aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They have a long way to go. Have read analysis in the past that if they actually had to go to war they had enough resources to sustain that for.....one day.

---

That's not surprising. I sort of understood the concerns during the reunification because East Germany was heavily militarized by the Soviets. (Or so was the conventional wisdom back then. Probably was just as much a paper tiger back then as well.)

But I also think Germany will face the same dilemma the UK is, not enough for a volunteer force and conscription would include migrants lacking allegiance to Germany.

---

Already are. There was an article on that posted here last week about it. Not enough natives volunteering and they are scared about it being migrants who do.

nortex97 said:

---

Going to Oman and Russia is interesting.

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister, will begin a regional trip on Friday evening (April 24), visiting Islamabad, Muscat, and Moscow.

Source: IRIB pic.twitter.com/LBOqLsFBed

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 24, 2026

---

Sorry for blowing your **** up, Oman...

Will you do us a favor, though?

I will say, bombing their bankers and allies was one of the more novel war strategies I can recall.

No US talks in Islamabad:

No Iran-U.S. talks to take place during FM Abbas Araghchi’s visit to Pakistan, only bilateral engagement, I was told by a senior Iranian source. The FM will visit Muscat and Moscow too to discuss developments. A source familiar with regional discussions told me that Russia has…

— Ali Hashem علي هاشم (@Alihashem) April 24, 2026

Hopefully he is just going to check out real estate on this junket. The mullahs/IRGC own a lot of property though in Istanbul and Londonistan in particular. I'd expect them, if considering heading out, to choose those cities first.

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

Quote:

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

---

These countries are clearly not really our allies. They are parasites at this point.

docb said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

---

How about just sit there and do nothing instead of not allowing us to use their air space? These ****wads couldn't even do that. You see, they allowed a huge Muslim population to invade their countries and their new masters won't allow the US do do anything.

This is one of the reasons why NATO is worthless.

docb said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

---

I think you are struggling to interpret my comments/positions. I apologize. There is a big difference between 'needing to be ready to jump' and 'active denial of airspace/use of resources we pay to station in these so-called allies' (to protect them and our interests alike), and the coordinated political attacks they have provided which followed. Again, to be clear, telling them specifics would have put US lives in danger. I am thankful we don't have folks like Gen. Milley at the pentagon now that would endorse that.

Europe quite intentionally made themselves heavily dependent on traffic through Hormuz (and Russian oil/gas alike). I have zero empathy for their complaints/whining toward the US actions. Now they are shocked that we might not ally with their colonial possessions elsewhere looking ahead.

I’m not sure Trump is the UK’s ally, really https://t.co/1hRauOedH7

— Rupert Myers (@RupertMyers) April 24, 2026

It's all just entertaining to me, really.

nortex97 said:

---

docb said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

---

I think you are struggling to interpret my comments/positions. I apologize. There is a big difference between 'needing to be ready to jump' and 'active denial of airspace/use of resources we pay to station in these so-called allies' (to protect them and our interests alike), and the coordinated political attacks they have provided which followed. Again, to be clear, telling them specifics would have put US lives in danger. I am thankful we don't have folks like Gen. Milley at the pentagon now that would endorse that.

Europe quite intentionally made themselves heavily dependent on traffic through Hormuz (and Russian oil/gas alike). I have zero empathy for their complaints/whining toward the US actions. Now they are shocked that we might not ally with their colonial possessions elsewhere looking ahead.

I’m not sure Trump is the UK’s ally, really https://t.co/1hRauOedH7

— Rupert Myers (@RupertMyers) April 24, 2026

It's all just entertaining to me, really.

---

Well maybe they don't agree with the decision or the way we had it planned out. They are sovereign countries that have a right to make decisions that they deem in their best interests. I can respect that.

Science Denier said:

---

docb said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

So if we build up some troops in an area and don't tell our allies we are going to attack they just need to be ready to jump in if we do? Is that what I'm hearing you say?

---

How about just sit there and do nothing instead of not allowing us to use their air space? These ****wads couldn't even do that. You see, they allowed a huge Muslim population to invade their countries and their new masters won't allow the US do do anything.

This is one of the reasons why NATO is worthless.

---

Lol we topple half the governments in the ME and displace millions then blame Europe for the muslim migration we unleashed?

JUST IN: The U.S. is reportedly considering suspending Spain from NATO & reviewing the U.S. stance on Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands.

— Polymarket (@Polymarket) April 24, 2026

Supposedly over their reluctance to participate in this war

🔴 The US could review Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands as punishment for its lack of support for the war on Iran

🔗: https://t.co/AwV5XdbAYm pic.twitter.com/9ZkMPVbcdt

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) April 24, 2026

Quote:

---

The concept here is to make it so they can't hold the strait hostage EVER...

---

Agreed. That is one of our several primary objectives.

Along with: "no nukes, no uranium refining, no more of you funding & arming & using proxies, and no more attacking other countries via missiles, drones, proxies, or clandestine terrorist orgs."

These are justified, warranted, reasonable, rational, logical, smart objectives.

We are essentially telling the Iranian mullahs and IRG: "Enough. Since 1980, your regime has been a recalcitrant and angry child whose behavior has been a thorn in everyone's side for the past 45 years. We've been patient with you. We've tried diplomacy. And we've tried milder forms of corrective actions. But you continue to refuse to grow up, mature, and behave. So we're taking a harsher, more severe form of corrective action. Either straighten up and fly right, or the consequences will be much more severe from now on."

It is logical, reasonable, and justified.

But "How can it be achieved?" is the challenge.

Will the mullahs and IRG listen and comply?

If they refuse to comply, what are our options?

1. Military force. Hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground. This could be used to dethrone the mullahs and destroy the IRG, and do real regime change, Install a regime that is willing to be a good citizen among nations.

Not feasible. The US public won't support it. And we are $40T in debt, largely thanks to Reaganomics / Bushonomics / Trumponomics. The majority of the U.S. electorate is tired of intervention wars. They have seen the nation building policy failures your Republican Party (Iraq, Afghanistan) and the Democratic Party (Vietnam, Libya, Syria) got us into and miserably failed.

2. Diplomacy. Get the mullahs to agree to some terms for something in return.

Not a good option. The mullahs know they hold the upper hand. But it might be the best option we currently have.

3. Walk away. Let the Middle East and BRIC and the EU deal with Iran.

4. ?

nortex97 said:

---

The buildup to the military conflict was so obvious only the Europeans could ignore it. Just as they ignored the IRGC slaughtering 30K Iranian protesters during the build up. The misperception that we have a duty to share intelligence and give 'formal notification' to our political enemies in Europe is just that, imho.

Telling the PM's of London/Paris/Madrid etc. what/when/how we were going to launch operations would have been akin to notifying Tehran of the specifics. That's what makes Tusks comments about 'American loyalty' particularly rich.

---

As far as the protesters being slaughtered much of that occurred after Trump encouraged them to do so by saying basically they would not be harmed. But they were and nothing happened following that.

As far as the NATO members go they were fairly unhappy about the country we were attacking on behalf for leveling Gaza in the manner it occurred and the total loss of lives.

So I don't think they are going to move based on harm to protesters in Iran. Especially now after he threatened to wipe their entire civilization out. That and Trump said repeatedly we don't need their help he has this war won.

These countries have taken money from us for years and have taken advantage of the relationship. But with that said Trump not anticipating their lack of support well that's on him.

Trump promised improved standing around the world. I'm sure it's all part of the plan. We shall see.

Bad Trump, an immature response to a Stammer government on shaky ground anyway. Is Trump going to support a new Argentinian invasion that the UK is almost powerless to stop today?

I get the frustration but Europe and America are getting too short sighted about what is going on in Iran and ignoring the big picture.

Who gives a ****? They bring nothing to the table. At all.

We had **** all to do with them flooding their countries with Muslims.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We had **** all to do with them flooding their countries with Muslims.

---

Sadly with the tentacles of USAID maybe we did. So glad it's hopefully fully dismantled now.

BQ78 said:

---

Bad Trump, an immature response to a Stammer government on shaky ground anyway. Is Trump going to support a new Argentinian invasion that the UK is almost powerless to stop today?

---

Supporting our actual ally, Milei, matters. We will see. We are helping him rebuild his military capacity too, but I think clearly Trump would favor a diplomatic path.

Quote:

---

"We are doing everything humanly possible to bring the Falkland Islands back into Argentine hands," Milei told Neura yesterday.

"Sovereignty is not negotiable, but it must be done judiciously, it must be done with intelligence."
Trump's plan to punish Nato allies was laid out in an internal Pentagon email revealed earlier today.

Trump has repeatedly slammed Nato as a "paper tiger" in recent weeks, and even hinted at leaving the alliance altogether.

---

If the Brits want to fight to maintain their control over the islands again, let them try to exert their power, imho.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We had **** all to do with them flooding their countries with Muslims.

---

Lol we absolutely did. You think those people are going to stick around while their country falls apart? Obviously they would flee towards Europe. We toppled Assad and placed actual Al Qaeda head choppers in charge of Syria while we were still fighting them in Afghanistan. Would you stick around for that?

Even Gaddafi saw mass migration coming. You can't displace millions of people and then be shocked when they flee to a better place.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11139345

Prosperdick said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We had **** all to do with them flooding their countries with Muslims.

---

Sadly with the tentacles of USAID maybe we did. So glad it's hopefully fully dismantled now.

---

Don't forget Soros and his Open Society Foundation.

The U.S. has burned through so many munitions in Iran that some administration officials increasingly assess that America couldn’t fully execute contingency plans to defend Taiwan from a Chinese invasion if it occurred in the near term, per WSJ

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) April 24, 2026

nortex97 here is another reason we need to rethink NATO because so many of our so called allies are letting the lawyers run the show. Most Americans don't know about this story of betrayal of UK hero's:

Quote:

---

The three-hour battle was brutal. It was the first time in decades that soldiers had fixed bayonets and charged across open ground to trenches where the enemy, armed with rocket-propelled grenades, heavy machine guns and assault rifles, had dug in. Three other soldiers received Military Crosses for their valiant actions that day.
But while L/Cpl Wood was being decorated for bravery, behind the scenes, human rights lawyers had already started the ball rolling on a legal case that would become the greatest smear of British troops in recent history.

---

Free link to the whole article:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/bb0a6124d49abf54

Here is more on the investigation of the lawyers who went after the heroes:

what is Argentina providing to the US?

BREAKING: President Trump is sending Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to Pakistan for a second round of Iran talks, per CNN.

Oil prices have fallen to a new low of the day on the news.

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 24, 2026

An anchor of freedom/resistance to China/capitalism in South America? In all seriousness we've been steadily increasing our military and economic cooperation with them over the past year, as part of the Donroe doctrine.

We do import a lot of beef/agricultural products I think from the Argentinians, and they jumped on a free trade deal this year.

nortex97 said:

---

An anchor of freedom/resistance to China/capitalism in South America? In all seriousness we've been steadily increasing our military and economic cooperation with them over the past year, as part of the Donroe doctrine.

We do import a lot of beef/agricultural products I think from the Argentinians, and they jumped on a free trade deal this year.

---

Chile will be coming on strong following Argentina. Brazil is poised for incredible growth under the Donroe Doctrine. Venezuela and ultimately Cuba will be blank slates for investment and growth.

Cheap chinese **** will soon be replaced by cheap south american ***** But ultimately thats a better deal for the USA, for S America and ultimately the world. The EU can cozy up to the Chinese, Russians and Jihadist all they want. We will keep to our half of the world.

Appreciate your updates nortex97. Always informative and based on accurate information. Its refreshing with so much rumor, innuendo and blatant lies that seem to fill the space only to be proven inaccurate or completely wrong within a few hours.

Like believing the WSJ has some inside reporting on our weapons stockpiles...

aggiehawg said:

---

BREAKING: President Trump is sending Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to Pakistan for a second round of Iran talks, per CNN.

Oil prices have fallen to a new low of the day on the news.

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 24, 2026

---

"fallen to a new low for the day" translates to going from $95.50 to $93.20.

Always cracks me up how they tweet such exaggeration.

I continue to find it interesting Kushner being in on the continued negotiations. I do NOT subscribe to the grand semitic conspiracy theories regarding BiBi and the Kushner Klan so I am not indicating anything negative at all.

Makes me wonder if Jared goes to essentially be Trump's direct eyes / ears in the room. Undoubtedly Trump trusts Witkoff explicitly, but even still I think Trump is going to have "family" level trust in the room with sending Jared.

How critical was Jared in the Trump 1.0 Abraham Accords? I know he received much credit, but what role did he actually play? I honestly never looked into it that much.

Here's to hoping negotiations go nowhere and we get back to bombing Iran in earnest.

BTW, below courtesy of this 3+ year old thread about "explosions in Iran" from a relatively small, uneventful drone attack claimed by no one but attributed to Israelis.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3358549/1

Its interesting to reflect on some of the comments and positions folks had 3 years ago vs now. Some consistency, some inconsistency.

But one thing remains, the Islamic Republic of Iran must be ended. Iran was never meant to be an Islamic "territory" and the current regime are nothing but unelected dictators hellbent on wreaking havoc, misery and destruction worldwide.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Here's to hoping negotiations go nowhere and we get back to bombing Iran in earnest.

---

Trump said there aren't many legitimate Iranian military targets left to strike from the air or the sea. Trump and Bibi said they have hit and destroyed almost all of them.

Quote:

---

But one thing remains, the Islamic Republic of Iran must be ended.

---

A warranted, justifiable objective.

But how can that be accomplished?

Everything else aside, I don't see how you can't be for suspending Spain. They are now openly communist and cavorting with China.

If that's who they want to be, then fine but they shouldn't be in NATO or possibly even the EU if that's the path they are going.

DeschutesAg said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Here's to hoping negotiations go nowhere and we get back to bombing Iran in earnest.

---

Trump said there aren't many legitimate Iranian military targets left to strike from the air or the sea. Trump and Bibi said they have hit and destroyed almost all of them.

Quote:

---

But one thing remains, the Islamic Republic of Iran must be ended.

---

A warranted, justifiable objective.

But how can that be accomplished?

---

Still have some ayatollahs, mullahs and IRGC leaders that need their one way ticket to paradise.

Over 80% of the people in Iran DO NOT SUPPORT the illegal theocratic regime that has oppressed its population, murdering tens of thousands of them, in what has been 47 years of terror propagated by Iran against its people, its neighbors, its foes, its declared call to destroy the USA and Israel, and now adding attacking their allies to their list of atrocities.

True regime change should remain an objective, but I believe Trump will accept something less if they agree to and abide by the other demands.

YouBet said:

---

Everything else aside, I don't see how you can't be for suspending Spain. They are now openly communist and cavorting with China.

If that's who they want to be, then fine but they shouldn't be in NATO or possibly even the EU if that's the path they are going.

---

Watched a nifty little 4 part series on the rise and fall of the Inca Empire.

How is it relevant? Well, Spain very conveniently forgets it conquistadors and colonial past and their responsibility for annihilating the indigenous peoples of South and Central America in the name of the monarchy and for the Catholic church.

Is Spain prepared to pay reparations to those countries and their first peoples who were slaughtered, raped, pillaged, poisoned and looted for years with the wealth brought home to the Spanish crown.

The Spanish and Portuguese also have much more responsibility in the enslavement of Africans in the "New World" than Americans could ever take credit for.

In my estimation, the Pope and the Spaniards should sit this one out given their history in genocide and invading other countries.