Khamenei, One of Most Evil People in History, is Dead
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Wednesday, September 2, 2026 05:42
VIEWED: 15626
PAGE 30 of 73
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yhis has got to be the most counterproductive war in US history.
"Before“ ... that is, before Netwnyahu blackmailed Trump into starting a war with Iran ... Iran had promised not to build a nuclear weapon, it was being inspected by the IAEA, oil was flowing freely thru the Straits and paid for in dollars, the Gulf States were positioned as glitzy (if totally artificial and corrupt) centers of petrodollar finance, and Israel was able to continue its aggressive expansion.
Now Trump and Netanyahu are finding out that Iran is holding the biggest cards... oil shipment, the world economy, and the petrodollar.
SIX:
Why? Because you're paying more in gas for a month?
Grow up.
No, but you putting words in my mouth is what THUGR does. Thanks for that.
Do you need me to explain my post?
Iran was NOT a terror-supporting state. That's Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
As part of the JCPOA, and also bc of a religious prohibition issued by the (murdered) Ayatollah, Iran was not going to build a nuclear weapon. Now they probably will.
Thanks to the UNITED STATES and ISRAEL launching a war against Iran, the Law of the Seas no longer applies to the Straits of Hormuz. Iran isn't breaking any laws or treaties by taking control.
Our Muslim "allies" in the region - the terrorist-funding corrupt gulf monarchies - are unable to sell oil for dollars. They must now use renminbi. Iran is also collecting a toll in renminbi. This all chips away at the petrodollar.
Russia is making lots of $$, as are our oil companies. But we will be lacking fertilizer, helium, and other basic products which will add to overall inflation.
This is costing us money. And it's POINTLESS. Trump's constantly- shifting narrative, our "goals" and status, is like the Wheel of Fortune.
Worse than being pointless, it's counterproductive. It exposes Trump's brainlessness and the failure of our entire political system to allow our policy to go so far off the rails.
It exposes our duplicity. Again: We attack during "negotiations", so why should anyone negotiate with us?
It chips away at our currency, and creating scarcity in fundamental products.
It's starving Treasuries, banks, and investment firms of the flow of dollars from the ME, increasing the risk of financial collapse.
All of this could be powered thru if we had a military "solution" but I don't think we do.
Which means it exposes our fundamental strategic weakness: We can't protect our "friends" in the ME, or save our "allies" in Europe and the far East.
I'm willing to sacrifice if I see some good coming out if it. But I don't.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't believe anything you just posted.
What now?
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I don't believe anything you just posted.
What now?
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick.
You should become better informed?
Find better sources?
I've mentioned my sources more than once. American military men with ME experience. Military analysts. Former spooks. Ambassadors with long histories of. Financial advisors.
Russians. Americans. Iranians. Saudis. Chinese. They don't all say exactly the same thing but they do tend to coalesce around the same outlook.
I could post link after link but I doubt that you would listen or read, and even if you did you wouldn't accept what they had to say.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yup.
They all coalesce around a globalist vision of the world that we'd been living under for more than half a century that is crumbling all around them.
They don't matter anymore.
At the end of the day, nobody likes change. But the rich, powerful and elite really hate change.
And they're all crying about it.
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Yup.
They all coalesce around a globalist vision of the world that we'd been living under for more than half a century that is crumbling all around them.
They don't matter anymore.
At the end of the day, nobody likes change. But the rich, powerful and elite really hate change.
And they're all crying about it.
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick.
No.
They don't.
But as usual you ASS U ME you know what they're saying.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's a joke BTW.
When you assume you make an ASS out of U and ME.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, anyway, I have a few moments.
What most of the analysts say is that we're seeing the beginning of the end of the American Empire. Unipolar moment. Hegemony. Whatever you call it.
Whether you think that's good for Americans or bad for Americans can be debated.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
But I think I see your concern. If there's no Donald Trump, does that mean we revert back to transnationalism? One -worldism?
I think that's a false dilemma. Russia and Iran (so far) have managed to reassert their sovereignty after having been part of the globalist system. Really, that was helped alongside by being sanctioned by the western world, especially western banks. (China I think is a little different. Needs some thought.)
I'm more concerned that engaging in STUPID nationalism ... wasting time and resources trying to piss on and bully the rest of the world... is going to create such a bad experience that ppl will jump right back into transnationalism bc it seems like the better choice.
OTOH maybe by being such an a-hole, The Donald will get the rest of the world to sanction US. Refuse our currency. THAT would force us to stand on our own feet instead of everybody else's. So maybe in a backwards way that's the point?
MAGA!
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists asks: Will Trump nuke Iran? Will Benjamin Netanyahu?
What once seemed preposterous is now a palpable possibility.
https://thebulletin.org/2026/04/will-trump-nuke-iran/
When Trump, echoing Gen. Curtis LeMay’s 1965 threat toward North Vietnam, threatened to “obliterate” Iran and bomb it “back into the Stone Age”—rhetoric repeated by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—he wasn’t just posturing. In fact he was signaling that in an administration which respects no norms, mushroom clouds may be acceptable.
The “how” and “when” remain open questions, but if the ceasefire ceases to hold the crosshairs are likely fixed on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant or, just as probably, Isfahan, where Iran’s fissile material was allegedly transferred before the June 2025 attack. Buried deep beneath a mountain of solid rock, Fordow is the nuclear facility that Trump had earlier claimed to have “obliterated.”
The math of escalation is inexorable: Iran reportedly holds roughly 450 kilograms of 60 percent enriched uranium. While a rudimentary gun-type nuclear weapon would be assembled using 80-100 kilograms of this material, a sophisticated implosion-type bomb needs 20-25 kilograms of uranium enriched to contain 90 percent of the uranium 235 isotope, a process requiring only some weeks. If Iran has mastered the complex engineering required for the latter, its current reserves represent a potential arsenal of eight to 10 nuclear warheads.
The game hinges on the upgrade. Iran can push its stockpile to weapons-grade in a matter of weeks. Conventional “bunker busters” like the GBU-57 have already failed; 14 were dropped on Fordow and Natanz in 2025, yet the heart of the program kept beating. To achieve absolute destruction, the hammer would have to be nuclear.
If the United States chooses to go nuclear in Iran, the Pentagon’s solution would likely be an earth-penetrating warhead like the B61-11 or the newly deployed B61-12. Washington would frame such a strike not as a Hiroshima-style apocalypse but as a “clinical necessity”—a tactical operation designed to kill hundreds rather than tens of thousands.
But Iran will not surrender quietly and would retaliate with everything it has. A lucky strike from a sophisticated missile could sink an American aircraft carrier; a coordinated swarm of drones and missiles could turn major Arab oil terminals into pillars of fire. At that point, the “clinical” experiment could end, and the apocalypse might begin as the United States reaches for its next nuclear target.
Even for a man who finds gratification in the suffering of others—who celebrated the recent destruction of Iran’s biggest bridge followed by cars plummeting down—Trump’s nuclear ambitions are constrained by American electoral politics and the upcoming November elections, a potentially hostile public reaction, and a somewhat reluctant military.
For now, America and Israel are operating in lockstep. They reportedly executed coordinated strikes on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant—which has nothing to do with bomb-making—on March 18 and April 4. These were presumably “signaling strikes” since they destroyed only an auxiliary building and killed a single guard. Their intent was clear—even if the endgame is not. The message has been received: In coordination with the Israeli Defence Forces, over 200 high-level Russian technicians have already evacuated Bushehr, leaving behind only a skeleton crew to manage a potential emergency shutdown.
But “signaling” near a live reactor is a high-stakes gamble with an unclear ultimate purpose. While the plant continues to feed the grid, a direct hit on its containment dome would trigger a radiological catastrophe far exceeding that of Chernobyl or Fukushima. With 70-80 tons of uranium dioxide in its core and a massive inventory of spent fuel lying in nearby cooling ponds, a breach would shroud the Persian Gulf with a lethal miasma of radioiodine and cesium-137. This wouldn’t just be a strike against a regime;
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump’s decision to counter Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by blockading the Strait of Hormuz surely adds to the perception that relying on U.S. oil and LNG isn’t safe. Who can guarantee that an erratic America won’t try to weaponize other countries’ dependence on U.S. energy?
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/chinese-electrotech-is-the-big-winn
er
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME