Coming soon.... Boots on the ground.

[FastLane]

As are you.

If we cannot trust both Trump and Netanyahu saying the Iran nuclear was obliterated beyond being any threat to the world for MANY YEARS, and then when they attack again mere weeks later claiming 'Iran was days away from being able to nuke the US', everyone, and i mean EVERYONE should question the words Trump and Netanyahu are using to sell these actions.

For instance, even now you still insist it was obliterated while saying 'they became such a threat again weeks later we must go to war to stop them'.

People like you, Trump and Netanyahu need to be ignored in these discussions if you are going to double speak like that and thus have ZERO credibility.

Trump also said if they restarted the nuclear program the US would be back. They restarted it and we are back.

 

[Nordberg]

Iran says they have 480kg of 60% U235. Nuclear experts tell us 60% U235 can be enriched to 95% U235 in 10-14 days. In the entire history of the world no country has enriched to 60% U235 and not produced nuclear bombs. Would you rather Iran get nukes and Trump be wrong about obliterating Iran's nuclear program?

Iran did not refine to 95 as you said. That is certainly one country that did not. Iran was willing to give it up in the deal. The country that was after peace was not the US or Israel. Trump and Bibi were planning this war while supposedly negotiating a peace deal. It was a sneak attack like Pearl Harbor. Except Japan sent an agent to the US to declare war before the attack, Trump joked about that to the Japanese leaders. Unethical, immoral crookerd trump shows who he is regularly and you Trumpys obviously like that in a president.

 

[QP!]

I'm saying if those countries are killing hundreds of Americans and chant death to American and are making the weapons of mass destruction. Yeah I think it is smart to strike them now while the are at their weakest. Iran is building 200 ballistic missiles a month. Think how much harder it would be to stop them 10 years from now.

And that is the NeoCon position. Will you own that?

There has been a rotating chorus of countries in the ME and Africa who have been considered sponsors of terror that result in US deaths and claims of them making weapons of mass destruction.

That was the claim to invade Iraq. It was the claim to invade Afghanistan, and we could make it for maybe another dozen or so countries in the last decades.

Do you accept your view is that America SHOULD HAVE gone to war with all of them, as a preemptive measure based on what theoretically those countries might have been able to do to America if given 10 years to act?

As that is EXACTLY what you are saying. You are saying 'project out 10 years and assess the worst case assumption and America MUST act on that'.

That is a NEoCon wet dream and EXACTLY how they message. John Bolton would spend hours laying out the 'hypothetical threat...if just left to continue' as the reason why America should act now.

 

[FastLane]

Iran did not refine to 95 as you said. That is certainly one country that did not. Iran was willing to give it up in the deal. The country that was after peace was not the US or Israel. Trump and Bibi were planning this war while supposedly negotiating a peace deal. It was a sneak attack like Pearl Harbor. Except Japan sent an agent to the US to declare war before the attack, Trump joked about that to the Japanese leaders. Unethical, immoral crookerd trump shows who he is regularly and you Trumpys obviously like that in a president.

LIES

Japan intended to send a formal warning before attacking Pearl Harbor, but it was not received until after the attack began, resulting in a surprise assault. Known as the "14-Part Message," it was designed to break off diplomatic talks 30 minutes before the attack, but was delayed by translation issues and formatting bottlenecks in the Japanese embassy in Washington, D.C..

 

[QP!]

Trump also said if they restarted the nuclear program the US would be back. They restarted it and we are back.

Trump also said here and which is posted on the White House web site as an official statement STILL...

Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News​

The world is far safer after President Donald J. Trump’s highly successful, decisive precision strikes against the Iranian regime’s key nuclear facilities.

Take it from those who actually know:

President Trump: “Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!

Israel Atomic Energy Commission: “The devastating US strike on Fordo destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable. We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years. The achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material.”

 

[FastLane]

And that is the NeoCon position. Will you own that?

There has been a rotating chorus of countries in the ME and Africa who have been considered sponsors of terror that result in US deaths and claims of them making weapons of destruction.

That was the claim to invade Iraq. It was the claim to invade Afghanistan, and we could make it for maybe another dozen or so countries in the last decades.

Do you accept your view is that America SHOULD HAVE gone to war with all of them, as a preemptive measure based on what theoretically those countries might have been able to do to America if given 10 years to act?

As that is EXACTLY what you are saying. You are saying 'project out 10 years and assess the worst case assumption and America MUST act on that'.

That is a NEoCon wet dream and EXACTLY how they message. John Bolton would spend hours laying out the 'hypothetical threat...if just left to continue' as the reason why America should act now.

What would you do when in your estimation they got nukes and a delivery system in 10 years?

 

[Into the Night]

All opposed to this illegal war, a war of choice should contact their senators, telling them no boots on the ground and no 200 billion dollars for this war either?!! 13 American dead, is 13 American dead too many?!!

What 'illegal war', moron?

 

[Into the Night]

Have you been under a rock?

Nah. You are just hallucinating again, Sybil.

 

[QP!]

I'm saying if those countries are killing hundreds of Americans and chant death to America and are making the weapons of mass destruction. Yeah I think it is smart to strike them now while the are at their weakest. Iran is building 200 ballistic missiles a month. Think how much harder it would be to stop them 10 years from now.

Right.

So over the last 25 years or so you think America fucked up by not starting about a dozen more ME and Africa wars as those things were being threatened.

So you are full NeoCon. That is not an insult. NeoCons have a right to their view point.

I just wanted to know if you own it. i would call your view on the extreme of the Neocon side too. I am not even sure Bolton would have pushed for a dozen more such wars in the last decade or so.

 

[FastLane]

Right.

So over the last 25 years or so you think America fucked up by not starting about a dozen more ME and Africa wars as those things were being threatened.

So you are full NeoCon. That is not an insult. NeoCons have a right to their view point.

I just wanted to know if you own it. i would call your view on the extreme of the Neocon side too. I am not even sure Bolton would have pushed for a dozen more such wars in the last decade or so.

.

 

[QP!]

What would you do when in your estimation they got nukes and a delivery system in 10 years?

Again,

Any nation on earth can start and acquire a nuke in a 10 year frame, so that is why you are extreme for even being within the NeoCon movement as you now admit you are.

YOu are making the argument that the US can and should act based on a hypothetical of 'what if they get a nuke within 10 years...' and if the nation is not seen as friendly to the US today, then attack them now while they are weak and vulnerable.

Take them all out just in case they get a nuke in 10 years and it becomes too dangerous to do it then.

 

[Into the Night]

We have got a crazy man in charge.

OMG

Here's shithead with his blatant stupidity again.

This situation is going to get worse before it gets any better.

This makes you wonder just how psychotic Trump really is

Crazy Trump calls NATO allies ‘cowards’ for failing to help open Strait of Hormuz​

The president has also said the US is considering “winding down” military efforts. But officials said thousands of more troops are heading to the region. So whats going on here???????​

https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/iran-war-us-israel-trump-03-20-26

Apparently all you do is throw insults and live in your paranoia.
Mantras 1a, 1d, 4b.

 

[Into the Night]

You're the kind of spineless, oxygen-wasting maggot who thinks regurgitating conspiracy theories counts as a personality?

The Democrat party is a conspirasy, Stooge. It is no theory.

 

[Into the Night]

Again,

Any nation on earth can start and acquire a nuke in a 10 year frame, so that is why you are extreme for even being within the NeoCon movement as you now admit you are.

YOu are making the argument that the US can and should act based on a hypothetical of 'what if they get a nuke within 10 years...' and if the nation is not seen as friendly to the US today, then attack them now while they are weak and vulnerable.

Take them all out just in case they get a nuke in 10 years and it becomes too dangerous to do it then.

Why do you support brutal dictators with nuclear weapons, Kewpie?

 

[QP!]

.

So by that you are saying you would be ok with accepting the risk of these other nations...

"...(getting) nukes and a delivery system in 10 years?"

But not Iran. You are fine accepting that in a 10 year span OTHERS may get nukes and we do nothing about it but just not for Iran.

OK. Another lack of logic and consistency from you,

 

[Into the Night]

Iran did not refine to 95 as you said.

They were working to, Sybil.

That is certainly one country that did not.

We stopped it in time, Sybil.

Iran was willing to give it up in the deal.

What 'deal', Sybil?

The country that was after peace was not the US or Israel. Trump and Bibi were planning this war while supposedly negotiating a peace deal.

What 'deal',Sybil?

It was a sneak attack like Pearl Harbor.

Attacks in military conflicts are sneak attacks, Sybil. You don't tell the enemy what you are doing.

Except Japan sent an agent to the US to declare war before the attack,

Never happened, Sybil. You are hallucinating again.

Trump joked about that to the Japanese leaders. Unethical, immoral crookerd trump shows who he is regularly and you Trumpys obviously like that in a president.

Never happened, Sybil. You are hallucinating again.

 

[Into the Night]

And that is the NeoCon position. Will you own that?

Yes. He would. So will I. Why do you support brutal dictators with nuclear weapons, Kewpie?

There has been a rotating chorus of countries in the ME and Africa who have been considered sponsors of terror that result in US deaths and claims of them making weapons of mass destruction.

That was the claim to invade Iraq. It was the claim to invade Afghanistan, and we could make it for maybe another dozen or so countries in the last decades.

Do you accept your view is that America SHOULD HAVE gone to war with all of them, as a preemptive measure based on what theoretically those countries might have been able to do to America if given 10 years to act?

What war, Kewpie?

As that is EXACTLY what you are saying. You are saying 'project out 10 years and assess the worst case assumption and America MUST act on that'.

That is a NEoCon wet dream and EXACTLY how they message. John Bolton would spend hours laying out the 'hypothetical threat...if just left to continue' as the reason why America should act now.

Cliche fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Again,

Any nation on earth can start and acquire a nuke in a 10 year frame, so that is why you are extreme for even being within the NeoCon movement as you now admit you are.

YOu are making the argument that the US can and should act based on a hypothetical of 'what if they get a nuke within 10 years...' and if the nation is not seen as friendly to the US today, then attack them now while they are weak and vulnerable.

Take them all out just in case they get a nuke in 10 years and it becomes too dangerous to do it then.

I have to agree with Fastlane:

 

[QP!]

I think it is pretty clear @FastLane was always an extreme NeoCon who just had to surpress that part to fit in with Trumps prior position of being more isolationist.

What Fastlane is saying right now above for anyone to read is that if you take a 10 year window and make a hypothetical assessment that a country has any potential to attack America in that 10 year time frame and they are considered as a US enemy state, then the US should attack them NOW or any time they see them as weak and can seize that opportunity.

Fastlanes entire position is you do not allow those hypothetical 10 year threats to continue to exist because 'what if they obtain the weapons and act on it'.

That is not just Neocon but extreme Neocon and i am sure many neocons tried to switch to be more Trump isolationist but are thrilled to see the NeoCon take over of maga, in the way Fastlane is.

 

[Monad Portal]

Iran says they have 480kg of 60% U235. Nuclear experts tell us 60% U235 can be enriched to 95% U235 in 10-14 days. In the entire history of the world no country has enriched to 60% U235 and not produced nuclear bombs. Would you rather Iran get nukes and Trump be wrong about obliterating Iran's nuclear program?

wait, there's fractions on this quiz?

no fair!