stuff eh?
When Spain finally falls AGAIN TO THE muslHAMS. LETS SEE IF THEY COME BEGGING FOR HELP
“Seems. Clearly. Obviously. ”
lots of TDS declarations there X.
You know why. Sends Spain a message and we will absolutely take it if we had to because they would capitulate in 2 seconds if pushed. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re either with us or against us. Obviously X is lying for clear reasons.
Everyone knows X just makes stuff up but it’s disgusting that X cares more about his cash then humans.
Trump IS the “force multiplier”. He forced the freeloading NATO members to multiply their forces and they did as they were told. Now we just need them to grow a spine and care about the voices of humanity crying out instead of their trust funds.
X can’t accept the reality of Trump’s world now.
Only this America gets from nato is free rent and a yearly bill for 5%
“When I was a kid the UN and NATO were seen as forces for good, promoting human rights and progress across the globe.”
You are 100% correct. The pertinent question is whether it is those organizations that have changed so dramatically, or whether the wool had been successfully pulled over our eyes for decades, and it has taken until recently to see through the blindfold. I am very much inclined to the latter view.
[nato] is all the things you list plus I woul add useless impotent and evil
“Yet Trump is making NATO look useless and bureaucratic, even anti-american, villainous, and certainly cowardly in the face of confronting the obvious enemies of humanity. ”
You seem to be forgetting Ukraine, where most of NATO’s European members are standing solidly behind the victim of Putin’s Stalinist aggression, and it is the Orange Shitgibbon who somehow thinks that his mate Vlad is the innocent party and who refuses to confront one of the most nasty, murderous dictators in the world. Trump is freeing no one from the bonds of tyranny, just wants to enslave all you lot. I hope when you celebrate 250 years of independence, you ponder how many more years you will actually enjoy before Donald rips apart the fabric of your Constitution, flatlines the economy, and lets Russia and China destroy everything that both Republican and Democrat administrations have achieved on the world stage since 1945. Oh, and what is more cowardly than dodging Vietnam by faking a medical issue? What is more shameful than standing, watching the coffins of servicemen killed by your hubris be offloaded, and doing so wearing a crass politically branded baseball cap? The man is so far beyond a disgrace it is difficult to express adequately.
TDS prevents you from seeing the celebrations of Venezuelans and Iranians all over the internet.
You will not fit easily in with Trump’s new world order called America First.
“When I was a kid the UN and NATO were seen as forces for good, promoting human rights and progress across the globe.”
That world is gone. The US are the villains now.
“. . . a solo provocation that backfired . . .”
In nine days (nine days!):
The Iranian *dictatorship’s* navy, air force, and air defense systems have been obliterated. Two layers of its tyrannical regime have been destroyed. Senior politicians, military leaders, and secret police are turning tail. What started as Iran firing some 100 missiles/day is down to some 8 missiles/day. A brutal slave state (with morality police and the torturing of dissenters) is being systematically dismantled. Freedom loving Iranians around the world are cheering in the streets. They might, thanks to Trump, finally have a chance to live under freedom. The world’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism is being reduced to a whimper.
Please, please give me more “backfire.”
Woke should be forbidden to vote. They should be sent to Iran. They are not only unpatriotic, they are traitors. They want and work for the destruction of America. And they recruit other idiots.
Sam,
It’s cute that you think nine days of ‘obliteration’ equals a win. In the real world, your ‘systematic dismantling’ is actually a $1 billion-a-day [10] money pit with no exit strategy and no allied support.
Here is your ‘backfire’ by the numbers:
The Intelligence Gap: While you’re celebrating, U.S. intelligence confirms Iran still retains 50% of its missile and drone capabilities.
The Diplomatic Failure: Trump is so ‘successful’ that Spain and Britain [12] refused him base access, forcing him to threaten embargoes against our own allies.
The Price Tag: This ‘freedom’ is costing nearly $1 billion every 24 hours—wealth being transferred directly from American taxpayers to defense contractors.
The Election Strategy: Despite the ‘whimper,’ CENTCOM memos project this conflict will conveniently drag on through September 2026 to serve as a midterm distraction.
It’s not a ‘victory’ just because things went boom; it’s a unilateral provocation that has isolated America, spiked gas prices, and left us footing a $100 billion bill for a war Congress never authorized. But keep cheering—I’m sure the defense contractors appreciate your enthusiasm for their profit margins.
Didn’t you learn anything from the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles Sam?
We can kiss those low inflation rates goodbye and higher gas prices at the pump for a few months maybe the rest of the year. I’m sure you’re also looking forward to putting boots on the ground. Right?
TL;DR
X (George, Gigi, Svelaz, mentally ill troll) got a new batch of crystal meth to fuel his rage. Expect his foaming at the mouth keyboard warrior shtick to continue till midnight or until he finds a she-male at the West Hollywood bathhouse to take care of his “needs”.
X has been pushing his posts to the max lately. “Little angry X” is his new name.
Trump is getting to him!
You’d prefer they load a ten megaton thermonuclear bomb on a ship and set sail to New York harbor.
Is it really possible woke (or anyone) could be so stupid. Traitors. That explains it. Plus severe mental retardation.
Yes it is possible they clearly are.
“Plus severe mental retardation.”
Probably exacerbated by addiction to whatever the latest super-fentanyl drug foisted on us by the CCP is…
Iran with a nuke would be vastly more expensive. As for an exit strategy; just leave after destroying as much military infrastructure as we can find. Will we need to do it again very possibly. That is however better than nuclear blackmail by a 7th Century theocracy with modern weapons.
10,000,000 tons of TNT.
Woke is beyond stupid. I guess they believe they will join their brethren in Glory with all them virgins upon release from earth’s gravity. Good luck girls. (It is 90 percent woke girls who trash this place with inanity.)
“It is 90 percent woke girls who trash this place with inanity”
They object to being called “girls”, they believe their grafted-on penises make them something different.
What about freedom loving Iranians? X doesn’t care about them only gas prices.
if they have 50% of their arms in 9 days, it might take another 9 days. We’ll talk then, ok X?
You clearly didn’t actually read the story. He was comparing apples to apples and had the receipts. The NATO part is meaningless. Read the Constitution – NATO isn’t mentioned. NATO is a military alliance. Or actions with Israel are also a military alliance. There is no difference except on supports your personal narrative and the other does not. You clearly are allowing your TDS to override logic.
” NATO is a military alliance”
“NATO” is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which is a military alliance, authorized by the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty to empower Europe to provide much of its own defense against an expansive Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Soviet Union). The Soviet Union has not existed for the past 35 years, and stopped its aggressive expansion policies long before that.
“expansive USSR”
Right north Atlantic now includes every Tom, Dick and Harry?
“Right north Atlantic now includes every Tom, Dick and Harry?”
According to the Woke/Globalist/Deep Staters, the Earth has been rechristened “North Atlantica”. Please update your almanac and atlases.
Our allies didnt get involved initially due to being so thoroughly penetrated by aliens from the Middle East. That’s a ticking time bomb ready to go off in Lonfon, Paris and Berlin.
“due to being so thoroughly penetrated by aliens from the Middle East. That’s a ticking time bomb ready to go off”
So, you are saying that the penetration led to pregnancy?
Preach.
JUST LIKE HERE IN AMERICA
HELL, just like here in my Texas
It’s just a matter of when. Not if
3 standing armies of military age men were brought here by your own president or whomever had auto pen
S. American
Ahab the Arab
Chinese
ARMIES OF MEN
STILL HERE
THANK THE DIMZ/uniPatty/gloBAALists
Just a matter of time
Tote
MAGAA1st
11b