MTG is pissed (Political)
-
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.
-
@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.
-
but we've been screwing around with these bastards and their nuclear ambitions for 25 years.
The US, self-appointed gatekeepers and the only nation ever to obliterate entire cities of civilians with nuclear bombs. How, exactly, does having the secret codes in the hands of someone like Trump give us any authority on who or who shouldn't have nuclear ambitions?
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.
Surely, you can't be serious.
To add to the comment about 'several generations', this latest action only heaps more resentment upon resentment upon resentment.
-
It's a hard no from me. Iran's nuclear program is being monitored by the relevant official agency. It would be a 2nd-- 2nd Iraq War ("weapons of mass destruction") or even worse, maybe much worse. Hopefully, the U.S. and Israel, again, are forced to come to terms with Iran's current abilities to wage war, and back off a second time.
-
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