Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Meanwhile, in France.

French President Macron declares that France will no longer report to the world how many nukes they have,

"To be free, we must be feared. To be feared, we have to be powerful."pic.twitter.com/2deDfISvP0

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) March 2, 2026

What's up with the timing of this announcement? Is Macron just trying to sound tough with everything going on right now?

---

The only things that fear the French are frogs and snails.

nortex97 said:

---

Most maritime insurance policies are subject to cancellation at any time, in general with 72 hours notice.

They didn’t even cancel insurance for ships targeted by Russia for entering Ukraine…. They just jacked up the rates.

This is all very unusual. https://t.co/p8tDLrBlkF

— John Ʌ Konrad V (@johnkonrad) March 2, 2026

Note, I'm not an expert on this at all, just my understanding.

---

Russia attacked the ports and a few ships, but not all that many and to this day really hasn't. They certainly could pound Uke ports and shipping with drones pretty indescriminately and that'd be a realy issue for the Ukes to sell their foodstuffs.

Iran has a much smaller body of water to hit, with lots more targets, many, many of which are much, much more valuable than a few container ships. Absolutely not surprised this has happened as the risk of a full attempt by the Iranians to use small boats, drones and so forth to sink and burn a few ULCC or VLCC in the Gulf would basically make shipping there impossible for a while. The risk insurance on something carrying 2-4 million barrels of crude is astronomical inside an engagement zone. I have no idea how local laws would hold companies shipping through the area accountable for the environmental damage even if it was Iran responsible for the damage.

You're not going to sail a boat of Australian mutton through an area where you have petro burning on the surface and leaking up everywhere and the risk levels are just insane. We're 72ish hours in and the decapitation hasn't allowed the Iranians to really execute a coherent strategy. Any strategy shutting the straight would have to be made at the very top and the risk level to Tehran for that action is incendiary.

I'm sure that there is thought inside the brains of the current leadership that is hiding in hospitals and schools that they can ride this out no matter how much damage they take from the air. A million member military and another million in a religious militia, not including intelligence, IRGC and police assets along with a total monopoly on violence will lead to that confidence not being totally unfounded. If they can kill enough protestors to keep a semblence of order then they will wait on the international community to stop the US.

It's not a terrible gamble considering the cards they have to play. It's going to be very, very difficult to eliminate enough of the zealots to turn power over (really). We'll see, but I still have my doubts.

Harry Stone said:

---

If Biden or Obama did this libs would be singing their praises, not protesting. I dont care what Trump said about wars, this is good for the world, along with venezuela. Suck it libs, your leaders were too afraid or compromised to do this.

---

That's where I'm at as well. 2026 has been a bad year for dictators. At some point the terrorist regime and their newly appointed leaders who get killed almost instantly are going to have to wave the white flag.

All of the white liberal hags being paid to protest are simply just continuing to make themselves and their party who is ok with it look even more silly to the regular American people.

I'm also wondering when the classified files on Crooks and the other lunatic will start rolling out to the public. Trump has basically said that Iran tried to take him out twice, but most of the media will simply ignore it. When files get released that the 2 attempted assassinations had Iran ties, then the majority of the American public will have to finally accept it.

Silvertaps said:

---

Swollen Thumb said:

---

Lloyd's is certainly the global center for marine and energy insurance (among other classes), but the assertion that war risk policy don't normally get cancelled is incorrect and the speculated MI6 connection is ridiculous.

Typically these policies include very short cancellation notice period (usually ~7 days) that is triggered in the event of conflict in a particular region involving particular sovereign states. Once triggered, notice is given that the policy will be cancelled at the end of the notice period. That mechanism is in place so that the triggering events are covered for the very short-term (7 days), while allowing underwriters to cancel and (if they choose to) subsequently reinstate coverage on a re-rated basis (much higher premium) given the change in risk. The fun part is that the new policy will also have the same a 7 day cancellation notice provision that is immediately triggered, allowing underwriters to further review, re-rate and reinstate coverage (or not) after another 7 days. So you essentially get in a 7 day loop of renewing coverage. Of course, underwriters do not have to renew if the exposure is too great...such as a ship moving through Hormuz as Iran is threatening destruction of same.

---

are you referring to an open cargo type of policy?

---

Any property policy that covers war risks. Most non-marine property policies will exclude war/political violence perils, so such coverage (if needed) would be addressed separately by a dedicated policy for which there is a specialized market. Marine policies covering Hull (the vessel) and/or cargo will often include war perils subject to the cancellation provision referenced in my first post above.

LEGEND

Jim Cramer this morning: $AVAV is the “drone company the US favors”

The stock has crashed 33% since pic.twitter.com/Q7J5QSOqJg

— Inverse Cramer (@CramerTracker) March 2, 2026

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

Dungeon Crawler Carl said:

---

Judge a man by his actions, not his words......

---

So, he was confident in his ability to negotiate.

He underestimated the Islamic Iranian's obstinance.

He had to pivot.

I'd rather he adjust his position when things change rather than sticking with a position that was no longer viable out of fear of being called a "hypocrite".

I see him adjusting based on reality and not popularity. that he's Israels *****....

---

FIFY....

TRANSLATION: "Israel forced our hand. They fired first. And because they are the stronger nation, we had no choice. We had to launch at the same exact time -5 minutes for appearances' sake, to show that they actually, technically went first. Yes, we are their bitch." https://t.co/tWOxNx5jJs

— Chris Martenson (@chrismartenson) March 2, 2026

Why that guy is even allowed on financial channels on TV is beyond me.

Perfectly said! Thank you for sharing.

And there they are.

Quote:

---

Look for the usual suspects to RRRRREEEEE that this shows Israel forced Trump into something he didn't want to do

---

Easy as predicting the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

BMX Bandit said:

---

And there they are.

Quote:

---

Look for the usual suspects to RRRRREEEEE that this shows Israel forced Trump into something he didn't want to do

---

Easy as predicting the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

---

Yep, it's truly bizarre. Lets call it JDS or Jew Derangement Syndrome. New name for an ancient disease.

BuddysBud said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The US should withdraw from Nato this afternoon. It's a liability, more than anything else to the American people.

Quote:

---

Spain blocks U.S. use of bases for Iran strikes.

---

Nato represents a political hindrance, rather than a strength or ally in our fight to free the Iranian people.

---

The question at the end should be, " how sustainable is the E.U's current approach?

The US can easily survive without its NATO "allies".
Can a free Europe survive without the economic and military support from the U.S.?

---

Think we all know the answer to that question.

Swollen Thumb said:

---

Silvertaps said:

---

Swollen Thumb said:

---

Lloyd's is certainly the global center for marine and energy insurance (among other classes), but the assertion that war risk policy don't normally get cancelled is incorrect and the speculated MI6 connection is ridiculous.

Typically these policies include very short cancellation notice period (usually ~7 days) that is triggered in the event of conflict in a particular region involving particular sovereign states. Once triggered, notice is given that the policy will be cancelled at the end of the notice period. That mechanism is in place so that the triggering events are covered for the very short-term (7 days), while allowing underwriters to cancel and (if they choose to) subsequently reinstate coverage on a re-rated basis (much higher premium) given the change in risk. The fun part is that the new policy will also have the same a 7 day cancellation notice provision that is immediately triggered, allowing underwriters to further review, re-rate and reinstate coverage (or not) after another 7 days. So you essentially get in a 7 day loop of renewing coverage. Of course, underwriters do not have to renew if the exposure is too great...such as a ship moving through Hormuz as Iran is threatening destruction of same.

---

are you referring to an open cargo type of policy?

---

Any property policy that covers war risks. Most non-marine property policies will exclude war/political violence perils, so such coverage (if needed) would be addressed separately by a dedicated policy for which there is a specialized market. Marine policies covering Hull (the vessel) and/or cargo will often include war perils subject to the cancellation provision referenced in my first post above.

---

Got it…so I was one of those specialized markets, (monoline Terrorism) but US based, however, wrote quite a bit in Lloyd's. I'm unfamiliar with this Notice Of Cancellation provision you are talking about though. Property brokers approach me for the cover that's excluded in their policies. We do have a very broad Political Violence policy that includes War and all the other perils within that risk, but excludes attacks from specific countries (took a lot of losses the first year of Ukraine/ Russian war).

I want to ask some of our people in London about this, but trying to get clarity. Company wide we've already been given the "Suspension of Authority" for all unquoted renewals and new biz for Iran, Iraq, Israel, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen.

Our PV policy is extremely expensive, especially in places like the Middle East. Lloyd's is a wild place with a lot of carriers. No telling how some of those riskier policies are written in order to get them more affordable.

BMX Bandit said:

---

And there they are.

Quote:

---

Look for the usual suspects to RRRRREEEEE that this shows Israel forced Trump into something he didn't want to do

---

Easy as predicting the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

---

The sun doesn't RISE! The earth rotates! /some lib somewhere after reading your post

SECRETARY RUBIO: There was absolutely an imminent threat. We knew that if Iran was attacked, even by someone else, they would immediately come after us and we were NOT going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded. pic.twitter.com/goer7Ku0Ta

— Department of State (@StateDept) March 2, 2026

Yeah that's not a good look. The world superpower got dragged into a war

Dan Scott said:

---

SECRETARY RUBIO: There was absolutely an imminent threat. We knew that if Iran was attacked, even by someone else, they would immediately come after us and we were NOT going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded. pic.twitter.com/goer7Ku0Ta

— Department of State (@StateDept) March 2, 2026

Yeah that's not a good look. The world superpower got dragged into a war

---

A "war" we are winning.

Interesting conundrum here. You either support Israel's right to defend themselves without our say so, or you keep a leash on your allies and not let them do anything without your say so.

bobbranco said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

SECRETARY RUBIO: There was absolutely an imminent threat. We knew that if Iran was attacked, even by someone else, they would immediately come after us and we were NOT going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded. pic.twitter.com/goer7Ku0Ta

— Department of State (@StateDept) March 2, 2026

Yeah that's not a good look. The world superpower got dragged into a war

---

A "war" we are winning.

---

What's winning? What's the objective.

So far we’ve heard that although we killed the whole Iranian regime, this was not a regime change war. And although we obliterated their nuclear program, we had to do this because of their nuclear program. And although Iran was not planning any attacks on the US, they also might…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) March 2, 2026

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Meanwhile, in France.

French President Macron declares that France will no longer report to the world how many nukes they have,

"To be free, we must be feared. To be feared, we have to be powerful."pic.twitter.com/2deDfISvP0

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) March 2, 2026

What's up with the timing of this announcement? Is Macron just trying to sound tough with everything going on right now?

---

Harnessing his inner Charles de Gaulle.

YouBet said:

---

Interesting conundrum here. You either support Israel's right to defend themselves without our say so, or you keep a leash on your allies and not let them do anything without your say so.

---

Do what you got to do but don't drag us into it. And if we get dragged into, then we call the shots. We're Michael Jackson, they're Tito. It's starting to sound like they dragged us into a war.

Lol.

Dan Scott said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Interesting conundrum here. You either support Israel's right to defend themselves without our say so, or you keep a leash on your allies and not let them do anything without your say so.

---

Do what you got to do but don't drag us into it. And if we get dragged into, then we call the shots. We're Michael Jackson, they're Tito. It's starting to sound like they dragged us into a war.

---

Well, they doing what they have to do was going to involve us no matter what because Iran would make sure of it.

That's the conundrum.

Those *******s, their financing, and their proxies have killed thousands of Americans over the last 50 years. Piss on this whole notion that we shouldn't bomb the hell out of them or assist Israel.

You seriously don't understand what's going on?


It's pretty basic.... the recipe has been repeated over & over....


https://www.independent.org/article/2026/02/27/petrodollar-war-theory/

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Meanwhile, in France.

French President Macron declares that France will no longer report to the world how many nukes they have,

"To be free, we must be feared. To be feared, we have to be powerful."pic.twitter.com/2deDfISvP0

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) March 2, 2026

What's up with the timing of this announcement? Is Macron just trying to sound tough with everything going on right now?

---

He's bluffing. I'll bet the count dwindled down to zero while EU lost the will to defend itself.

That's where the United States then tells Israel that because you're going to make your problem, my problem, let's examine if this move and all the uncertainty that will come is worth it.

Per Netanyahu, the regime is the weakest it's ever been, per Trump we destroyed their nuclear unless they were able to rebuilt everything in 8 months, all their proxies pretty much destroyed, Iran has huge internal issues to deal with and about to have financial catastrophe.

Now we're paying higher energy prices, Americans are at risk, billions paid, and no clue what's to come. As the superpower in the world that wants stability, we tell Israel to chill.

Walsh says it better than I can.

I can't take the gaslighting, guys. I really can't. Conservatives are now running around saying "Iran has been waging war on us for 47 years." Okay then why didn't any of you call for an attack on Iran at any point until now? Why didn't you make a case for Trump "ending the war,…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) March 2, 2026

Matt Walsh is now the latest "conservative" hero of the political left.

Will be interesting to see if he transitions into another Bill Kristol or a Tucker Qatarlson.

Rapier108 said:

---

Matt Walsh is now the latest "conservative" hero of the political left.

Will be interesting to see if he transitions into another Bill Kristol or a Tucker Qatarlson.

---

Once the money stops flowing they always get desperate.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/khameneis-unforced-errors-proved-fatal-635fb5e4?st=HYJJS6

A very good article exploring the whys

Rapier108 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Look for the usual suspects to RRRRREEEEE that this shows Israel forced Trump into something he didn't want to do

Megyn Kelly’s transformation into heel is fully complete.

Imagine thinking Trump doesn’t make the decisions.
And that somehow he, JD, Rubio, Hegseth etc., were tricked into this by podcasters and radio hosts.

The Botox isn’t supposed to go directly into your brain, lady. pic.twitter.com/UpsJ8C8TdG

— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) March 2, 2026

---

We need to ship Kelly, Tucker, Fuentes, Owens, and the rest of their cabal of antisemites over to Iran so they can be among like minded individuals.

---

Antisemites. LOL

I keep seeing all over X that we thought this would be over in 48-72 hours. I can't see any evidence that we thought that. Where is that originating?