BMX Bandit said:
DeschutesAg said:
BMX Bandit said:
It's a fact that Carlson and the others named are 100% aligned with Bernie & Jazmine ok the Iran/Israel issue.
BMX: That is an accurate statement, but the underlying logic in the implication you're making is specious and completely flawed. Because of your background, I presume you know that. It is irrelevant whether Bernie and Tucker arrived at a similar conclusion on an issue or are 180 degrees apart and hold opposite views on an issue. What matters is whether a conclusion or view on an issue is correct or wrong. Heck, there are many views Bernie has which are also held by Trump voters.
With anything in life, when you look around and you see that your are aligned with people who are wrong time and time again on just about every issue there is, you should look in the mirror and say "WTF am I doing?"
If you are a BigRobeto to type or Rand Paul and just want out or the Middle East, I get it. We can agree to disagree.
But when you reach your conclusions about Iran/ Israel based on lies from leftist and terrorist regimes, then you start promoting that same propaganda, then you are no different than the Bernies and Jasmines. Lying trash that should be taken out.
I don't really care that some Trump voters also agree with Bernie Sanders. He has many populist supporters that I don't align with. What I'm talking about is conservatives or people that claim to be conservative like Carlson, Kelly, etc.
They have gone way past just disagreement. They are now actively part of a machine pushing the propaganda for Iran and other enemies of America.
I understand your point of view, but I disagree with it. Americans are being objectively critical of Trump's and Hegseth's war with Iran, and they are being objectively critical of the lies and threats and the enormously excessive political power and political influence that Netanyahu, American pro-Zionists, and AIPAC have here in the USA.
The act of making those criticisms is not tantamount to being on the side of the Iranian mullahs and the IRG. Americans have a 1st Amendment right and a patriotic and solemn civic duty to speak up when an Administration is lying to us and is heading down the wrong path. That is what we're seeing and hearing from tens of millions of Americans from across the entire U.S. political spectrum.
There are many justifiable, objective, 100-percent valid criticisms being made of what the Trump regime has done in Iran, its explanations of why the POTUS made this decision, and its failure to explain what it plans to do next.
The criticisms have originated from every idealogical point across the entire American political spectrum -- from the far-left, mainstream left, center-left, center, center-right, mainstream-right, and far-right.
You're ignoring the substance of those criticisms and simply smearing the critics by lumping them all together as far-lefties. That tactic won't work.
There is too much truth and too much observable, factual evidence contained in the substance of the criticisms. And there are too many critics from every U.S. political faction, including even from Americans who have been Trump's staunchest supporters for the past ten years.
You should be providing substantive counter-evidence and counter-arguments. But there isn't much of that to be found on the Trump-Hegseth side, so you're pounding the table and attacking the character of the witnesses.
Many F16 posters will recall these same kind of tactics were used by others twenty years ago against anyone who made objective observations and justifiable, fact-based criticisms of the unwarranted preemptive Iraq war and the incompetently planned, badly bungled U.S. occupation.
For 3 years after Saddam's regime was toppled, the GWB Administration and its staunchest supporters insisted there was no substantial multi-factional insurgency against our American troops and no internecine multi-faction civil war occurring between the competing factions of the many groups who comprised Iraq's population.
Yet anyone willing to open their eyes and look at the evidence in US-occupied Iraq could see both were happening. It was only when it became clear his party was going to get shellacked in the November 2006 midterm elections that GWB finally publically admitted there was indeed a widespread insurgency and civil war going on in Iraq and tens of thousands more American ground troops were needed in Iraq to defeat it.
Iran is not like Iraq. Not yet, anyway. Militarily we have reportedly destroyed much of Iran's capability to conduct conventional war on sea, land, and air. However, because we haven't put any ground troops in Iran, the Iranian mullahs & IRG regime were able to quickly replace their killed leaders, and they still have total control of Iran on the ground.
So what happens next?
In some serious and impactful ways, our preemptive war on Iran is a 3x bigger and worse challenge than Iraq was.
Top of the list is the Strait of Hormuz which is a huge problem with a rapidly approaching "MUST BE FULLY RE-OPENED" due date. Half of the world economy and 4B people will be adversely affected. Trump and Hegseth apparently have not decided how to solve this.
Because of the importance and immediacy of the Hormuz shipping channel problem, it appears: either we the USA must solve it immediately by using American ground troops, or the countries that heavily depend on the SoH shipping channel being open must convince us to move aside so they can step in and solve it via a combination of diplomacy, bargaining, security promises, money, deals, and threats.
