Burdizzo said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

If the Straight of Hormuz is blocked for weeks and gas price go to $4.50+ a gallon, it will be interesting to see how the bulk of this country reacts.

---

So you are saying we should tolerate decades of despots to keep oil prices down. How neo-capitalist of you.

---

Where do I say anything in that post about supporting despots, opposing or supporting what is happening or anything else other than commenting about it will be interesting to see how the public and Texags responds if gasoline goes substantially higher due to the Strait of Hormuz closing. I think if a sharp increase in gasoline prices occurs, it will cause public sentiment to quickly sour on this action just like $4.50 gasoline under Biden was a massive political liability for his administration.

As for my thoughts on what is going on, I would love nothing more than to see a free, peaceful Iran with the religious fanatics gone. I remember 1979 along with all of the subsequent attacks on American interests throughout the World by this regime. I don't think killing the current leadership via air attacks will get us the desired result because there is no organized opposition in Iran and the Republican Guard is still well entrenched. I pray that I am wrong but I'm just stating how I don't think total regime change happens without boots on the ground for which there is no political appetite.

Better safe than sorry.

Texas12&0 said:

---

Haleyscomet50 said:

---

It's just strange we give Israel billions a year for nothing. They are a leech to the American taxpayer. We were told it was for the best intelligence in the world then they let 3,000 hamas fighters attack across the most secure border in the world. I hope we aren't relying on them to keep America safe.

Next we are told the billions of dollars a year is so Israel can defend itself but they needed us in June to hit a underground bunker. They need us to wage war with Iran this is not a good return on investment if we give them billions year because they fight our so called enemies.

I just don't get it why one country would hold so much power over the United States. What do we get out of being Israel big brother that pays for everything and fights the bad guys for him?

---

They don't hold power over us, homes. Their interests align with ours for a peaceful ME.
As a MAGA dude I don't buy the "they'll have nukes within days or weeks" line. What I do know is that Iranian regime constantly destabilized the ME. As reported, I do believe they were stockpiling more missiles for the next round of attacks on Israel and our bases. I do know they've been responsible for thousands of American deaths over the last 5 decades. It has to stop and now we have a President willing to do what's necessary. The Israeli and Iranian people approve of our actions. Our "friendly" Arab Allies in the region approve. I believe most Americans approve, as well. Perhaps we can save some money in the coming years with a peaceful ME. Worth a shot. What we were doing wasn't working.

---

Agreed. The Iranian leadership should have been sent to hell decades ago and the reason has little to nothing to do with nukes.

We should have for sure sent them to hell when obama was president and they kidnapped our sailors.

We paid them instead

flashplayer said:

---

From the other thread.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We aren't the world's police and we have a constitution. That requires going to war to be decided by Congress not the president. If the case is so certain that doing things the correct action why not put it to Congress? Reason being is th constitution is being walked on again.

---

If you left it to any Congress of the past 15-20 years we would never declare war even if we needed to. Having the ability for our presidents to be nimble and act without approval is probably going to end up being important to our survival. Because by the time the partisans agree on anything it will likely be too late.

Even Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines were preventable disasters because our leaders didn't have the political stomach to go on offense.

---

So you are against the constitution. Cool. Glad so called Conservatives are just mask off and don't actually care about the constitution at all and want to use it as toilet paper to wipe their **** stained asses with

Geminiv said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

If the Straight of Hormuz is blocked for weeks and gas price go to $4.50+ a gallon, it will be interesting to see how the bulk of this country reacts.

---

So you are saying we should tolerate decades of despots to keep oil prices down. How neo-capitalist of you.

---

Are we going to go get the rest of them now?

---

According to your ilk, we are doing this too often as it is.

Saxsoon said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

From the other thread.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We aren't the world's police and we have a constitution. That requires going to war to be decided by Congress not the president. If the case is so certain that doing things the correct action why not put it to Congress? Reason being is th constitution is being walked on again.

---

If you left it to any Congress of the past 15-20 years we would never declare war even if we needed to. Having the ability for our presidents to be nimble and act without approval is probably going to end up being important to our survival. Because by the time the partisans agree on anything it will likely be too late.

Even Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines were preventable disasters because our leaders didn't have the political stomach to go on offense.

---

So you are against the constitution. Cool. Glad so called Conservatives are just mask off and don't actually care about the constitution at all and want to use it as toilet paper to wipe their **** stained asses with

---

You and Yukon are off, here. Look up the War Powers Act. That's a law passed in 1973 by Congress, so it is within The Constitution. It gives the President the flexibility to act quickly against threats. Everything that has been done has met the letter of the law.

BTKAG97 said:

---

Only because he has been mentioned a few times now...

I don't think I have ever heard of the comic Dave Smith until this thread.

---

He was pushed by certain groups in the faux right as some expert on the Middle East. Even Rogan acts like he has some special knowledge.


He's actually clueless on the area. Just pushes Hamas talking points fed to him.


Twitter made people confuse wit with intelligence. "Speaking so well" is considered synonymous with "being informed".

Quote:

---

They were just days away from having a weapon. Apparently this works every time for 30+ years.

---

very popular strawman used by the left and faux right.

I laughed at this;

The Ayatollah's supposed successor is a Kantian philosopher. What have we wrought? pic.twitter.com/xUIdVhjk56

— Zak Slayback (@zslayback) March 1, 2026

I don't think the mullah's regime would line up with Kant's concepts of moral law/treating other individuals as an end in itself. Interesting choice for them, though.

Somebody lying.

austinag1997 said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

This whole situation is insane. They try to convince us to attack Iran. Why? When anyone says it's due to Israeli influence on our government, they're labeled antisemitic. Netanyahu has been in our White House 7 times in a calendar year. He's addressed our Congress. It's ludicrous.

Iran has been on the verge of nuclear weapon for 30 years. I thought we destroyed their nuclear capabilities in the great strike last year.

They try to sell us that the Iranian people are being oppressed. So? People are oppressed everywhere but we don't involve ourselves. We are told we will bring democracy to the region (we don't even follow western democratic values here anymore). These people can't handle democracy.

There's no plan. Just like in Iraq. What's going to happen when the regime falls? The refugees will go to Europe and here.

And like any criticism of policy on this board one must express their allegiance to Trump lest be called TDS or a leftist.

I'm sick of the wars. I'm sick of the corruption. I voted Trump every time to clean this stuff. But I'm more confident than ever that they're all compromised.

I'm sick of our leaders being elected on a position and then completely deviating. The whole thing makes me sick as ****.

---

This is a legitimate complaint of Trump. The man that said he can negotiate everything. Goes to war in the Middle East.

---

Sometimes negotiations involve showing the other side that you're willing to employ the "big stick" that you told them would be used if they didn't acquiesce to the negotiation demands...

So how about this talking point where we offered Iran lifetime uranium enrichment for civilian use and they declined it. I've seen at least one X post from Iran where they told us to pound sand on that. I do not know if it was a legitimate account with Iran. Don't recall.

If this is an accurate deal that was offered and declined, that's a really interesting development.

That source comes from trump's govt

Who?mikejones! said:

---

That source comes from trump's govt

---

You mean the US government? Yes, I know.

I think it's an interesting negotiation point that I've only seen reported sparingly. Curious how accurate it is.

Id imagine its probably pretty accurate.

Enrichment has been a stumbling block for years and offering up free fuel for life is quite a deal.

Makes sense that Trump etal basically determined the Iranians were not negotiating in good faith when they rejected it

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Id imagine its probably pretty accurate.

Enrichment has been a stumbling block for years and offering up free fuel for life is quite a deal.

Makes sense that Trump etal basically determined the Iranians were not negotiating in good faith when they rejected it

---

Right. Almost an easy justification if Iran still says no to that. One can easily argue their true intentions by denying that deal.

nortex97 said:

---

And how is that going to happen? It hasn't even been (fully) blocked to date and there's little likelihood Iran's ability to do so is going to increase. Iran's ability to export oil is going to plummet though, a necessary condition to cripple the regime's ability to pay their 'security forces.'

Kharg Island is closed at the moment I believe, but I could be wrong.

Kharg Island is Iran’s jugular.

80-90% of Iran’s crude exports flow through this supertanker terminal in the Persian Gulf. No Kharg, no oil revenue. No oil revenue, no regime. Every war plan, every sanctions package, every naval deployment in the Gulf orbits this one fact. https://t.co/E0mVmlC9ea pic.twitter.com/mRuT3gTY1s

— John Ʌ Konrad V (@johnkonrad) February 28, 2026

---

We do NOT need to damage it at all...the Iranians will need it when the ******* regime is gone.

BUT...we could stop any oil from leaving it...

Yes, because the Iranians(and people like Dave smith) have always maintained that enrichment was for nuke power purposes. Its been conveniently ignored that iran enriched it to just below weapons grade and far beyond power grade.


Rejecting the deal shows a clear intent to build a nuke weapon, imo

Isn't that because of the bitcoin mining?

American first =/= isolationist

Quote:

---

You and Yukon are off, here. Look up the War Powers Act. That's a law passed in 1973 by Congress, so it is within The Constitution. It gives the President the flexibility to act quickly against threats. Everything that has been done has met the letter of the law.

---

That was most definitely not the purpose of the War Powers Act. That legislation was passed to inhibit a Presidents ability to fight wars rather than empower it.

Congress overrode Nixons' veto of the legislation . . . .people were that mad at the time about the the Vietnam War.

It says the Commander in Chief only has 60 days for combat actions and after that Congress has to formally approve any waging of war otherwise the Troops have to come home.

All that being said, Presidents do have the ability to initiate wars.

US CENTCOM: The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) killed more than 1,000 Americans over the past 47 years. Yesterday, a large-scale U.S. strike cut off the head of the snake. America has the most powerful military on earth, and the IRGC no longer has a… pic.twitter.com/I3AY772md8

— Polymarket Intel (@PolymarketIntel) March 1, 2026

Taking out a generator makes sense imho.

Windy City Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

You and Yukon are off, here. Look up the War Powers Act. That's a law passed in 1973 by Congress, so it is within The Constitution. It gives the President the flexibility to act quickly against threats. Everything that has been done has met the letter of the law.

---

All that being said, Presidents do have the ability to initiate wars.

---

And that's my point. Initiate. Flexibility. Whatever.
From Chicago are you?

Who?mikejones! said:

---

US CENTCOM: The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) killed more than 1,000 Americans over the past 47 years. Yesterday, a large-scale U.S. strike cut off the head of the snake. America has the most powerful military on earth, and the IRGC no longer has a… pic.twitter.com/I3AY772md8

— Polymarket Intel (@PolymarketIntel) March 1, 2026

---

Glad those scumbags had a second or two to realize their asses were cooked.

Saxsoon said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

From the other thread.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We aren't the world's police and we have a constitution. That requires going to war to be decided by Congress not the president. If the case is so certain that doing things the correct action why not put it to Congress? Reason being is th constitution is being walked on again.

---

If you left it to any Congress of the past 15-20 years we would never declare war even if we needed to. Having the ability for our presidents to be nimble and act without approval is probably going to end up being important to our survival. Because by the time the partisans agree on anything it will likely be too late.

Even Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines were preventable disasters because our leaders didn't have the political stomach to go on offense.

---

So you are against the constitution. Cool. Glad so called Conservatives are just mask off and don't actually care about the constitution at all and want to use it as toilet paper to wipe their **** stained asses with

---

Congress passed the War Powers Act which allows the POTUS to launch attacks without a Congressional declaration of war...

Since, that's an actual law, none of us are "against the Constitution".

Sorry that your false strawman failed...

UAS Ag said:

---

Saxsoon said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

From the other thread.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We aren't the world's police and we have a constitution. That requires going to war to be decided by Congress not the president. If the case is so certain that doing things the correct action why not put it to Congress? Reason being is th constitution is being walked on again.

---

If you left it to any Congress of the past 15-20 years we would never declare war even if we needed to. Having the ability for our presidents to be nimble and act without approval is probably going to end up being important to our survival. Because by the time the partisans agree on anything it will likely be too late.

Even Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines were preventable disasters because our leaders didn't have the political stomach to go on offense.

---

So you are against the constitution. Cool. Glad so called Conservatives are just mask off and don't actually care about the constitution at all and want to use it as toilet paper to wipe their **** stained asses with

---

Congress passed the War Powers Act which allows the POTUS to launch attacks without a Congressional declaration of war...

Since, that's an actual law, none of us are "against the Constitution".

Sorry that your false strawman failed...

---

This goes back to what I said yesterday - people have collectively changed the definition of "war". These attacks were not war; they were attacks. There is a pretty significant difference.

BREAKING:

Channel 3 of IRIB, the state TV of the Islamist regime in Iran, has been hacked and is now broadcasting a message from Netanyahu to the Iranian nation, calling on people to overthrow the regime

Via @realRayanAmiri pic.twitter.com/kEwCGOMtIC

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) March 1, 2026

Even legacy fake news media is acknowledging what's going on in Iran:

Quote:

---

Speaking on the death of the Supreme Leader, Mr. Dokoutil asks his guest:

Quote:

---

The Iranian people, what are you hearing from them tonight, we know they're celebrating, what's the feeling?

---

Middle East reporter Courtney Kealy:

Quote:

---

It's a terrible dissonance that they had to choose war over a regime. But they were willing to do it. Thank you Donald Trump, thank you Benjamin Netanyahu, thank you America, it's not death to America after they killed the leader, the Americans and the Israelis did it, it's not death to Israel, it's not death to America, it's thank you. It's a new day dawning. But, very early days. Very, very early days. So we'll have to see what comes, but the Iranian people that have been telling me over and over, and over again, we want this. We're not regimeists, we're not Islamic. I don't even say "Oh my God" to my Iranian friends, because they don't want God to be any part of this.

---

---

Democrat (Iranian expat) on very fake news CNN even ties freeing Iran to sacrosanct Ukrainian freedom cause (a stretch, but plausible to see the point).

Quote:

---

State of the Union Host Dana Bash is speaking with Iranian Diaspora Collective members Moj Mahdara and Milad Alami.

Quote:

---

Moj Mahdara: It is imperative the Democratic Party wake up and get past their dislike of President Trump, President Trump, and their feelings of their national conflicts going on. This is about national security. This is about what it possible in the Middle East. This is about being a good neighbor, a good partner towards the Gulf States and what their aspirations are. This is about supporting the people of Venezuela, this is about dismembering our relationship with, uh, well not dismembering but resetting our relationship with China. Right now 55 percent of the oil production that Iran produces goes to China despite sanctions. You want to support the people of Ukraine? You want to end that war? You have to... There is no getting around dismembering this Islamic republic. It is non-negotiable. It is not a want to have. They have to have it. And not just for the Iranian people. I think you have to trust the Iranian people. We know this government better than anyone else. When you dismember and decapitate this regime, you are going to see a change in the Middle East, in Venezuela, in China, in Ukraine, and I think quite frankly their ideology has really... it's caused a lot of problems for us worldwide. We need to take it seriously, and I think at this point we have a tremendous opportunity. This will be like ending the Soviet Union. The Berlin Wall. This is a transformational moment for humankind. For security, and as an American, as an American, this is in our interest. It is. So, I am a Democrat. I have been a huge Democrat. I am incredibly disappointed with my party. I do not see myself in them at this moment.

---

---

I guess Tim Kaine and Mark Warner didn't get the memo on that, this am based on their political show circuit performances.

What next?
We let the next in command, another beard, rule?
Or do we install a President ourselves? Iranians being brainwashed by Islam for 1000 years may not be Democracy-ready. They may need a strongman.
Do we get the Shah back?