Iran President apologizes for bombing the Gulf countries and they would stop, but they don't

[Frankfooter]

What do we know about the DNC autopsy report from the article in Axios?
We know that the IMEU (through spokesman Hamid Bendaas) told the Axios people that during the meeting “the DNC shared with us that their own data also found that policy was, in their words, a ‘net-negative’ in the 2024 election.”

For you, this means "the DNC admitted that Harris lost because of Gaza".

You do like to deal in absolutes, don't you?
As in, I could be right but since its not 100% therefore I am definitely wrong.
But as you've also admitted, you aren't absolutely sure you are right either.

Though things have certainly changed now after this war with support for Israel.
Admitting that the student lead protest on the Israeli genocide lost the election for Harris is too much for you, it appears.

You could have just been wrong.
But if you were, you wouldn't have tried to back it up with a clip that didn't say it, and then a Hillary Clinton clip that didn't say it, and pretend that proved you were right.

You would have gone, "Oh, I misremembered."

This is an anonymous board with a ton of shit thrown out on it. I noted that when you visit you pick a target and stick to it, as you have with me with what you once stated as practice for debate IRL outside the board. As such, I'm not biting. I saw the Clinton attack quote which was taken out of context but have also seen nothing from her that disputes her pro AIPAC position towards Iran and war. The quote was wrong but the argument stands. And accusing me of lying over it is bad form.

Same here.

Are you under the impression "picayune" is academic jargon?

Not at all, its more appropriate to describing editing and use of language in academia. But I do note that you would be breaking academic policies yourself here.

It's also three weeks and not remotely done.

Sure, its not done.
Its going great, Israel is whining to the UN about war crimes, failing at black flag attacks in Diego Garcia and Saudi Arabia, complaining about Dimona, stuck at the border of Lebanon losing tanks while bombing hospitals and apartment buildings. America has pulled back all aircraft carriers, can only fly B2's through a narrow path from the UK to Iran, are running out of standoff missiles so are starting to lose jets who actually have to enter Iranian air space. While sanctions on Iranian oil are now ended, they are charging $2 million in Yuan to let who they like through Hormuz and seem to have an endless supply of rockets with the people all of a sudden cheering them.

Australia is now having gas stations run out, 1/4 of american farmers have no fertilizer, helium losses mean chip manufacturing issues, plastics supplies are being hit too, LNG will be down 10% or so globally for 4-5 years and Iran is working to end the petrodollar.

All going exactly as trump and AI Netanyahu dreamed of, if only Netanyahu lived to see his 40 year dream fulfilled.
(assuming he is dead, which is still the most likely scenario. Today's video looks better but its also could be like the last of the Pretti videos with multiple angles)
Haaretz on the earlier videos.

Netanyahu isn't dead. But even his 'proof of life' video is being derided as AI

Netanyahu With Six Fingers, a Brimming Cappuccino That Won't Spill: Conspiracy Theories Have Exploded Over Social Media, in English and Arabic, Contending That Israel's Prime Minister Was Killed in an Iranian Missile Strike and That AI-generated Videos Have Taken His Place

www.haaretz.com

That doesn't answer the question.
You asked, " Is there an offramp other than nukes or TACO? "

TACO is Trump backing down/retreating, otherwise de-escalating.
How are nukes a fucking off ramp?

I would expect that the genocidal team of trump and AI Netanyahu would assume its more of a brick wall than an exit ramp, a hope that nuking Iran would make them stop entirely. They also thought the war would be a cakewalk, though.

You also didn't answer the question.
Is there an offramp?

Maybe France is a better WWII example. You can credibly argue Germany did cease to exist for a few decades with East and West Germany replacing it.

Maybe that makes Germany a better example after all, where some imposed two state solution where say, Israel gets Gaza and Palestine the rest is imposed by Iran.
`trump posted terms for a ceasefire which were essentially returning to the deal that Obama signed. Iran asked for america to leave the gulf entirely, a veto on the UNSC, reparations and a guarantee that neither Israel or america be able to do this again.

But basically yes - countries like France and China and Germany can still exist even if they undergo massive changes in their structure and regime.

Well, Israel is going through massive changes. Gaza is being starved again, the pogroms in the West Bank are out of control and trump's latest 48 hr demand means either TACO or he escalates knowing that Iran just said they'd hit Israel's only desalination plant.

Fun times.

 

[Valcazar]

You do like to deal in absolutes, don't you?
As in, I could be right but since its not 100% therefore I am definitely wrong.
But as you've also admitted, you aren't absolutely sure you are right either.

No.
You're the one who are dealing in absolutes.
You took an ambiguous statement and said it proved something that wasn't said.

You do this a lot.

When called on it, you say that pointing out it didn't say what you said it said means I am denying the whole thing entirely and saying you are completely wrong.

Another absolute.

Have you noticed that I never once said I think this is a false report?
Just to make it clear for you, I think Axios reported this honestly and this is what the IMEU guy told them.
I also think the IMEU representative isn't misrepresenting what the DNC people told him.

Though things have certainly changed now after this war with support for Israel.

No argument there at all.
It's almost like things that happen in the world have an impact on how people view things.

Admitting that the student lead protest on the Israeli genocide lost the election for Harris is too much for you, it appears.

LOL, and right back to an absolute claim.
However, you might want to think about how your phrasing that, depending on your intention.

As you know, one of the main tools of attack against the student protests is that they were artificially seeded in order to cause the Democrats to lose.
You claiming that the protests are what lost the election for her plays into that trope and I'm pretty sure you don't want to do that.

This is an anonymous board with a ton of shit thrown out on it. I noted that when you visit you pick a target and stick to it, as you have with me with what you once stated as practice for debate IRL outside the board. As such, I'm not biting. I saw the Clinton attack quote which was taken out of context but have also seen nothing from her that disputes her pro AIPAC position towards Iran and war. The quote was wrong but the argument stands. And accusing me of lying over it is bad form.

So you would prefer from now on that when you consistently post deceptively misleading things to support your positions that you are just bone-dead ignorant and wildly gullible?

If you are going to hide behind "it's emotionally true" then at least be honest enough to admit that is what you are doing. Point out that you know the clip is misleadingly edited and claim that you feel it gets to the heart of it anyway. Admit that you know that this isn't footage of Netanyahu's house burning, but you believe the account of the person posting a fake video.

Because constantly posting things that are "supported" by untrue things does you no favors.

If your actual claim is "Any Democratic president would have done this same war with Iran" just say it.
Don't make up that Kamala said she would invade and pretend that Clinton said she would attack.

Just go with what you've backed down to now - you have "seen nothing from her that disputes her pro AIPAC position towards Iran and war" and therefore believe she would also have done this.

You must realize on some level that claiming something because of a judgment you've made on some vague totality of experience looks much less bad than claiming something and presenting fake evidence for it.

Not at all, its more appropriate to describing editing and use of language in academia. But I do note that you would be breaking academic policies yourself here.

What academic policies would I be breaking here and why would I care?

Sure, its not done.
Its going great, Israel is whining to the UN about war crimes, failing at black flag attacks in Diego Garcia and Saudi Arabia, complaining about Dimona, stuck at the border of Lebanon losing tanks while bombing hospitals and apartment buildings. America has pulled back all aircraft carriers, can only fly B2's through a narrow path from the UK to Iran, are running out of standoff missiles so are starting to lose jets who actually have to enter Iranian air space. While sanctions on Iranian oil are now ended, they are charging $2 million in Yuan to let who they like through Hormuz and seem to have an endless supply of rockets with the people all of a sudden cheering them.

Australia is now having gas stations run out, 1/4 of american farmers have no fertilizer, helium losses mean chip manufacturing issues, plastics supplies are being hit too, LNG will be down 10% or so globally for 4-5 years and Iran is working to end the petrodollar.

Yup, it's a shit show.
Now, have you learned your lesson about absolutes yet?

All going exactly as trump and AI Netanyahu dreamed of, if only Netanyahu lived to see his 40 year dream fulfilled.
(assuming he is dead, which is still the most likely scenario. Today's video looks better but its also could be like the last of the Pretti videos with multiple angles)
Haaretz on the earlier videos.

Netanyahu isn't dead. But even his 'proof of life' video is being derided as AI

Netanyahu With Six Fingers, a Brimming Cappuccino That Won't Spill: Conspiracy Theories Have Exploded Over Social Media, in English and Arabic, Contending That Israel's Prime Minister Was Killed in an Iranian Missile Strike and That AI-generated Videos Have Taken His Place

www.haaretz.com

Paywall.

I would expect that the genocidal team of trump and AI Netanyahu would assume its more of a brick wall than an exit ramp, a hope that nuking Iran would make them stop entirely. They also thought the war would be a cakewalk, though.

OK.
So we're in agreement that fucking nukes are never "an off ramp", yes?

You also didn't answer the question.
Is there an offramp?

There wasn't one they took, was there?
Is there one going forward? It looks like two maybe.
1) Trump just arbitrarily says "fuck it" and declares victory then goes home. Always a possibility with him, the question is whether or not that would be enough to get Israel and Iran to stop.
2) Some kind of middle-powers move that results in a cease fire and lets Trump do 1 in a way that makes it less easy for him to just change his mind and start bombing again.

I don't have a lot of faith in 2.

Right now, I don't see any off ramps - just escalation.

Maybe that makes Germany a better example after all, where some imposed two state solution where say, Israel gets Gaza and Palestine the rest is imposed by Iran.

Outside troops coming in and imposing a 2-state solution or even a UN-peacekeeper effort within the current set up can't be ruled out. But, as we agree, both of those would still have Israel existing.

`trump posted terms for a ceasefire which were essentially returning to the deal that Obama signed. Iran asked for america to leave the gulf entirely, a veto on the UNSC, reparations and a guarantee that neither Israel or america be able to do this again.

This also still has Israel existing.
Mind you, those demands seem unlikely to be met, so I don't see this as an offramp likely to be taken in any way.

 

[Frankfooter]

Have you noticed that I never once said I think this is a false report?
Just to make it clear for you, I think Axios reported this honestly and this is what the IMEU guy told them.
I also think the IMEU representative isn't misrepresenting what the DNC people told him.

So you admit I'm right but then think I should have said 'maybe' somewhere in the post.
ok

LOL, and right back to an absolute claim.
However, you might want to think about how your phrasing that, depending on your intention.

As you know, one of the main tools of attack against the student protests is that they were artificially seeded in order to cause the Democrats to lose.
You claiming that the protests are what lost the election for her plays into that trope and I'm pretty sure you don't want to do that.

Now you are making up stories about protests being 'seeded' instead of people just being really angry about america backing genocide?
And then you're jumping to argue that this is therefore an antisemitic 'trope'?
That's playing that really shitty zionist tactic of arguing that being against genocide is antisemitic because all Jews are for genocide instead of just zionists.
wow

So you would prefer from now on that when you consistently post deceptively misleading things to support your positions that you are just bone-dead ignorant and wildly gullible?

If you are going to hide behind "it's emotionally true" then at least be honest enough to admit that is what you are doing. Point out that you know the clip is misleadingly edited and claim that you feel it gets to the heart of it anyway. Admit that you know that this isn't footage of Netanyahu's house burning, but you believe the account of the person posting a fake video.

Because constantly posting things that are "supported" by untrue things does you no favors.

If your actual claim is "Any Democratic president would have done this same war with Iran" just say it.
Don't make up that Kamala said she would invade and pretend that Clinton said she would attack.

Just go with what you've backed down to now - you have "seen nothing from her that disputes her pro AIPAC position towards Iran and war" and therefore believe she would also have done this.

You must realize on some level that claiming something because of a judgment you've made on some vague totality of experience looks much less bad than claiming something and presenting fake evidence for it.

You just argued that student protests were 'seeded' and its a 'trope' to be against genocide. That makes your argument about being 'deceptive' look idiotic.
What total garbage.
Easy to prove, post Clinton being critical of Israeli genocide, apartheid or wars.

What academic policies would I be breaking here and why would I care?

Its true, why should you care, you are on the side that gets other academics banned and is largely immune from criticism.

Yup, it's a shit show.
Now, have you learned your lesson about absolutes yet?

Hilarious, what a shit show of a lesson.
What a lousy teacher.

Paywall.

I guess I'll stick to the xitter.

OK.
So we're in agreement that fucking nukes are never "an off ramp", yes?

Samson.

There wasn't one they took, was there?
Is there one going forward? It looks like two maybe.
1) Trump just arbitrarily says "fuck it" and declares victory then goes home. Always a possibility with him, the question is whether or not that would be enough to get Israel and Iran to stop.
2) Some kind of middle-powers move that results in a cease fire and lets Trump do 1 in a way that makes it less easy for him to just change his mind and start bombing again.

I don't have a lot of faith in 2.

Right now, I don't see any off ramps - just escalation.

1) trump just declared fake talks and a 5 day ceasefire only to have AI Netanyahu launch more attacks on power generation. So much for that plan.
2) Can't see that as long as this war has ended Iranian sanctions, they control the Hormuz and the rise in oil prices and their experience lasting through sanctions makes pummelling Israel worthwhile.

So yes, we agree, its more escalation.

Outside troops coming in and imposing a 2-state solution or even a UN-peacekeeper effort within the current set up can't be ruled out. But, as we agree, both of those would still have Israel existing.

The other option is that Iran keeps shelling until most of the foreign zionists leave and Palestinians become the majority. That's looking most likely right now.

This also still has Israel existing.
Mind you, those demands seem unlikely to be met, so I don't see this as an offramp likely to be taken in any way.

The land will exist with or without people, regardless of the label.
Whether people will be able to live there without desalination in the near future is a question.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2036242267795607981

 

[Valcazar]

So you admit I'm right but then think I should have said 'maybe' somewhere in the post.
ok

No.
You claimed the DNC admitted Gaza lost them the election.
That isn't what was reported.
You would have been less wrong if you had said "maybe", sure.

But this falls into the repeated pattern you've had of claiming things prove you are right about something which don't actually prove you are right about something.

Now you are making up stories about protests being 'seeded' instead of people just being really angry about america backing genocide?

I am not making up stories.
This was a line of attack used against the protest as an attempt to discredit them.
You must be aware of that.

And then you're jumping to argue that this is therefore an antisemitic 'trope'?
That's playing that really shitty zionist tactic of arguing that being against genocide is antisemitic because all Jews are for genocide instead of just zionists.
wow

What the fuck are you even babbling about here?
If you're going to try and attack me, at least make the effort to be coherent.

You just argued that student protests were 'seeded' and its a 'trope' to be against genocide. That makes your argument about being 'deceptive' look idiotic.

Things might go better if you stopped making up a fake me to argue with.

What total garbage.
Easy to prove, post Clinton being critical of Israeli genocide, apartheid or wars.

Yes, that standard is garbage, I'm glad you realize that your claim isn't supported by what you've posted.

Its true, why should you care, you are on the side that gets other academics banned and is largely immune from criticism.

WTF is this new obsession you have?
Again, try not arguing with the fake me in your head.

Hilarious, what a shit show of a lesson.
What a lousy teacher.

So the answer there is no.

I guess I'll stick to the xitter.

Your choice, of course.

Samson.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

1) trump just declared fake talks and a 5 day ceasefire only to have AI Netanyahu launch more attacks on power generation. So much for that plan.

That other countries have agency has always been one of Trump's major blind spots.
(One shared sometimes by others, of course, with their belief that the US can just dictate cease fires or peace deals arbitrarily and the only reason they haven't happened is because the US didn't try hard enough.)

2) Can't see that as long as this war has ended Iranian sanctions, they control the Hormuz and the rise in oil prices and their experience lasting through sanctions makes pummelling Israel worthwhile.

Iran will always have agency about what they want to do.
This is why negotiations are hard, people/regimes/countries have varying goals and interests and incentives.

So yes, we agree, its more escalation.

That's what it looks like right now.
You can't de-escalate if the people involved don't want to de-escalate.

The other option is that Iran keeps shelling until most of the foreign zionists leave and Palestinians become the majority. That's looking most likely right now.

That's not an off-ramp, though.
That's just an end condition.
Like nuking things.

The land will exist with or without people, regardless of the label.
Whether people will be able to live there without desalination in the near future is a question.

The desalination attacks are horrible.

 

[Frankfooter]

No.
You claimed the DNC admitted Gaza lost them the election.
That isn't what was reported.
You would have been less wrong if you had said "maybe", sure.

But this falls into the repeated pattern you've had of claiming things prove you are right about something which don't actually prove you are right about something.

Yes, you are also clinging to this belief that you are right based on your own views while arguing your own unsupported views are superior because reasons.
I get that accepting that america taking part in genocide is something you are unwilling to accept as an act that could have changed the results the 1-2% needed for trump to win. Accepting that would mean that your own support of Israeli acts has been part of a movement that lead to the election of trump and likely end of Israeli and american empires. That would shatter your own world view as much as rich turning against MAGA.


You have your own personal views that you are unwilling to change.

It's time for Democrats to face political reality on Israel

At its April meeting, the Democratic National Committee must have an open debate on its support of Israel

www.salon.com

I am not making up stories.
This was a line of attack used against the protest as an attempt to discredit them.
You must be aware of that.

Nope, that's news to me.
I assume you are repeating it here because you believe it.

What the fuck are you even babbling about here?
If you're going to try and attack me, at least make the effort to be coherent.

Right, you argued that student protests against genocide were seeded and that its a 'trope' to argue that Harris' support of genocide lost her the election.
The use of 'trope' infers you think its an antisemitic argument to either be against the genocide or that the Israeli support could lose dem voters.
Feel free to clarify why you brought up this new 'seeded' argument and the 'trope' line if you think I've got that wrong.

Things might go better if you stopped making up a fake me to argue with.

Feel free to explain why you brought up this 'seeded' protest and 'trope' argument.

Yes, that standard is garbage, I'm glad you realize that your claim isn't supported by what you've posted.
WTF is this new obsession you have?
Again, try not arguing with the fake me in your head.
So the answer there is no.
Your choice, of course.
I have no idea what you mean by this.

This is a very johnlarue series of comments.

That other countries have agency has always been one of Trump's major blind spots.
(One shared sometimes by others, of course, with their belief that the US can just dictate cease fires or peace deals arbitrarily and the only reason they haven't happened is because the US didn't try hard enough.)

trump's corruption and illegal acts are easy for you to call out. But not Israel's, why is that?

Would you care to explain why you think Israel breaking every crime against humanity and your continual defence of those actions through your attacks on me for calling out those attacks are different that you acting under Wilhoit's law again?

You're willing to call out trump yet totally unwilling to publicly state that Israel's acts are war crimes.

Iran will always have agency about what they want to do.
This is why negotiations are hard, people/regimes/countries have varying goals and interests and incentives.

Iran has no reason to trust negotiations considering their long history with the NPT, JCPOA and the last three attacks on their country by Israel and america.

That's what it looks like right now.
You can't de-escalate if the people involved don't want to de-escalate.

Same way you can't end an illegal occupation if the military controlling it doesn't want to.

That's not an off-ramp, though.
That's just an end condition.
Like nuking things.

Yes, and that is looking like the most likely scenario now.

The desalination attacks are horrible.

So is the continuing genocide in Gaza, the attempts to commit genocide in Lebanon and Iran.
So will be the next year of oil and food shortages.

All because of AI Netanyahu's 40 year dream realized through blackmailing a senile child fucker.
A sentence that is more ridiculous than any James Bond novel yet its what's happening.

 

[Valcazar]

Yes, you are also clinging to this belief that you are right based on your own views while arguing your own unsupported views are superior because reasons.
I get that accepting that america taking part in genocide is something you are unwilling to accept as an act that could have changed the results the 1-2% needed for trump to win. Accepting that would mean that your own support of Israeli acts has been part of a movement that lead to the election of trump and likely end of Israeli and american empires. That would shatter your own world view as much as rich turning against MAGA.

None of that is true, though.
We know the US has done terrible things.
It is entirely possible that could have changed the results by 1 or 2%.
My objection has always been you claiming proof and that it is a simple fact that this and only this determines everything.

You have your own personal views that you are unwilling to change.

It's time for Democrats to face political reality on Israel

At its April meeting, the Democratic National Committee must have an open debate on its support of Israel

www.salon.com

What about that article would be anything I object to?

Nope, that's news to me.

How is that news to you?
Were you not aware of the bullshit people spewed at the protests?

I assume you are repeating it here because you believe it.

Of course not. It's ridiculous.
Were there people trying to use it as a wedge to make the Democrats lose and/or Trump win? Of course. There are always people who to try and take political advantage of events.
Was the whole thing some kind of astroturf movement artificially created for that purpose? Of course not. That's utterly ridiculous.

Right, you argued that student protests against genocide were seeded and that its a 'trope' to argue that Harris' support of genocide lost her the election.
The use of 'trope' infers you think its an antisemitic argument to either be against the genocide or that the Israeli support could lose dem voters.

I argued no such thing. This is a delusion you've invented for yourself.
Once again, absolute agreement with Frank is needed, or it means someone is completely against him and taking wild positions Frank makes up in his mind.
I see the lesson about absolutes is going to be a problem.

Feel free to clarify why you brought up this new 'seeded' argument and the 'trope' line if you think I've got that wrong.

This isn't a new argument.
What I am bringing up is that since that was an argument used, claiming that "yes, those protests cost her the election" is feeding into "that was the point of the protests".

At least when the claim was "Harris's position on Israel cost her the election" you avoided that.
"The protests cost her the election" is playing into their hands.

This is a very johnlarue series of comments.

LOL!
You see I have engaged Larue and try to use him as a mode of attack on me?
Cute.
I guess you've given up on comparing me to MAGA?

trump's corruption and illegal acts are easy for you to call out. But not Israel's, why is that?

Would you care to explain why you think Israel breaking every crime against humanity and your continual defence of those actions through your attacks on me for calling out those attacks are different that you acting under Wilhoit's law again?

You're willing to call out trump yet totally unwilling to publicly state that Israel's acts are war crimes.[/QUOTE]

When have said the Israeli government isn't corrupt and committing illegal acts?
Israel has obviously committed war crimes.
By the way, "your continual defence of those actions through your attacks on me"?
Holy shit man, get over yourself.

Iran has no reason to trust negotiations considering their long history with the NPT, JCPOA and the last three attacks on their country by Israel and america.

Of course not.
Why on earth would I suggest otherwise?

Same way you can't end an illegal occupation if the military controlling it doesn't want to.

Of course.

Yes, and that is looking like the most likely scenario now.

You think a nuclear exchange is the most likely scenario now?

So is the continuing genocide in Gaza, the attempts to commit genocide in Lebanon and Iran.
So will be the next year of oil and food shortages.

Yes.
The world is in a very bad place.

 

[Frankfooter]

None of that is true, though.
We know the US has done terrible things.
It is entirely possible that could have changed the results by 1 or 2%.
My objection has always been you claiming proof and that it is a simple fact that this and only this determines everything.

Yet you have been posting with equal certainty that Harris backing the genocide could absolutely not have changed the election.
Now you admit that its 'entirely possible' that I'm right?

What about that article would be anything I object to?

great

How is that news to you?
Were you not aware of the bullshit people spewed at the protests?

Feel free to post evidence to back up this claim.
What I saw was mass protest against america arming and paying for genocide in Gaza.

Of course not. It's ridiculous.
Were there people trying to use it as a wedge to make the Democrats lose and/or Trump win? Of course. There are always people who to try and take political advantage of events.
Was the whole thing some kind of astroturf movement artificially created for that purpose? Of course not. That's utterly ridiculous.

No, that didn't happen.
Dem voters worked hard to make their positions clear, from uncommitted to grass roots.
None of them wanted trump to win, they wanted the dems to support the 80% of dem voters who backed ceasefire.

I argued no such thing. This is a delusion you've invented for yourself.
Once again, absolute agreement with Frank is needed, or it means someone is completely against him and taking wild positions Frank makes up in his mind.
I see the lesson about absolutes is going to be a problem.

You most definitely made that argument right here and should apologize.

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/iran-president-apologizes-for-bombing-the-gulf-countries-and-they-would-stop-but-they-dont.920208/post-9349680

This isn't a new argument.
What I am bringing up is that since that was an argument used, claiming that "yes, those protests cost her the election" is feeding into "that was the point of the protests".

At least when the claim was "Harris's position on Israel cost her the election" you avoided that.
"The protests cost her the election" is playing into their hands.

Harris' support of Israeli genocide cost her the election and those protests should have been the warning for her to change her position before she lead the party.

LOL!
You see I have engaged Larue and try to use him as a mode of attack on me?
Cute.
I guess you've given up on comparing me to MAGA?

We can return to your MAGA and Wilhoit application of morality if you like. I know you enjoy skirting that topic by dismissal and refusing to defend your position.

When have said the Israeli government isn't corrupt and committing illegal acts?
Israel has obviously committed war crimes.
By the way, "your continual defence of those actions through your attacks on me"?
Holy shit man, get over yourself.

Should we number the posts you've made here with me, where you practice tactics for use IIRL as you once said, compared to posts you've made that are critical of Israel actions? Just because you refuse to overtly make a statement doesn't meant that statement doesn't become apparent in the long term.

You think a nuclear exchange is the most likely scenario now?

Personally, I don't think its most likely but its quite probable.
The first Kharg Island attack was a disaster and america is losing more valuable assets.
Yemen just joined in and Hezbollah has reportedly taken out 100 tanks.
Do you think trump or AI Netanyahu will just slowly lose a war of attrition and not do something incredibly stupid and evil to try to cover for their losses?

Yes.
The world is in a very bad place.

All because Netanyahu got his 40 year dream to attack Iran by blackmailing that stupid child fucker into a war for Israel.

 

[Frankfooter]

Meanwhile, Israel and america continue to use terrorism on Iran by hitting civilian targets while Iran is taking out military targets.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2037827763084632202

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2037843230696346019

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2037771725631356985

 

[P0Pewlar]

Elon must be loving this, "gas/oil is expensive, "'electric is cheaper'". lol Scammers.

 

[Valcazar]

Yet you have been posting with equal certainty that Harris backing the genocide could absolutely not have changed the election.
Now you admit that its 'entirely possible' that I'm right?

I have never denied that it affected the election.
Me pointing out your "proofs" aren't "proofs" does not mean I am saying it had no effect.
This is your problem of absolutes again.

Feel free to post evidence to back up this claim.
What I saw was mass protest against america arming and paying for genocide in Gaza.

There were mass protests.
Those protest were opposed by lots of people who made a lot of effort to discredit it.
Did you not notice that?
Did you not notice the moves to suppress and criminalize it as well?

No, that didn't happen.
Dem voters worked hard to make their positions clear, from uncommitted to grass roots.
None of them wanted trump to win, they wanted the dems to support the 80% of dem voters who backed ceasefire.

What didn't happen?
People didn't protest?
Why would you think everyone protesting were Dem voters?
Other people didn't take advantage of the protests?
There was no one who prioritized making the Democrats lose?

Just how disconnected from reality have you become?

You most definitely made that argument right here and should apologize.

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/iran-president-apologizes-for-bombing-the-gulf-countries-and-they-would-stop-but-they-dont.920208/post-9349680

Your struggles with reading comprehension aren't actually my problem.
(Well, they are in that it can make engaging with you frustrating at times.)

Harris' support of Israeli genocide cost her the election and those protests should have been the warning for her to change her position before she lead the party.

I understand this is an article of faith for you.

We can return to your MAGA and Wilhoit application of morality if you like. I know you enjoy skirting that topic by dismissal and refusing to defend your position.

LOL!
There you go!

Should we number the posts you've made here with me, where you practice tactics for use IIRL as you once said, compared to posts you've made that are critical of Israel actions? Just because you refuse to overtly make a statement doesn't meant that statement doesn't become apparent in the long term.

I don't remember you being that self-important before.
Claiming disagreeing with you means supporting and defending Israel (basically by definition) seems more off the rails than in the past.

Personally, I don't think its most likely but its quite probable.
The first Kharg Island attack was a disaster and america is losing more valuable assets.
Yemen just joined in and Hezbollah has reportedly taken out 100 tanks.
Do you think trump or AI Netanyahu will just slowly lose a war of attrition and not do something incredibly stupid and evil to try to cover for their losses?

The "first Kharg island attack"?
Today is March 28, it is about 2pm Eastern.
When did this attack take place?

 

[Frankfooter]

I have never denied that it affected the election.
Me pointing out your "proofs" aren't "proofs" does not mean I am saying it had no effect.
This is your problem of absolutes again.

Straw man argument - claiming I am 'absolute'

There were mass protests.
Those protest were opposed by lots of people who made a lot of effort to discredit it.
Did you not notice that?
Did you not notice the moves to suppress and criminalize it as well?

I didn't hear arguments that the protests were 'seeded' or that they were 'tropes'.

What didn't happen?
People didn't protest?
Why would you think everyone protesting were Dem voters?
Other people didn't take advantage of the protests?
There was no one who prioritized making the Democrats lose?

Just how disconnected from reality have you become?

I have no idea what you are trying to argue here, this is sloppy thinking.

Your struggles with reading comprehension aren't actually my problem.
(Well, they are in that it can make engaging with you frustrating at times.)

Right, its my problem.

LOL!
There you go!

As predicted, dismissal.

I don't remember you being that self-important before.
Claiming disagreeing with you means supporting and defending Israel (basically by definition) seems more off the rails than in the past.

Right, you think you appear here as someone neutral or not supportive of Israel.
Interesting.

The "first Kharg island attack"?
Today is March 28, it is about 2pm Eastern.
When did this attack take place?

It didn't, my bad, it was an attack on another island america was using as a launching point, Bubiyan Island.

By the way, these are my 'ilk'.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2037923821617926290

 

[Valcazar]

Straw man argument - claiming I am 'absolute'

Your behavior speaks for itself.

I didn't hear arguments that the protests were 'seeded' or that they were 'tropes'.

That's wild.
I really thought you were paying attention and supporting them.

I have no idea what you are trying to argue here, this is sloppy thinking.

There was no argument being made.
You said "that didn't happen".
I was asking you what you think didn't happen.

Right, its my problem.

Among a few, it seems.

As predicted, dismissal.

It's not a serious argument, so yes, dismissal.

Right, you think you appear here as someone neutral or not supportive of Israel.
Interesting.

Everyone who doesn't agree with you completely is a Zionist, so no, I don't expect I appear as neutral or not supportive of Israel to you.

It didn't, my bad, it was an attack on another island america was using as a launching point, Bubiyan Island.

An attack by Iran that went well is pretty different from an attack by the US that was a disaster.

By the way, these are my 'ilk'.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2037923821617926290

You didn't go to the Toronto protest?

 

[Frankfooter]

Your behavior speaks for itself.

No, that's just your desire to turn everything into straw man absolutes.

That's wild.
I really thought you were paying attention and supporting them.

Are you going to argue today's protests were 'seeded' or 'tropes' as well?
Are you going to back up your claim?

Its bad enough you claimed you never said it and said I made it up.
Now you're arguing like you think everybody believes this wacko theory.

There was no argument being made.
You said "that didn't happen".
I was asking you what you think didn't happen.

Again, I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Among a few, it seems.

You can do better then larue type insults.
Its not even witty.

It's not a serious argument, so yes, dismissal.

Its a position you can't defend so dismiss.
Its serious as it disputes your view of your presence here, and therefore your own self identity.

Everyone who doesn't agree with you completely is a Zionist, so no, I don't expect I appear as neutral or not supportive of Israel to you.

Oh look, we are back to straw man absolutes.
Your admission that you are here to try out debating positions for real life make your views pretty clear.

An attack by Iran that went well is pretty different from an attack by the US that was a disaster.

Iran hit america as they were prepping for an attack. Its not that different.

You didn't go to the Toronto protest?

I'm out of town this week.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2038043105933561872

 

[Valcazar]

No, that's just your desire to turn everything into straw man absolutes.

Matt 7:3

Are you going to argue today's protests were 'seeded' or 'tropes' as well?
Are you going to back up your claim?

Its bad enough you claimed you never said it and said I made it up.
Now you're arguing like you think everybody believes this wacko theory.

I won't argue that because it isn't true
But you know very well the argument exists.

Again, I have no idea what you are talking about here.

And you wonder why everyone makes fun of your ability to comprehend things or think critically.

Slowly this time.

I said:
Were there people trying to use it as a wedge to make the Democrats lose and/or Trump win? Of course. There are always people who to try and take political advantage of events.
Was the whole thing some kind of astroturf movement artificially created for that purpose? Of course not. That's utterly ridiculous.

In other words - No, these protests were not fake and astroturfed by malign forces but yes, like just about every protest ever - people took the opportunity to try and use them as a wedge issue or fodder for other political purposes.

You said "that never happened".

I asked what part of my statement was "that" to you.
So. What never happened?

Were there no protests?
Were the protests actually astroturfed and I am wrong in thinking they are organic?
Were there no efforts by anyone, ever, to use the protests for their own political ends - in this case specifically as "we must get the Democrats to lose/Trump to win"?

You can do better then larue type insults.
Its not even witty.

No attempt to be witty.
You seem to have several problems.

Its a position you can't defend so dismiss.
Its serious as it disputes your view of your presence here, and therefore your own self identity.

Yes, I understand you think that is true and think that is why it is some kind of devastating attack I cannot recover from.
It's funny, but again, about as serious as accusing me of being a mooninite.

Oh look, we are back to straw man absolutes.

You do love them it's true.
Just look at this thread.

Iran hit america as they were prepping for an attack. Its not that different.

You've made your views on whether or not information needs to be accurate very clear, yes.

I'm out of town this week.

Fair enough.
My local one got cancelled due to credible violent threat.

 

[Frankfooter]

Matt 7:3

I won't argue that because it isn't true
But you know very well the argument exists.

Nope, I know nothing about that argument. Its totally ridiculous to claim that those massive, country wide protests were 'seeded'.

And you wonder why everyone makes fun of your ability to comprehend things or think critically.

Slowly this time.

I said:
Were there people trying to use it as a wedge to make the Democrats lose and/or Trump win? Of course. There are always people who to try and take political advantage of events.
Was the whole thing some kind of astroturf movement artificially created for that purpose? Of course not. That's utterly ridiculous.

In other words - No, these protests were not fake and astroturfed by malign forces but yes, like just about every protest ever - people took the opportunity to try and use them as a wedge issue or fodder for other political purposes.

You said "that never happened".

I asked what part of my statement was "that" to you.
So. What never happened?

Were there no protests?
Were the protests actually astroturfed and I am wrong in thinking they are organic?
Were there no efforts by anyone, ever, to use the protests for their own political ends - in this case specifically as "we must get the Democrats to lose/Trump to win"?

The protests were not 'seeded' as you argued and are now trying to backstep.
Nor were they a 'trope'.

Yes, I understand you think that is true and think that is why it is some kind of devastating attack I cannot recover from.
It's funny, but again, about as serious as accusing me of being a mooninite.

Again, you can't defend so you dismiss.

You do love them it's true.
Just look at this thread.

To see how often you use straw man absolutes?

You've made your views on whether or not information needs to be accurate very clear, yes.

You do not provide accurate information.

Fair enough.
My local one got cancelled due to credible violent threat.

Oh, who called in that warning?

 

[Valcazar]

Nope, I know nothing about that argument. Its totally ridiculous to claim that those massive, country wide protests were 'seeded'.

This is mind-boggling to me.
How thick is the epistemic bubble you live in?

Oh, who called in that warning?

"Called in" the warning?
The organizers called off the meeting.
They did not share details of the threat.

 

[Frankfooter]

This is mind-boggling to me.
How thick is the epistemic bubble you live in?

How deep are you in zionist disinformation?
Feel free to post your sources for this claim and how verified it is, prove its a 'trope' as you declared.
Show your homework.

Meanwhile, Iran has deals with China, Russia and a bunch of other countries for passage through Hormuz.
Now they've offered up a deal to the EU which includes payment in euros or yuan, a massive attack on the petrodollar.

AIPAC and AI Netanyahu's war is screwing over the planet and looking more and more like it will be the end of Israeli and american hegemony.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2039915565024702641

 

[Valcazar]

How deep are you in zionist disinformation?
Feel free to post your sources for this claim and how verified it is, prove its a 'trope' as you declared.
Show your homework.

You know what.
Fine.
You have never seen anyone ever accuse any protest anywhere (and specifically these ones) as being fake or as being exploited by forces who have other goals.
If that is what you say, I will accept it as true.
You are someone who believes twitter after all.

Meanwhile, Iran has deals with China, Russia and a bunch of other countries for passage through Hormuz.
Now they've offered up a deal to the EU which includes payment in euros or yuan, a massive attack on the petrodollar.

This is a big deal, further eroding the petrodollar dominance.
Mind you, that's not as big a deal as some people seem to think it is, but it is important.

 

[bggolfingmaniac]

Just to comment on one item in your back and forth? Harris didn't lose the election because of Gaza. She lost because her idiotic party kept a borderline senile man in charge until it was way too late for her to mount an effective national campaign and hit purple states hard as hell. She wasn't primaried, therefore not battletested enough against the orange lunatic. She chose to talk about 'joy' when the electorate clearly felt otherwise coming off the COVID recession and a few years of wayyyyy too open borders.

So yeah, maybe it cost her Dearborn, MI (and ultimately a close swing state) but give your head a shake - the DNC fucked up a ton in 2024 and it had little to just do with Gaza/Israel.

 

[Valcazar]

Just to comment on one item in your back and forth? Harris didn't lose the election because of Gaza.

Don't start.
Frank has oodles of "proof" he can show you that mathematically fails to prove that Gaza and Gaza alone that is the reason they lost.