MTG is pissed (Political)
-
Well the Iranian ambassador to the UN brought a wry grin when he said the US and Israel bombs had killed a hundred people of his people, forgetting that he and his mates had killed 30,000 in the last month.
Personally if I see a bloke with a big stick beating up a woman saying you must stay at home and wear a niqab, beating on a man saying his homosexuality is a sin & mental disease; and I have a gun, then I'll say stop. When man with stick continues, argues, threatening to kill me, I'll use my gun to shoot him in the leg. He continues despite argument and warnings then I'll shoot his other leg. He continues, I'll aim higher.
I don't care what nationality any of them are.
We live on one tiny planet and ought to help.
But it is our nature to be self-serving, tribal, nationalistic.@AndyD There is little disputing the ugliness of the regime, but the solution is not having two megalomaniac criminals attacking a sovereign state to save their skins. Netanyahu is a war criminal+, and Trump is tanking at home and the Epstein files are getting closer and closer to the inner circle.
I have read that the Iranian regime has 7 levels of contingency for every major office. They will not be thrown into disarray over the murder of the Supreme Leader. There is someone right behind him to take his place.
What we are doing is promoting more violence as an answer to violence. More hate as an answer to hate. It will not work. And Americans will again, be asked to pay, innocent Iranians will be asked to pay. Both with money and lives. It's gross. And a violation of our constitution to continue without Congressional support.
The industrial revolution cheapened everything.
-
I won't litigate this as such.
I was against my country waging a war of aggression on Iran when I heard first heard of the planning of this dark reality we fine ourselves in now decades ago when the Neocons made no secret of any aspect of their plans to wage a war of aggression on Iran, and I am against it now.
In particular, Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but it has excellent guided missiles, and its military capabilities are vastly underrated.
The battle ground is a small land mass compared to places like the U.S., Canada, Russia, China, Austria, Etc.
It will be very destructive, very quickly, and many expert analysts have talked about what they believe would be an increase for the probability of global nuclear war.
Iran is not an existential threat to the U.S. The U.S. won't but should back away from this illegal war.
-
Unfortunately, MTG lost all credibility years ago.
@Steve-Miller She has indeed made a spectacle of herself and she still holds views that boggle the mind. But I am glad she's speaking out against Trump; she's one of the few from that pack of magats to be doing so. I give her credit for calling out the blatant lies and hypocrisy of Trump, Vance, et. al.
-
And not to mention--a big one--the increased risk of nuclear war. Iran isn't going to take this sitting down, and Trump is throwing out some damned scary language, which will in turn, no doubt, be met with retaliation. This could very quickly escalate to the level of unimaginable horror. Trump is not a stable man. (For that matter, none of these players are very stable.) A war of madmen.
-
This is the difference between campaigning and governing. This intervention will be brief.
-
@AndyD There is little disputing the ugliness of the regime, but the solution is not having two megalomaniac criminals attacking a sovereign state to save their skins. Netanyahu is a war criminal+, and Trump is tanking at home and the Epstein files are getting closer and closer to the inner circle.
I have read that the Iranian regime has 7 levels of contingency for every major office. They will not be thrown into disarray over the murder of the Supreme Leader. There is someone right behind him to take his place.
What we are doing is promoting more violence as an answer to violence. More hate as an answer to hate. It will not work. And Americans will again, be asked to pay, innocent Iranians will be asked to pay. Both with money and lives. It's gross. And a violation of our constitution to continue without Congressional support.
What we are doing is promoting more violence as an answer to violence. More hate as an answer to hate. It will not work. And Americans will again, be asked to pay, innocent Iranians will be asked to pay. Both with money and lives. It's gross. And a violation of our constitution to continue without Congressional support.
This is basically my take.
@andyd I get what you're saying, but isn't the way. And our president is breaking laws to do it his way.
We need a different way.
-
What I'm reading is that control is basically distributed in a network in Iran, and the death of even several key leaders won't fundamentally change the control structure there. But by doing what we've done, we've introduced an element of chaos and uncertainty into the whole situation.
I think @mik is right, that this will be a short intervention; my assessment is that Trump was just looking for another headline about how brave and great he is. He will hold up the death of the ayatollah as a huge success, nothing anyone else would have done and he will continue to call for the Iranian citizens to take back their country. If they don't, he'll just say he set the stage and they didn't take advantage of it and wash his hands of the whole matter.
I doubt that he's considered what happens next.
-
A good Associated Press report ...
https://apnews.com/article/trump-iran-ayatollah-khamenei-ad853dc1d5606fd9202b65a75bdbfc2f
I thought this was interesting, too.
Here's the non-paywall version of the WaPo article mentioned by the Times of India:
-
One should not ignore takes that are uncomfortable, like this one from a former head of CentCom ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/01/opinion/iran-trump-bad-faith.html
-
Serious analysis from the Institute for the Study of War.
Israel appears to be targeting the internal apparatus of political control, consistent with a regime change goal. I can't say I'm shedding any tears for the butchers who killed over 10,000 (up to possibly 30,000) protestors last month.
-
Another view from Politico/Foreign Affairs.
-
What I'm reading is that control is basically distributed in a network in Iran, and the death of even several key leaders won't fundamentally change the control structure there. But by doing what we've done, we've introduced an element of chaos and uncertainty into the whole situation.
I think @mik is right, that this will be a short intervention; my assessment is that Trump was just looking for another headline about how brave and great he is. He will hold up the death of the ayatollah as a huge success, nothing anyone else would have done and he will continue to call for the Iranian citizens to take back their country. If they don't, he'll just say he set the stage and they didn't take advantage of it and wash his hands of the whole matter.
I doubt that he's considered what happens next.
What I'm reading is that control is basically distributed in a network in Iran, and the death of even several key leaders won't fundamentally change the control structure there. But by doing what we've done, we've introduced an element of chaos and uncertainty into the whole situation.
I think @mik is right, that this will be a short intervention; my assessment is that Trump was just looking for another headline about how brave and great he is. He will hold up the death of the ayatollah as a huge success, nothing anyone else would have done and he will continue to call for the Iranian citizens to take back their country. If they don't, he'll just say he set the stage and they didn't take advantage of it and wash his hands of the whole matter.
I doubt that he's considered what happens next.
I do not believe you're right. He saw an opportunity and took it. No one knows for certain how it will end up, but we've been screwing around with these bastards and their nuclear ambitions for 25 years.
What we must do is avoid trying to dictate what Iran looks like after this, and I certainly hope there has been groundwork laid for a replacement government. While Palavi probably has the most power behind him, I seriously doubt the Iranians wish to see the return of the Shah, even in his son. We cannot forget the genesis of the Islamic Republic was largely due to our brutal meddling, and several generations of Iranians have been taught all about that.
All that aside, I am pretty sure domestic political considerations were a factor. Should this be successful the midterms will go much better. If not, well, it looked pretty bad anyway.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login