4stringAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Seems more likely than not that ground forces will be in play shortly to me. If so, this topic is going to be VERY loud in the coming days. Especially if casualties come from it and the manner in which they do. America is not ready for their sons and daughters to be on the wrong end of an FPV feed.

---

Won't change much. Either party is so locked into their groupthink at this point that literally nothing in the world matters.

---

I beg to differ. "Boots on the ground" is a special status, even to your average joe on the street. I can even tell you most people don't even directly care about the war as is, right now. They may have an opinion but they won't expound on it endlessly or think about it as they fall asleep. Ground troops will force that extremely frustrating phrase back into a LOT of people's minds though. "Back in another ME ground war..."

I think it would be a political mess unseen yet in this term.

---

Yep, if we put boots on the ground on Iranian mainland and soldiers start dying his approval rating will fall to 10% or less and you will start seeing impeachment proceedings (valid or not) if he doesn't abort that mission rapidly.

---

I'm resigned to the fact that the midterms will already go to the Dems, it usually does with the party out of power and the Republicans in Congress have fumbled the ball on the SAVE act and other things irrespective of what Trump is doing in Iran or doing/not doing domestically. Because of that, they will start impeachment proceedings anyway over ICE and other things, not to mention Iran.

---

The last two years of Trump's term with a Dem Congress are going to be a cluster, to put midlly.

4stringAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Seems more likely than not that ground forces will be in play shortly to me. If so, this topic is going to be VERY loud in the coming days. Especially if casualties come from it and the manner in which they do. America is not ready for their sons and daughters to be on the wrong end of an FPV feed.

---

Won't change much. Either party is so locked into their groupthink at this point that literally nothing in the world matters.

---

I beg to differ. "Boots on the ground" is a special status, even to your average joe on the street. I can even tell you most people don't even directly care about the war as is, right now. They may have an opinion but they won't expound on it endlessly or think about it as they fall asleep. Ground troops will force that extremely frustrating phrase back into a LOT of people's minds though. "Back in another ME ground war..."

I think it would be a political mess unseen yet in this term.

---

Yep, if we put boots on the ground on Iranian mainland and soldiers start dying his approval rating will fall to 10% or less and you will start seeing impeachment proceedings (valid or not) if he doesn't abort that mission rapidly.

---

I'm resigned to the fact that the midterms will already go to the Dems, it usually does with the party out of power and the Republicans in Congress have fumbled the ball on the SAVE act and other things irrespective of what Trump is doing in Iran or doing/not doing domestically. Because of that, they will start impeachment proceedings anyway over ICE and other things, not to mention Iran.

---

Of course they will. You voted Trump for mass deportations, ending birthright citizenship, and maybe a border wall? Too bad you don't get any of that and instead you get a corporate tax cut and another Middle East War.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The last two years of Trump's term with a Dem Congress are going to be a cluster, to put midlly.

---

Its March 27 Miss Nancy McNaysayer.

The idea that a Dem led congress come January is not even close to being any sort of certainty.

Keyno said:

---

Of course they will. You voted Trump for mass deportations (a), ending birthright citizenship (b), and maybe a border wall (c)? Too bad you don't get any of that and instead you get a corporate tax cut and another Middle East War.

---

(a) - As of the most recent official statements from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in late 2025 and early 2026 (covering roughly the first year of President Trump's second term, from January 20, 2025, onward), the Trump administration claims that more than 2.5 million illegal aliens have left the United States. This figure breaks down asver 605,000 to 675,000 deportations (formal removals by ICE, CBP, and other DHS operations). Later statements updated this to around 622,000675,000 for the first full year.

Approximately 1.9 million to 2.2 million self-deportations (voluntary departures encouraged by stricter enforcement, including incentives like the CBP Home app offering flights and stipends of $1,000$2,600).
source: dhs.gov

(b) - On January 20, 2025 (his first day in office for his second term), President Trump signed Executive Order 14160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship."

It applies only prospectively to babies born after February 19, 2025 (30 days after the EO was signed). It does not affect anyone already born or granted U.S. citizenship.
source: whitehouse.gov

Multiple federal courts issued preliminary injunctions shortly after it was signed, blocking implementation nationwide. Lower courts have consistently ruled it likely unconstitutional, citing the plain text of the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court's 1898 precedent in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (which affirmed birthright citizenship for a child of non-citizen Chinese immigrants who were legal residents).
source: scotusblog.com

The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court as Trump v. Barbara (a class-action challenge). Oral arguments are scheduled for April 1, 2026, with a decision expected by late June or early July 2026.

(c) - Progress Since January 2025 (Federal Construction)Construction restarted quickly in early 2025 using previously appropriated funds (e.g., FY2021) that had been paused or slowed under Biden. Major funding came from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed July 2025), which allocated $46.5 billion for border barriers and technology.Completed new/expanded barriers: Approximately 2530 miles of physical Smart Wall (steel bollard barriers) as of January 2026, with some reports noting around 29.5 miles by late January 2026 (including 12 miles in a 45-day spurt). More than 10 miles were added in the last ~50 days of that period. Pace was averaging **2 miles per week** by mid-December 2025, with plans to ramp up to 10 miles/week.
source: cbp.gov

Under construction or in advanced planning: Hundreds of miles awarded via contracts. Key early actions included:

March 2025: First contract for ~7 miles in Hidalgo County, Texas (Rio Grande Valley).

June 2025: Contract for ~27 miles in Santa Cruz County, Arizona (Tucson Sector).

September/October 2025: 10 contracts worth $4.5 billion for ~230 miles of Smart Wall + nearly 400 miles of technology (cameras, lights, sensors, patrol roads) across multiple sectors.

By January 2026: Contracts awarded for a total of ~587 miles of barriers (primary, secondary, and waterborne). Overall, over $1113 billion placed on contract, with plans for the rest by mid-2026.

source: homeland.house.gov

Waterborne barriers: Installation began in the Rio Grande River in January 2026.

The "Smart Wall" system includes 30-foot steel bollards (often painted black), secondary fencing in places, water buoys/barriers in river sections, patrol roads, and integrated detection technology. Long-term goal: Cover ~1,4001,422 miles with physical barriers (primary + secondary + waterborne), leaving ~535 miles for technology-only coverage due to rugged terrain.

wola.org

CBP's Smart Wall Map (updated weekly until a pause in February 2026 due to government shutdown issues) tracks completed, under-construction, and planned sections. Some delays occurred in early 2026 related to contract approvals at the DHS Secretary level.

Its March 27 Miss Nancy McNaysayer.

General question: If pearls are clutched hard enough, will diamonds be produced or just crushed seashells by the seashore?

Hoyt Ag said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The last two years of Trump's term with a Dem Congress are going to be a cluster, to put midlly.

---

Its March 27 Miss Nancy McNaysayer.

The idea that a Dem led congress come January is not even close to being any sort of certainty.

---

I like your optimism but the reality is that we are entering into a war with no exit strategy, the S&P is now trading at July 2025 levels and falling daily, nothing of significance has been done with prosecutions in the Epstein files, our House and Senate cannot get a single freaking thing done and Rs are the majority, gas is up, etc. Trump needs to get some major wins and get them fast so the average American wants to vote R if they even vote at all.

---

I don't fault Trump for the war. I think it's the right call at the right time, and we just need to see it through. It took 4 years to defeat the radical Japanese and Germans. Won't take 4 years against the Iranians, but it might take a while. And I don't care about the Epstein files. If there was anything incriminating against people in high places it would have been released years ago by opposite political partisans who had access to the information. I don't think your typical American citizen is too concerned about that conspiracy theory.

But they do care about affordability, job security, inflation, etc. You would have to be the ultimate ostrich with your head-in-the-sand to believe that's a good news environment. It's not, and people know it, and it will be reflected in the midterms. Count on it.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hoyt Ag said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The last two years of Trump's term with a Dem Congress are going to be a cluster, to put midlly.

---

Its March 27 Miss Nancy McNaysayer.

The idea that a Dem led congress come January is not even close to being any sort of certainty.

---

I like your optimism but the reality is that we are entering into a war with no exit strategy, the S&P is now trading at July 2025 levels and falling daily, nothing of significance has been done with prosecutions in the Epstein files, our House and Senate cannot get a single freaking thing done and Rs are the majority, gas is up, etc. Trump needs to get some major wins and get them fast so the average American wants to vote R if they even vote at all.

---

I don't fault Trump for the war. I think it's the right call at the right time, and we just need to see it through. It took 4 years to defeat the radical Japanese and Germans. Won't take 4 years against the Iranians, but it might take a while. And I don't care about the Epstein files. If there was anything incriminating against people in high places it would have been released years ago by opposite political partisans who had access to the information. I don't think your typical American citizen is too concerned about that conspiracy theory.

But they do care about affordability, job security, inflation, etc. You would have to be the ultimate ostrich with your head-in-the-sand to believe that's a good news environment. It's not, and people know it, and it will be reflected in the midterms. Count on it.

---

Agreed. My point was kinda that each American probably cares about a combination of those things I listed amongst others. Not a good look for the administration, IMO. Your last paragraph is spot on.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

I don't fault Trump for the war. I think it's the right call at the right time, and we just need to see it through. It took 4 years to defeat the radical Japanese and Germans. Won't take 4 years against the Iranians, but it might take a while. And I don't care about the Epstein files. If there was anything incriminating against people in high places it would have been released years ago by opposite political partisans who had access to the information. I don't think your typical American citizen is too concerned about that conspiracy theory.

But they do care about affordability, job security, inflation, etc. You would have to be the ultimate ostrich with your head-in-the-sand to believe that's a good news environment. It's not, and people know it, and it will be reflected in the midterms. Count on it.

---

I think your overall take is well-reasoned (you did not ask for nor do you need my endorsement, just saying I find it all reasonable) but think your outlook is a bit slanted to the half empty.

I think its obvious if the markets are flat or down, consumer sentiment is anything but positive, we are at a stalemate in Iran, unemployment and interest rates are low double digits, then yes its going to be a bloodbath in November.

There is a near zero chance of that all being the case but you are correct in that it is not absolute zero.

DonHenley said:

---

Trump said no new wars and we are in one with Iran. Trump said he would release the Epstein Files and we get portions of them. Trump said he'd lower costs and we got increasing inflation and prices. About the only thing Trump has done is secure the border, and even so his deportations are way lower than the Obama Presidency.

---

Deported under Obama were paper deportations. If you presented at the border and were not let in, they counted you as deported.

Appreciate the update and to see the talking points from BlueSky have yet to be updated this week.

Quote:

---

with no exit strategy

---

Does unconditional surrender sound like an appropriate exit strategy?

DonHenley said:

---

Trump said no new wars and we are in one with Iran. Trump said he would release the Epstein Files and we get portions of them. Trump said he'd lower costs and we got increasing inflation and prices. About the only thing Trump has done is secure the border, and even so his deportations are way lower than the Obama Presidency.

---

How are you defining increasing inflation and what is your baseline?

DonHenley said:

---

Trump said no new wars and we are in one with Iran. Trump said he would release the Epstein Files and we get portions of them. Trump said he'd lower costs and we got increasing inflation and prices. About the only thing Trump has done is secure the border, and even so his deportations are way lower than the Obama Presidency.

---

Pretty much how I see it. The trump I voted for has reneged on all his major campaign promises, and this war was so obviously a bad idea I am having trouble seeing how the President of the US fell for it. Not even Biden or Obama fell for it.

Inflation is likely around 4% since the invasin of Iran.

Are you really trying to play that devils advocate? Come on man….

100%

DonHenley said:

---

Trump said no new wars and we are in one with Iran. Trump said he would release the Epstein Files and we get portions of them. Trump said he'd lower costs and we got increasing inflation and prices. About the only thing Trump has done is secure the border, and even so his deportations are way lower than the Obama Presidency.

---

The war with Iran was always going to happen because of their fanatical obsession with harming others. Just a matter of when.

They are releasing the Epstein files, but I realize the truly committed conspiracy believers will never be satisfied. Can't help you there.

Overall economy and affordability isn't going well. Trump is actually doing more good than bad on that front by reducing taxes and regulations, but the headline news and his bizarre obsession with tariffs doesn't help him in the court of public opinion. And of course the impact of higher oil/gasoline from the Iran war isn't helping. It is what it is.

A Dem Congress won't be fun, but I remain extremely grateful that Kamala isn't in the WH. That would have been a disaster.

Bayou City said:

---

Inflation is likely around 4% since the invasin of Iran.

Are you really trying to play that devils advocate? Come on man….

---

I'm merely trying to establish the baseline because we get claims all of the damn time on here that manipulate stats to try and prove something with inflation.

And likely isn't factual until it's shown to be. It won't surprise me but we don't know inflation is up until next reports come out. Energy obviously is up.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Quote:

---

with no exit strategy

---

Does unconditional surrender sound like an appropriate exit strategy?

---

Sure, how many American lives and how much American money are you willing to put down for it? Can we at least compel Israel to send troops this time? (They did not in Iraq War 2003).

If I was president, this was would have already ended.

The amount of historical and political ******edness on this thread is epic

Keyno said:

---

Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

If you believe the IAEA inspectors were able to conduct unfettered inspections or Iran's nuclear facilities and if you believe they were enriching uranium beyond agreed levels only as a deterrence against the Jews, then I do not believe there is any common ground to be had.

If you believe the Iranians did not tell Witkoff about having enough enrichment for warheads, then that's just denying facts presented. If you are trying to get cute with words that the recently departed ayatollah and his recently fragment successor had no intention of developing and using a nuclear weapon against the Great Satan and Little Satan, then there is not much we agree on there either.

I fully understand your point of view. And as bewildering as it is to me, it is your view, your truth and I won't deny you from it.

No back to discussions on real things happening and the political ramifications.

---

The IAEA had 24/7 monitoring of Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities- Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan- by way of cameras and sensors. These sites had on the ground inspectors continuously. The IAEA never found evidence of a nuclear weapons program. These are the facts. You can assume the contrary based on whatever, but it would not be in line with the evidence.

Again, you misunderstood what I said concerning Witkoff and I will correct you I guess for the third time. I DO believe the Iranians told Witkoff they have enriched uranium for warheads. Let me say it again so maybe you understand it. I DO BELIEVE they told him that. One more time. When Witkoff says "Iran claims to have enriched uranium for warheads", I believe that Iran told him that. Hopefully that settles that for you.

The Ayatollah which was assassinated had a fatwa against nuclear weapons. That is just public record and it is what it is. I am not sure if his son/successor holds the same position as I have not heard anything from him regarding it. His entire family has been killed by the US/Israel, so he may take a harder line in that regard.

---

IAEA estimated last June that Iran had a significant amount of uranium enriched up to 60%. Since the 12 day "war" last year they have not had access to those facilities to see if that has changed.
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2026-8.pdf?utm_source=.com

https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-uranium-enrichment-suspend-ccf574a324504b985f4b158f9d3d6941

Saying they don't want a nuke is just dumb. They're an aggressive country that had uranium enriched way beyond a point for energy use.

---

Yes, Trump ripped up the JCPOA in 2018. Even still, Iran allowed IAEA inspectors to remain up until 2024 (even though they really had no reason to). They were expelled entirely after the 12 day war.

Calling Iran "an aggressive country" is really kind of beyond the pale. Do I need to post the stats of how many nations US/Israel has attacked compared to Iran in the last 50 years?

---

If you're choosing to believe Iran didn't want a nuke because the ayatollah said so 20+ years ago, why would the JCPOA or IAEA inspections be needed?

Your counterpoint to me saying Iran is aggressive is to say the US and Israel are aggressive? Just the definition of whataboutism.

YouBet said:

---

Bayou City said:

---

Inflation is likely around 4% since the invasin of Iran.

Are you really trying to play that devils advocate? Come on man….

---

I'm merely trying to establish the baseline because we get claims all of the damn time on here that manipulate stats to try and prove something with inflation.

And likely isn't factual until it's shown to be. It won't surprise me but we don't know inflation is up until next reports come out. Energy obviously is up.

---

Overall inflation is down since Trump took office, and whoever said there is not exit strategy is really mis-informed good lord.

GMaster0 said:

---

If the American people voted today they would be really pissed at the administration. It would be a slaughter for the Republicans, everything is going badly that concerns the average American. Bad war that wasn't sold to the public, high fuel prices, a bear market, long tsa lines, high interest rates, a tariff war resulting in higher prices. How's the average American doing?

Not great, Bob!

---

It's just getting started too. The next few years are not going to be kind to the United States of America economically.

They're in this war to try and stimulate it but it isn't going to work.

Keyno said:

---

Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

If you believe the IAEA inspectors were able to conduct unfettered inspections or Iran's nuclear facilities and if you believe they were enriching uranium beyond agreed levels only as a deterrence against the Jews, then I do not believe there is any common ground to be had.

If you believe the Iranians did not tell Witkoff about having enough enrichment for warheads, then that's just denying facts presented. If you are trying to get cute with words that the recently departed ayatollah and his recently fragment successor had no intention of developing and using a nuclear weapon against the Great Satan and Little Satan, then there is not much we agree on there either.

I fully understand your point of view. And as bewildering as it is to me, it is your view, your truth and I won't deny you from it.

No back to discussions on real things happening and the political ramifications.

---

The IAEA had 24/7 monitoring of Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities- Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan- by way of cameras and sensors. These sites had on the ground inspectors continuously. The IAEA never found evidence of a nuclear weapons program. These are the facts. You can assume the contrary based on whatever, but it would not be in line with the evidence.

Again, you misunderstood what I said concerning Witkoff and I will correct you I guess for the third time. I DO believe the Iranians told Witkoff they have enriched uranium for warheads. Let me say it again so maybe you understand it. I DO BELIEVE they told him that. One more time. When Witkoff says "Iran claims to have enriched uranium for warheads", I believe that Iran told him that. Hopefully that settles that for you.

The Ayatollah which was assassinated had a fatwa against nuclear weapons. That is just public record and it is what it is. I am not sure if his son/successor holds the same position as I have not heard anything from him regarding it. His entire family has been killed by the US/Israel, so he may take a harder line in that regard.

---

IAEA estimated last June that Iran had a significant amount of uranium enriched up to 60%. Since the 12 day "war" last year they have not had access to those facilities to see if that has changed.
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2026-8.pdf?utm_source=.com

https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-uranium-enrichment-suspend-ccf574a324504b985f4b158f9d3d6941

Saying they don't want a nuke is just dumb. They're an aggressive country that had uranium enriched way beyond a point for energy use.

---

Yes, Trump ripped up the JCPOA in 2018. Even still, Iran allowed IAEA inspectors to remain up until 2024 (even though they really had no reason to). They were expelled entirely after the 12 day war.

Calling Iran "an aggressive country" is really kind of beyond the pale. Do I need to post the stats of how many nations US/Israel has attacked compared to Iran in the last 50 years?

---

You can't be serious and believe the nonsense you're posting.
Iran's stated goal is the genocide of all non-believers in Islam, particularly their radical terroristic version.
In their efforts to accomplish this goal they

• Seizing the American Embassy as a prelude to terrorism worldwide
• sponsored the attacks on American troops, killing American soldiers.
• sponsored attacks on Israel killing innocent civilians
• sponsored terrorist attacks on civilian shipping from several different countries

Just a VERY SHORT LIST
Iranian and Iranian-Backed Attacks Against Americans (1979-Present)

The American responses causing war were all in response to attacks on other countries. Some were not executed to the satisfaction of many, but were undeniably in response

edit spelling

HoustonAggie11 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Bayou City said:

---

Inflation is likely around 4% since the invasin of Iran.

Are you really trying to play that devils advocate? Come on man….

---

I'm merely trying to establish the baseline because we get claims all of the damn time on here that manipulate stats to try and prove something with inflation.

And likely isn't factual until it's shown to be. It won't surprise me but we don't know inflation is up until next reports come out. Energy obviously is up.

---

Overall inflation is down since Trump took office, and whoever said there is not exit strategy is really mis-informed good lord.

---

What has the administration said the exit strategy is ?

Hoyt Ag said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

Seems more likely than not that ground forces will be in play shortly to me. If so, this topic is going to be VERY loud in the coming days. Especially if casualties come from it and the manner in which they do. America is not ready for their sons and daughters to be on the wrong end of an FPV feed.

---

Won't change much. Either party is so locked into their groupthink at this point that literally nothing in the world matters.

---

I beg to differ. "Boots on the ground" is a special status, even to your average joe on the street. I can even tell you most people don't even directly care about the war as is, right now. They may have an opinion but they won't expound on it endlessly or think about it as they fall asleep. Ground troops will force that extremely frustrating phrase back into a LOT of people's minds though. "Back in another ME ground war..."

I think it would be a political mess unseen yet in this term.

---

Yep, if we put boots on the ground on Iranian mainland and soldiers start dying his approval rating will fall to 10% or less and you will start seeing impeachment proceedings (valid or not) if he doesn't abort that mission rapidly.

---

I'm resigned to the fact that the midterms will already go to the Dems, it usually does with the party out of power and the Republicans in Congress have fumbled the ball on the SAVE act and other things irrespective of what Trump is doing in Iran or doing/not doing domestically. Because of that, they will start impeachment proceedings anyway over ICE and other things, not to mention Iran.

---

Agreed. There is no way Rs pull off winning midterms.

---

Ken Paxton disagrees.

mjschiller said:

---

WBBQ74, jja79 - marxist hate hearing the truth from Miller.

---

My point was why watch Ingraham or any of the Fox shows? They parade out flaccid Republicans screaming got em and they don't do a damn thing.

This would be terrific as a starting point. A direct fallout of the current conflict, and our lack of real 'allies' via our 'alliance.'

Trump is considering a major change to how NATO works, proposing a “pay-to-play” system where countries that don’t spend 5% of their GDP on defence could lose their say in key decisions, including military action.

Source: The Telegraph pic.twitter.com/6frCgaMT59

— Clash Report (@clashreport) March 28, 2026

Trump is considering withdrawing US troops from Germany, a move he has been weighing since returning to office.

Source: The Telegraph pic.twitter.com/2IzZQNggbl

— Clash Report (@clashreport) March 28, 2026

Not another dime should be spent basing Americans in Germany.

[This thread on the political ramifications of the Iran war has gone off the rails into an anti-Israel argument. If you want to explore that topic specifically, please start a different thread and don't hijack this one with it -- Staff]

Politically I think the fallout will be very negative for the GOP in the midterms. This is largely an unfavorable war within the moderate base that voted for Trump. There's growing sentiment this isn't geopolitically beneficial to the US and is pushed by some sects of the right for religious purposes. Time will tell but I don't think the midterms are going to be pretty.

What is the "growing sentiment" based on outside of a few talking heads?

3-4 weeks in with minimal US casualties is not resulting in "growing sentiment".

Secure the Hormuz, retrieve the enriched uranium and have a path forward with some incremental steps of progress and gas will be under $2 and DJIA over 55k and much crow shall be served on this threads.

Imagine folks who cheer for the US to fail and do so by ignoring success.

Bizarre.