This is where we can track news and updates relating to Stopping Endless Wars.
Nima Alkoshid (on YouTube) interviews various analysts about the various conflicts almost every day.
2 Likes
Hereâs the Google Doc from tonightâs meeting:
2 Likes
Except Rand Paul
And Massie.
Rand Paul has a pretty unimpeachable stance on this one; he has been arguing for austerity, and involvement in a war is anything but!
Anybody appearing on panels to discuss the pros and cons of US involvement needs to read highlights of Huckabeeâs letter to Trump and ask point blank of panelists: âDoes that sound like an episode of insanity to you? And if it does, what does that say about people trying to propagate that message??â (Trump retweeted itâŚ)
I think the Israeli people need to hit the streets to eject NUTanyahoo; that might give Iran a good reason to pause hostilities and return to a negotiating table (If Israel could accept the principles of the previously torn up agreementâŚ)
Weâre doing it here with protests and Court actions. They have to do heavy lifting there (no matter if the Netanyahoo faction is in power through electoral corruptionâŚ)
Iâm skeptical, but weâll see when itâs time to vote on the War Powers ActâŚ
+2 weeks: He probably is waiting for the War Powers vote.
So now youâre giving them +2 weeks to âunconditionallyâ surrender?
Looks like he is not going to wait for the War Powers vote and chance impeachment??
Will we have a successful bipartisan impeachment this time?
Will MAGA ideologues (like BannonâŚ) still stump for him, or get on board the impeachment train the way Dave Smith is ready to do?
Repubs Paul and Massie will do it (in spite of Massieâs absurd statement that he would âvote for Trump againâŚâ -that would have been before this possibly lunatic Iran strike actionâŚ)
Hershâs info might be a little scrambled here. Israel might do a tactical nuke furnished by the US, and the US will still make like they didnât do it; but then Israel can no longer play the no-comment-on-nukes game. Weâll see!
If Israel claims to drop them, it still wonât stop Iran from continuing to strike them. Nobody is thinking this through <sarcasm> -but what a surprise⌠</sarcasm>
My complements to people no longer believing ANYTHING Bunker Boy says! (especially just after he agreed to extend negotiations in bad faithâŚ)
At this point I think a joint statement on a coordinated response to the use of nukes in Iran needs to be made by Pakistan and Turkey. [Why Turkey? Although they donât have nukes, they can provide lots of aid and supplies to Iran. They were a big reason as to why Russia was able to undermine sanctions for YEARS.] This would throw cold water on any fantasies of âregime changeâ.
Would I welcome regime change in Iran? Sure, but itâs not going to happen on the fantasy timetable that the Mossad, neocons, and Trump think it will. It has to come through cultural change that can take decades. How many years was it from the first Soviet atom bomb test to the breakup of the Soviet Union? [And to think the Clintons snatched defeat from the jaws of that victory by not backing a Marshall plan for the Soviet Union, so we ended up with a gangster like Putin!]
You would be lucky to get the Iranians to agree to what Kerry negotiated in exchange for all sanctions being called off. A secular government in Iran? No freaking way! (as much as I prefer secular governmentsâŚ)
Iâm sorry to say: it appears that both France and Germany are kompromatted-out, what with France calling for ZERO percent uranium. Thatâs an utter fantasy at this point; thatâs effectively saying you will back regime change.
I am obviously not going to run into much agreement here at TYT, but I donât see what choice Israel had, in trying to stop Iranâs nuclear program. It was pretty clear (in my opinion) that:
- Iran has been seeking nuclear weapons for several decades
- if anything, they were and are far too close.
- Leaders there have been threatening and idealizing destruction of Israel for decades.
- Leaders there have (from what little I can see) been supporting Hamas and other organizations with money and weapons for decades.
If anything, in my opinion, Israel and the rest of the world waited for too long to go after the Iranian weapons program and now there is this terrible problem where the key facility possibly cannot be eliminated with conventional weapons.
If Netanyahu really actually wanted to defeat and eliminate Hamas, get the hostages back, and improve Israelâs security and standing and future, I think he would have done something along the lines of the following:
- ask for more help from the Muslim world with providing sanctuary for Palestinian civilians while Israel goes after hostages in Gaza. To my mind, going after Hamas there is like trying to go after the Mafia in Italy. It is unrealistic to expect help from the local citizens when they may well suffer a terrible fate for helping the Israelis.
- go after Iran sooner. After all, Iranâs transgression here was not just their pursuit of a nuclear weapons program, but being the sun-source of so much of the financing and weapons that were brought into Gaza (if Iâm understanding correctly.
Instead, Netanyahu prioritized a slow process that inevitably killed lots of civilians with his cynical 20:1 ratio, irrevocably allowed Israel to be trolled into mass-slaughter of human beings, and he allowed the Iranian program to continue past the point of Israelâs safety. In my view, this is not good leadership, nor was it done in a way that has helped secure his countryâs future in a peaceful world.
I probably wonât get a lot of agreement with my my post, but in any event, as for the âno more warsâ concept, Iâm not sure itâs how I would formulate a platform, but if most TYT members are into it then I have to say, standing up for Iran finally achieving the nuclear weapons it has been seeking for decades is in my fallible view not the best way to achieve a no-more-wars ideal.
Just to get a bead on your beliefs: do you think Iran was honoring the Kerry agreement, and that meant a bomb was not in the near term a threat?
1 Like
Massieâs War Powers vote is no longer the action item. After the foreign adventure today, the new action items are:
-
to impeach Trump for instigating a war that had no [non-Mossad] intel to support it, and a majority of Americans did not want; and
-
get Israeli control out of Congress.
Nobody was buying that â2 weeksâ thing, Bunker Boy; NOBODY. If you want to play: âfuck you, Iâm bombing them anyway because everybodyâs laughing at me, so this gets me instant respectâ (great prediction and insight in Hershâs analysisâŚ), itâs fuck-you-back time. He is unhinged, he needs to be impeached. If it gets pulled off, we get Vance, backed by Thiel (who got a payday from Israel for PalantirâŚ), but at least we get a madman away from the launch codes ASAP.
Given Vanceâs prior intolerance for Ukrainian involvement, he will have to follow suit on IsraelâŚ
Remember this one, back in April?
That was a setup for all this. Loomer is a Mossad asset.
Kyle: Youâre cherry-picking sockpuppet posts and media accounts that Trumpers are paying for with AIPAC, the same way Pool was paid for disinfo on Ukraine. MAGAs donât like this, Any MAGA that goes for the co-option of the US by Mossad can be kicked to the curb (they will eventually get kicked to the curb anyway, and will need to find a new home in a pto-working class allianceâŚ) Please donât do the bidding of the Mossad and AIPAC and re-amplify such propaganda as being a mainstream MAGA viewpoint (though Iâm no MAGAâŚ) Look at the polls among MAGAs; many are saying now we wuz had -especially with âquaintâ grocery prices now going up.
âMAGA falls in lineâ? Look at this montage of posts from just today.
Has Trump been doing a rally lately? A REAL one, and not an astroturf one where handpicked neocon and Zionist shills are paid to fill the seats?? Where MAGAs can get interviewed by media outside? Oh, thatâs right -heâs too busy now!
Trolls like Charlie Kirk are just grabbing the money they get to be paid as an apologist. for the handful of paid influencers you cite there, there are many others in MAGA world that are now raging about this: Carlson, Candace Owens, Tim Dillon, to name a few. AIPAC, the Mossad, and necocon stumpers will have more money to give the online youtube illusion that MAGA is on board; but look at the honest non-AIPAC influenced polling!
Loomer?! Sheâs been kicked to the curb by MAGA! She can go pay visits to Bunker Boy, but MAGA despises herâŚ
Turns out not only Laura Loomer but Susie Wyles was in on the Mossad infiltration at the White House.
A better move would be if they offered to stay in it if Israel were to also start getting monitored!
OK, so letâs say Israel does not agree to that; merely offering that would go a long way towards chilling out people on Iranâs intentionsâŚ
Repubs are signing on to backing strikes if Iran is found not to be at 0% uranium. I really hope the Iranians announce at the UN that they would agree to IAEA inspections if Israel does too (not that itâs all all likely that Israel would agree to that!) Then MAGA and Indie voters would flip out on this 0% uranium fantasy that the neocons and Zionists are seeking to accomplish, that would would give them the excuse to do a strike
Hi, itâs hard for me to say if Iran was technically honoring what was left of the agreement, but I will say that it sounds like Iran
- has already created enough enriched material to create several dirty bombs (although this is a guess on my part, I donât know how much material is needed to make an effective dirty bomb).
- has already created enough enriched material to create several nuclear weapons.
- has already caused immense destruction with its backing of Hamas.
What business did they have enriching Uranium to these levels? From what little I know, thereâs no real reason for this other than:
- to make a weapon.
- maybe for some (but not all?) types of reactors
If someone has knowledge of these matters, perhaps a link can be provided to some other claimed use?
If they did not want to be attacked, perhaps they should have stopped working on creating weapons grade material. And again, for those that think Israel is the warmonger in this particular situation, I think they should be able to discuss what they think Israel or any other country should or would do in the face of:
- Iran funding and arming Hamas
Iranian support for Hamas - Wikipedia - Iranian leaders using rhetoric of hate and destruction (AFAIK) for decades against Israel. Is there any reason to believe they would not use such weapons against Israelis, if they achieved them?
- Iran on the verge of achieving its long-sought weapons.
Itâs also a bit strange that I havenât heard anything yet (Iâm sure someone must have mentioned it, but I havenât heard it) about Israelâs successful mission in 1981 to wipe out Iraqâs nuclear reactor.
I agree with some of the arguments against Israelâs handling of the Gaza situation, and make an effort to include TYTâs points in my thinking, even when I may not fully agree, but I do not agree that Israel had that much choice as to striking Iran.
[cont.]
[cont.]
disclosure:
I grew up in a moderately Zionist American Jewish upbringing. I tend to favor Israel at times, historically, but do not side with them on how they have handled some key matters. I see myself as fundamentally pro-human-being and pro-human-rights, and also as being committed to not getting dragged down the rabbit hole of Middle East debates to the cost of my mind (which I think is what happens to some people). So, Iâd like to think my views are my own and based on defensible adult rational thinking, but I do have to disclose a possible bias. (As I think I heard a good scientist remark recently: everyone is biased, ⌠it is the disclosure of such things that can help us all to have better considerations and arrive at the truth of matters.)
Note also that I am an atheist (period). I do not give any credit to the Torah, the Bible, The Koran as to being the last word on anything. When someone starts blathering about how God gave them the land, my response is: A thing I am certain of, as to the Middle East, is that God gave nobody anything⌠that never happened. My definition of a religious war (which somewhat describes Middle Eastern Wars notwithstanding that many concerns are secular) is that it is a battle to the death as to whose imaginary friend is more powerful.
Irâs a quality thing, not a quantity thing. You need 90% level, and the IAEA has said they have found none. Neocons nor Israel have presented any solid evidence proving inasmuch.
They werenât while they were abiding by Kerryâs agreement, which Trump took it upon himself to tear up. Then they got sanctions; so they upped the rate (still not weapons levelâŚ) to apply pressure to remove those sanctions.
I was thinking about the Iraq strike. The difference was that Iraq at that time was more maniacal in its behavior towards its citizens than Iran is now (though clearly the mullahs are no choirboysâŚ) Before the US got involved in Iraq, Hussein was the first to go into Qatar and launch scuds at Israel.
Iran on the other hand is playing a long game with Hamas, having them weaken Israel. But the fact is, if the Palestinian Authority had been granted more authority and less illegal settlements had been encouraged, Hamas would not have gotten as much traction as it did and weâd be closer to a two state solution. The extremist NUTanyahoo faction did not want that.
It looks like NUT is on borrowed time now -but donât worry: his faction is still there and will work to deny Palestinians sustainability and autonomy.
Good Dore Program
Dore asks what Brin is up to; heâs doing AI slop at Google. He, like Altman, is in on the con that AI will be coding soon. [Anthropic is a more reputable company that does it.]
1 Like
Why should AOC have voted against replenishing the Iron Dome? Your answer is here:
She could have stated that sheâs ready to allow defense replenishment once the UN Aid agency is allowed back in to Gaza. Nutanyahoo wonât agree to that?? <seinfeld>âNo Defense Systems for you!â</seinfeld> (<joke>thatâs the Soup Anti-SemiteâŚ</joke>)