Colonel Kurtz said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

The Iranians themselves have often stated that to them "Death to America" more means "GTFO of the Middle East" and that it's our backing of Israel that draws their ire.

---

Do you have a link to this?


Its seems to me that they could just say "GTFO of the Middle East" rather than using code.

---

You're on the internet, so surely you can do a google search. Here are a couple of quick links. There was a fairly well known interview with the leader of their parliament where he said this exact thing as well, not too long ago:

https://americ.info/america/whats-with-irans-death-to-america-chant-al-jazeera/?amp=1

https://www.firstpost.com/world/iran-defends-death-to-america-slogan-says-not-against-us-citizens-but-its-leadership-13907589.html#goog_rewarded

The idea that Iran has ever posed a threat to the homeland is a nonstarter. Not only has it never happened, there's no indication it ever would.

---

My bad! I assumed since you made a claim, you could support it!

YOU CANNOT!!

Neither link supports your lie that "Death to America" means anything other than what is plainly and clearly means!

Stop carrying water for terrorists!!!

---

Much like that f-t-c character, I can't actually read it for you, that part is up to you.

Quote:

---

Iran's parliament clarified on Wednesday (July 16) that the chant "Death to America" is a rejection of US leadership and its history of global dominance, not a call for harm against American citizens.

---

But you'll no doubt explain away Trump's "end their civilization" rhetoric without Trump himself even offering such an explanation.

---

Ahh, the naivety of the left.

Islam allows, even encourages, lying to infidels to achieve the goals of Islam.

Who is an infidel? Anyone who is not Muslim.

Hope that helps.

---

You can say this exact same thing about Judaism. Of course, that would be antisemitic.

---

I don't think so. One of the reasons Jews have been successful in the banking arena is by keeping promises. Promised to Christians, Muslims, atheists and the like.

The concept in Islam is entirely different. They do not view any agreements as being valid if made with a non Muslim.

TxSquarebody said:

---

It' not like the target is a school. How many children are working the powerplants? …..

---

Probably fewer than the amount of children working Mary Jane farms in Cali

DTP02 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Iran doesn't just hate America for reasons of history. If that were true, their real conflict would've have arguably been more with the UK. No, early on their Shia Islamist movement zeroed in on the USA as the great enemy against whom they could go to an apocalyptic war, for deeply religious reasons that we were the greatest power for the movement to be pitted against to conform with the 12th imam return narrative. It surely also has to do with some geopolitical manipulations we had a hand in from after WW2 to 1979 but the movement had identified the USA as the enemy before that. The issue with the Shah simply provided pretext and opportunity. Israel is a subplot to it because they are the regional Jewish dominated state and the closest American ally or alleged proxy in the region and are reachable.

We could ignore Iran, but they won't ignore us. The Islamic Revolution was never going to leave us alone.

---

That's certainly one way to look at it. The Iranians themselves have often stated that to them "Death to America" more means "GTFO of the Middle East" and that it's our backing of Israel that draws their ire.

The imminent threat, such that it was, was to Israel, not the US.

---

If Muslims were so concerned with the ME, why have they all invaded Europe?

Iran hates the US because they hate the West. And, when it comes to military power, we ARE the West.

---

The vast majority of the numbers for the "invasion" of Europe (and the US, to a lesser extent) were caused by refugees crises which we had a significant hand in causing. Which is why we should be very concerned about starting another one in Iran and sending millions more Muslims heading to the west with grievances and no goal of assimilating.

Our short-sighted ME policies have constantly caused longterm unforeseen negative consequences, often greater than the problems we were trying to solve.

We've gone from four enunciated goals for this conflict, all of them military, and no boots on the ground, to talks of boots on the ground and causing massive economic and societal disruption.

And Trump is engaging in Twitter diplomacy with increasingly unhinged rhetoric and smelling of desperation. We all hope it's just rhetoric anyway.

I actually supported the initial bombing last year (remember when Trump said we obliterated their nuclear program and set them back years?) and begrudgingly supported the initial campaign this year.

But we are on the verge of taking things too far, if we haven't already. And it's likely to cost us in the long term as well as the short term politically. Those who get their politics only on TexAgs or their own social media bubble would be surprised at how unpopular this war is becoming among people the right is counting on for political support. And the economic pains from this hasn't even really started to hit yet, and those pains could be quite devastating if things don't stabilize quickly.

---

This is the crux of the matter.

I disagree with your outlook. I see it as 100% chicken little.

If we are still fighting in November as hard as we are now, I might change my mind.

But, I think that people that hold your view dismiss the success against ISIS, Hamas, Murduro due to confirmation bias.

No one wants another Iraq war, including me. We are not there.

We don't need an Iraq war to cause short, intermediate and longterm problems. We're already going to feel the economic pain from this over the next few months, just from what's happened to date. That is inevitable at this point. The major bump in price at the pump we've already seen is just the start.

Any combination of the Strait not being opened, damage to other energy production in the ME, and major economic damage to Iran is only going to make things worse, in addition to running the risk of a refugee crisis and the downstream impacts of that.

At which point, if anything worsens from here, I'll refer you back to the stated aims of this war (stated by Trump himself, and further emphasized by Hegseth) and ask you to ask yourself what the heck are we doing?

And November is your line in the sand where you might change your mind? Kiss the House, possibly the Senate and definitely the economy goodbye, in addition to the last of critical parts of our stockpile of high tech weaponry for a long time.

I doubt you were saying November 5-6 weeks ago. I doubt many others on here were either. Lot of sunk cost fallacy going on.

I think we have forgotten about what we did to German cities in WWII.

DTP02 said:

---

We don't need an Iraq war to cause short, intermediate and longterm problems. We're already going to feel the economic pain from this over the next few months, just from what's happened to date. That is inevitable at this point. The major bump in price at the pump we've already seen is just the start.

Any combination of the Strait not being opened, damage to other energy production in the ME, and major economic damage to Iran is only going to make things worse, in addition to running the risk of a refugee crisis and the downstream impacts of that.

At which point, if anything worsens from here, I'll refer you back to the stated aims of this war (stated by Trump himself, and further emphasized by Hegseth) and ask what the heck are we doing?

And November is your line in the sand where you might change your mind? Kiss the House, possibly the Senate and definitely the economy goodbye, in addition to the last of our stockpile of high tech weaponry for a long time.

I doubt you were saying November 5-6 weeks ago. I doubt many others on here were either. Lot of sunk cost fallacy going on.

---

Marco Rubio pointed out pretty plainly why we attacked.

Iran was investing tremendous resources to overwhelm Iron Dome, and was ordering it's army to launch all of those resources pretty indiscriminately throughout the middle east if/when attacked. That's what actually happened, and I am certain that Israel was aware of that before the attack. We can't allow Iran to continue to stockpile enough that Iron Dome gets swamped. If that means we have to pay more for gasoline for a while, it is likely worth it.

It's very rational military strategy.

Or, would you like to actually list the things that you are claiming are the stated goals and address them directly instead of putting out some vague statement where you can move the goalposts later?

Over_ed said:

---

But can the GOP take the pressure "bombing children" would create in the US.

---

of course they can. they already bombed a bunch of schoolchildren at the start of this war and swept it under the rug. bizarre that this thread is overlooking that.

nm

Colonel Kurtz said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

The Iranians themselves have often stated that to them "Death to America" more means "GTFO of the Middle East" and that it's our backing of Israel that draws their ire.

---

Do you have a link to this?


Its seems to me that they could just say "GTFO of the Middle East" rather than using code.

---

You're on the internet, so surely you can do a google search. Here are a couple of quick links. There was a fairly well known interview with the leader of their parliament where he said this exact thing as well, not too long ago:

https://americ.info/america/whats-with-irans-death-to-america-chant-al-jazeera/?amp=1

https://www.firstpost.com/world/iran-defends-death-to-america-slogan-says-not-against-us-citizens-but-its-leadership-13907589.html#goog_rewarded

The idea that Iran has ever posed a threat to the homeland is a nonstarter. Not only has it never happened, there's no indication it ever would.

---

My bad! I assumed since you made a claim, you could support it!

YOU CANNOT!!

Neither link supports your lie that "Death to America" means anything other than what is plainly and clearly means!

Stop carrying water for terrorists!!!

---

Much like that f-t-c character, I can't actually read it for you, that part is up to you.

Quote:

---

Iran's parliament clarified on Wednesday (July 16) that the chant "Death to America" is a rejection of US leadership and its history of global dominance, not a call for harm against American citizens.

---

But you'll no doubt explain away Trump's "end their civilization" rhetoric without Trump himself even offering such an explanation.

---

Ahh, the naivety of the left.

Islam allows, even encourages, lying to infidels to achieve the goals of Islam.

Who is an infidel? Anyone who is not Muslim.

Hope that helps.

---

You can say this exact same thing about Judaism. Of course, that would be antisemitic.

---

This is just straight up ignorance right here.

The OT contains tons of teachings about the importance of treating the traveler with hospitality and respect.

Can you quote me somewhere in the Bible where it says that it is OK to lie to non-Jews?

DTP02 said:

---

We don't need an Iraq war to cause short, intermediate and longterm problems. We're already going to feel the economic pain from this over the next few months, just from what's happened to date. That is inevitable at this point. The major bump in price at the pump we've already seen is just the start.

Any combination of the Strait not being opened, damage to other energy production in the ME, and major economic damage to Iran is only going to make things worse, in addition to running the risk of a refugee crisis and the downstream impacts of that.

At which point, if anything worsens from here, I'll refer you back to the stated aims of this war (stated by Trump himself, and further emphasized by Hegseth) and ask you to ask yourself what the heck are we doing?

And November is your line in the sand where you might change your mind? Kiss the House, possibly the Senate and definitely the economy goodbye, in addition to the last of critical parts of our stockpile of high tech weaponry for a long time.

I doubt you were saying November 5-6 weeks ago. I doubt many others on here were either. Lot of sunk cost fallacy going on.

---

Calling for a wipe out in November... just 7 months away now! Noting can change for the better, it will all be for the worst. Please everyone listen to me that the sky is falling for sure this time.

Perhaps a DIsney storyline approach to geopolitics is not well advised. But I could be wrong I guess.

Are you taking the position that it would be impossible for the GOP to hold the Senate in November?

BusterAg said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

We don't need an Iraq war to cause short, intermediate and longterm problems. We're already going to feel the economic pain from this over the next few months, just from what's happened to date. That is inevitable at this point. The major bump in price at the pump we've already seen is just the start.

Any combination of the Strait not being opened, damage to other energy production in the ME, and major economic damage to Iran is only going to make things worse, in addition to running the risk of a refugee crisis and the downstream impacts of that.

At which point, if anything worsens from here, I'll refer you back to the stated aims of this war (stated by Trump himself, and further emphasized by Hegseth) and ask what the heck are we doing?

And November is your line in the sand where you might change your mind? Kiss the House, possibly the Senate and definitely the economy goodbye, in addition to the last of our stockpile of high tech weaponry for a long time.

I doubt you were saying November 5-6 weeks ago. I doubt many others on here were either. Lot of sunk cost fallacy going on.

---

Marco Rubio pointed out pretty plainly why we attacked.

Iran was investing tremendous resources to overwhelm Iron Dome, and was ordering it's army to launch all of those resources pretty indiscriminately throughout the middle east if/when attacked. That's what actually happened, and I am certain that Israel was aware of that before the attack. We can't allow Iran to continue to stockpile enough that Iron Dome gets swamped. If that means we have to pay more for gasoline for a while, it is likely worth it.

It's very rational military strategy.

---

The Iron Dome is a defensive measure for Israel, so it definitely is a rational military strategy for Israel, which is a point I've made all along. The imminent threat was to Israel. We are not Israel.

We're watching the ending stroke of a strategy Israel adopted 20 years ago to take out the main threats to its borders: Syria, Iraq, and Iran. "Clean Break"- Google it if you're unfamiliar. They were going to go on this with or without us, although it would have looked very different without us. We've admitted as much.

And if you think the economic impact will just be on gas prices you aren't paying attention. Fertilizer, plastics, everything that uses fertilizer or plastic or gas to transport, which doesn't leave much else. It's all already going to go up in the next few months, just based on what's been done to date.

I'm still hoping Trump is going to take a half-measure and then try to de-escalate and claim the W. My real hope is that Iran capitulates, or the people rise up and overthrow, but neither seem likely at this point. Much more realistic to hope that Trump backs down without admitting as much.

As far as our stated aims, if we haven't eliminated or at least drastically reduced their missile and drone threat after almost 6 weeks, as well as setting their nuclear program back years (we were told we already did this 9 months ago and yet here we are) then what have we been doing?

Old McDonald said:

---

Over_ed said:

---

But can the GOP take the pressure "bombing children" would create in the US.

---

of course they can. they already bombed a bunch of schoolchildren at the start of this war and swept it under the rug. bizarre that this thread is overlooking that.

---

They were enemy combatants. I'm using the Obama era definition.

BusterAg said:

---

Are you taking the position that it would be impossible for the GOP to hold the Senate in November?

---

Was being facetious and poking fun at the chicken little pearl clutchers.

I think the Senate probably winds of 55+ to the Rs.

The house could be an 30 to 50 member advantage for the Rs.

Is that bullish? Hell yes. But you don't see your goals low if you want to succeed.

Why is it feasible? The conflict in Iran is soon to be over. Iran is now saying they are still in negotiations. I think Trump is making it clear through those backchannels how the next steps will play out.

Success in Iran, oil returning to normal, and a sky-rocketing economy.

Next challenge will be the Dems and a false flag even in early summer. But Trump 2.0 expects this and plans for it.

Old McDonald said:

---

Over_ed said:

---

But can the GOP take the pressure "bombing children" would create in the US.

---

of course they can. they already bombed a bunch of schoolchildren at the start of this war and swept it under the rug. bizarre that this thread is overlooking that.

---

So you believe Iran's claim of that, despite no proof.

Shocking... Actually, not shocking at all.

aggiedent said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

It' not like the target is a school. How many chikdren are working the powerplants? The question is not what kind of leader takes out a target loaded with children, but what kind of leader loads the target with children in the first place.
As far as taking out infrastructure, humans survived for centuries without electricity. They'll be fine.

---

Do you honestly believe your last sentence? It's unbelievably short sighted.

Because back when the world had no power generation, no rail, no water plants, no sewage treatment, etc etc; we had a fraction of the population, a much shorter life span, and high mortality rates.

Suddenly throw a large population into a scenario where there is no power to run basic utilities or hospitals, curtail the access to food and water, and suddenly have a mass sewage problem; and you have the classic example of a humanitarian disaster. Starvation……..illness………death

Sorry, but that last sentence is just nuts.

---

7th century culture. They'll be fine.

nai06 said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I think we're all falling for the head fake...We might be rolling out the EMP weapons or god knows what to damage their infrastructure

---

Well it's kind of hard not to be concerned when the president is threatening to kill the entire country.

---

Trump is going to kill everyone in Iran?

DTP02 said:

---

The Iron Dome is a defensive measure for Israel, so it definitely is a rational military strategy for Israel, which is a point I've made all along. The imminent threat was to Israel. We are not Israel.

We're watching the ending stroke of a strategy Israel adopted 20 years ago to take out the main threats to its borders: Syria, Iraq, and Iran. "Clean Break"- Google it if you're unfamiliar. They were going to go on this with or without us, although it would have looked very different without us. We've admitted as much.

And if you think the economic impact will just be on gas prices you aren't paying attention. Fertilizer, plastics, everything that uses fertilizer or plastic or gas to transport, which doesn't leave much else. It's all already going to go up in the next few months, just based on what's been done to date.

I'm still hoping Trump is going to take a half-measure and then try to de-escalate and claim the W. My real hope is that Iran capitulates, or the people rise up and overthrow, but neither seem likely at this point. Much more realistic to hope that Trump backs down without admitting as much.

As far as our stated aims, if we haven't eliminated or at least drastically reduced their missile and drone threat after almost 6 weeks, as well as setting their nuclear program back years (we were told we already did this 9 months ago and yet here we are) then what have we been doing?

---

Keeping Israel in good shape is a rational military strategy for the US. Maybe that is where our opinions really differ. There is an argument to be made over whether or not it is in the best interests for US to have an ally in Israel, but that is a different topic. My position is that it is.

As for what are we doing now? Telling Iran that holding the Straight of Hormuz hostage because they are butthurt we kicked their asses that this is a bad idea.

If Iran thinks it's going to get a payday from us like Obama gave them in order for them to play nice, they are in for a big surprise.

If Iran opens the straight without requiring reparations or any peace treaty that doesn't include their inability to enrich uranium, this thing could end tomorrow.

Joe Deertay said:

---

Feckless? I'm allllll for striking Iran…. But I'm feckless for not being okay with CHILDREN being dead? I know in a heartbeat they would kill an American child…. But if they load the children… innocent children into a power plant… I'd have a really hard time pulling that trigger.

---

Its a fake report, your conscious is clear.

I don't think the Iranians play 4D chess……….and Trump doesn't seem to understand that.

Oh, he understands it.

I find it amusing that you think he doesn't.

He is always two steps ahead.

"If Iran thinks it's going to get a payday from us like Obama gave them in order for them to play nice, they are in for a big surprise."

Agreed. In fact, I'm not sure there's ever been a war where the leaders so misunderstand each other. Trump has clearly not understood that strong arm negotiating (4D chess), or threatening, religious fanatics simply isn't going to work. And Iran has failed to understand that Trump has to get his way or he loses control.

Interesting to see how this plays out.

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

This just shows, once again, how ***tty muslims are. They don't value the lives of their children and they use that against the West, who does value the lives of innocents.

---

Democrats have been celebrating baby murder for years. They call it womens healthcare.

This is a ploy - we're bombing something else besides bridges and power plants.

TAMU1990 said:

---

This is a ploy - we're bombing something else besides bridges and power plants.

---

Israel already bombed 8 bridges.

nai06 said:

---

TexasAggie_97 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

TexasAggie_97 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I think we're all falling for the head fake...We might be rolling out the EMP weapons or god knows what to damage their infrastructure

---

Well it's kind of hard not to be concerned when the president is threatening to kill the entire country.

---

I believe his statements are called hyperbole. He's been talking this way since the 80's. I would think people would have picked up on this by now.

---

If that's true why should anyone trust what he says let alone Iran?

---

Well, in a way you shouldn't which is why he is so unpredictable. He might bomb them or he might not but it's the threat and unpredictability that makes him so dangerous and why these people fear him. With that being said he is not going to bomb them back into the stone ages, but he could hit some of their bridges and power plants to try and force them to give in to his demands.

---

That's not a good quality of leadership.


I don't think any world leader should be threatening to kill and an entire country, hyperbole or not. That's the sort of **** Iranians who use children as human shields say (which is a war crime).

The world looks towards the U.S. as a guide in geopolitics, military strategy, culture, basically everything. We have rapidly changed what is considered acceptable for a world leader to say and do (especially militarily).

I'm not saying everything is unjustified, but we have to be aware that what we do and say sets the standard for future wars and conflicts. Do we want to open the door for other countries to do the same? To treat us or our allies similarly?


Boasting about how good a golfer you are or telling a fishing story about the one that got away is fine for hyperbole. It's not acceptable when you are talking about large scale bombing campaigns or the implied use of nuclear weapons.

Someone who does that is not mentally or (more importantly) emotionally stable enough to make those kinds of decisions.

---

Leading the free world and maintaining its safety and freedom is a thankless task. Glad we have Trump leading.

I can't imagine the total abortion we'd have on our hands with Kamala and the queer MN governor.

flown-the-coop said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

This is a ploy - we're bombing something else besides bridges and power plants.

---

Israel already bombed 8 bridges.

---

Hell yeah.

Jump start!

flown-the-coop said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

This is a ploy - we're bombing something else besides bridges and power plants.

---

Israel already bombed 8 bridges.

---

That's Israel - not us

bobbranco said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I think we're all falling for the head fake...We might be rolling out the EMP weapons or god knows what to damage their infrastructure

---

Well it's kind of hard not to be concerned when the president is threatening to kill the entire country.

---

Trump is going to kill everyone in Iran?

---

MSDNC is more unhinged than usual over this. They're truly convinced Trump is going to drop nukes on Iran any minute now.

TAMU1990 said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

This is a ploy - we're bombing something else besides bridges and power plants.

---

Israel already bombed 8 bridges.

---

That's Israel - not us

---

So what are we bombing?

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

The Iranians themselves have often stated that to them "Death to America" more means "GTFO of the Middle East" and that it's our backing of Israel that draws their ire.

---

Do you have a link to this?


Its seems to me that they could just say "GTFO of the Middle East" rather than using code.

---

You're on the internet, so surely you can do a google search. Here are a couple of quick links. There was a fairly well known interview with the leader of their parliament where he said this exact thing as well, not too long ago:

https://americ.info/america/whats-with-irans-death-to-america-chant-al-jazeera/?amp=1

https://www.firstpost.com/world/iran-defends-death-to-america-slogan-says-not-against-us-citizens-but-its-leadership-13907589.html#goog_rewarded

The idea that Iran has ever posed a threat to the homeland is a nonstarter. Not only has it never happened, there's no indication it ever would.

---

You provided Shia propaganda. Why fall for such nonsense?

aggiedent said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

It' not like the target is a school. How many chikdren are working the powerplants? The question is not what kind of leader takes out a target loaded with children, but what kind of leader loads the target with children in the first place.
As far as taking out infrastructure, humans survived for centuries without electricity. They'll be fine.

---

Do you honestly believe your last sentence? It's unbelievably short sighted.

Because back when the world had no power generation, no rail, no water plants, no sewage treatment, etc etc; we had a fraction of the population, a much shorter life span, and high mortality rates.

Suddenly throw a large population into a scenario where there is no power to run basic utilities or hospitals, curtail the access to food and water, and suddenly have a mass sewage problem; and you have the classic example of a humanitarian disaster. Starvation……..illness………death

Sorry, but that last sentence is just nuts.

---

That would be Bibi's wet dream. Turn Iran into a failed state, like Libya, or Syria, or even Iraq. Something that has no teeth. Something that can be bombed whenever they want. Something that will have lots of internal chaos. And something that will never threaten their regional hegemony.

We've gone from "the Iranian people deserve freedom" to "screw them, let's bomb them back to the stone ages."

IRAN:
Article 51(7):⁰“The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of civilian population in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations.” pic.twitter.com/ybytwWZlxj

— Bree A Dail (@breeadail) April 7, 2026

Geneva Convention Article 51(7):

Quote:

---

"The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations."

---

So which side is committing war crimes?

DTP02 said:

---

So exactly what I said. Maybe you should read it and identify the actually stated aims of the war, not the rhetoric, which were further identified by Hegseth. It's the four aims I spelled out for you above.

No terms.

---

The only way to achieve the peace with Iran is their total submission and unconditional surrender.

Please don't buckle, stay the course.

DTP02 said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

The Iranians themselves have often stated that to them "Death to America" more means "GTFO of the Middle East" and that it's our backing of Israel that draws their ire.

---

Do you have a link to this?


Its seems to me that they could just say "GTFO of the Middle East" rather than using code.

---

You're on the internet, so surely you can do a google search. Here are a couple of quick links. There was a fairly well known interview with the leader of their parliament where he said this exact thing as well, not too long ago:

https://americ.info/america/whats-with-irans-death-to-america-chant-al-jazeera/?amp=1

https://www.firstpost.com/world/iran-defends-death-to-america-slogan-says-not-against-us-citizens-but-its-leadership-13907589.html#goog_rewarded

The idea that Iran has ever posed a threat to the homeland is a nonstarter. Not only has it never happened, there's no indication it ever would.

---

Holy head in the sand, Batman!
The world's leading sponsor of terror. Significant funder, trainer, provider of weapons, etc. to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis doesn't pose a threat to the homeland? How many of them do you think walked across the border under Biden's watch?
How naive can you get?

---

Hamas and Hezbollah pose a threat to Israel. The Houthis a threat to Israel, SA, and shipping.

They don't pose a threat to the USA, but to US interests and presence in the ME.

---

So as long as we stay completely out of the Middle East, then we should not worry about Iran?

What sort of strategy it that? Makes sense that you would think pallets of Obama-bucks and totally since fatwas from evil dictators are better strategy than taking any action. So brave, so bold.

---

If we stayed out of the ME, we would not have to worry about Iran. Yes, that was the point of the discussion you seem to be having trouble following. Our involvement in the ME is what drew Iran's ire, not our mere existence or lifestyle or beliefs. And the threat to us is not to the USA but to our interests in the ME. That was the discussion.

---

Ron Paul talked a good game but he was wrong then and you are wrong now.