March 5, 2026

"It seems that the Democratic Party, broadly, has concluded that the roughly 120-hour-old campaign is a disaster that the public is destined to despise...."

"[I]f the U.S. and Israel engineer a victory for the West in Iran, Democrats will have to spend 2028 arguing that voters should not believe their lying eyes. The Democrats are betting on failure, and they may be right. If they are, we’ll have bigger problems than the Democratic Party’s political achievements. But if they aren’t, Democrats will regret having to argue that the world was better off with the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Writes Noah Rothman, in "The Democrats’ Iran Gamble" (National Review).

88 comments:

mccullough said...

I’m still nonplussed that Obama bombed Libya when he should have bombed Iran. Like W invading Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia.

Iman said...

Those darned patriotic Democrats… they always want what’s best for the country… /sarc

Dave Begley said...

We will win and there will be no US boots on the guard. We are destroying the IRGC and regular army. At some point very soon, they will realize that resistance is futile. Why be a dead-ender?

The Kurds will be the ground force. The CIA will arm the local opposition.

The mullahs and IRGC are finished. When they killed 32,000 civilians they were finished. I understand that they had to bring in some Iraquis in order to kill Iranians.

When 90 million people out of a country of 93 million are highly motivated to throw the existing regime out, they will be forced out.

The Dems opposition to this war because it is "Trump's War" is going to backfire. And it really is disgraceful.

Breezy said...

Oh woe! the cost of always being against Trump policy, no matter how insane that position is. Poor poor Dems.

Wince said...

Here's the ominous prospect on the horizon that the Democrats apparently don't see yet. Or, perhaps, they do and that's why they want failure in Iran.

Interior Secretary Doug Bergum standing next to Venezuela interim President Delcy Rodriquez, as the govt thanks President Donald Trump.... who just forcibly snatched Nicholas Maduro.

Delcy Rodríguez thanks Donald Trump, the man who two months ago bombed Caracas and forcibly took Maduro.

buwaya said...

Some Iranians just shot up Azerbaijans airport. Thats every one of their west-side neighbors they have pissed off. None of their East-side neighbors like them either. It takes skill to make everyone hate you.

n.n said...

The Democratic contrarian policy is not a viable choice. Abort. Sequester. And bray no more.

Iman said...

The Democrats’ shitty behavior, horrible policies, lack of any morals or ethics and outright seditious souls will pay for it one day in the not too distant future.

Paul said...

I have no doubt once air supremacy is achieved.. where no drone attacks can succeed... the invasion of Iran will commence... Syria, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Kurds, and Iranians from the streets will rise up and that will be the end of the Mullahs...

n.n said...

It would appear that the allied nations have imminent cause to fix the broken axis... I talked, Iran, then a Persian revival.

Iman said...

Investigators need to dig into the money trail and determine who among the Democrats were on Maduro’s payroll. Same prescription goes for China, Iran and any other enemies of our nation. Smoke the traitors out!

If there are ANY Republicans in the mix, same goes for them.

Bob Boyd said...

There's nothing unusual in the way the Dems are treating this. The Dems are treating this exactly like they have treated every other thing Trump has done since 2015. They're saying it's a disaster. There is no objective reality for them. There is only messaging.

Aggie said...

As I understand it, the regional conflict has been, at its base, a conflict of which Muslim branch will have supremacy, Shia or Sunni? Mecca is presently declared to be in Saudi Arabia, a Sunni Muslim country.

There's a map that brings this home. Shias are only about 10-13% of all Muslims. Only Iran and Azerbaijan, and to a lesser extent Iraq, are dominantly Shia. When this is ended, there will probably be more than dust settling.

n.n said...

Democrats overwhelmingly subscribe to the Pro-Choice religion and bray with handmade tales.

Mark said...

So much Republican concern trolling.

If you are so confident Dems are wrong why are you so hung up with their words? Shouldn't you just confidently prove them wrong?

Mason G said...

"There's nothing unusual in the way the Dems are treating this. The Dems are treating this exactly like they have treated every other thing Trump has done since 2015. They're saying it's a disaster."

In other words, they're basically telling Trump (and his supporters) to disregard leftist opinions out of hand. Seems counterproductive to me, but hey- they like to think of themselves as the smart ones.

Skeptical Voter said...

Well the Iranian Navy is now down some 30 warships--I don't know how many they started with, but I suspect one or more Iranian Admirals will soon be out of work.

But getting to the Democrat's knee jerk response---if Trump did it, it's awful, a disaster and the world will end in 2 days; stock Dim response.

Which brings to mind an appropriate qoute from the late Lou Holtz (paraphrased a bit). "How do the Democrats know they are stupid if they have never been smart?

There were times in the past when the Democrat party was in possession of its senses, engaged in reasoned debate, and justifiably won their share of elections. Those days are in the party's rear view mirror--and receding fast.

Little Excursion™️ said...

I think Democrats have to make clear that they do support the goals, the overall objectives of eliminating this regime and freeing the people of Iran. It just has to be done in the right way.

The problem is, it’s not just one guy. The man the Israelis killed— yes, he deserved to die. He was a despot. But they’ve got a whole farm team of a hundred more crazy clerics waiting in the wings.

So what’s the actual plan for the next one? And the one after that? I suppose they’ll claim they’ve taken out numbers one through eleven, but regimes exist to self-perpetuate. They always find a way to keep going.

This is so much harder than what Trump seems to be assuming. And you know Trump—he’ll flip his position tomorrow. If it starts looking like ‘Well, they just killed 200 people today and still can’t change the regime,’ he’ll probably say, ‘Okay, never mind, let’s talk.’

What I wonder—and no one really knows, since it's ultimately unknowable—is whether this conflict will still be front-page news heading into the fall, or if other issues will push it aside. Will it become a decisive factor in the 2026 midterm elections? A lot of Republicans are now on the hook for it, because Trump is going to keep demanding strong support.

I think the military experts—like the General Keanes of the world—understand we can't keep expending ordnance at this rate forever, or we'll have nothing left in the stockpiles. We're burning through a ton of American munitions, and those carriers desperately need maintenance. Sustaining this level of effort is incredibly hard. So they'll probably keep at it for a while, then gradually ramp it down. But it'll still linger as a political issue.

That's the real problem. Look at Afghanistan: it came and went quickly, but the messy withdrawal haunted Biden for the rest of his presidency as a clear fumble.

Add to that, by September, you'll probably start hearing the narrative that Trump screwed up the economy and then made everything worse by getting us into this war. It's hard to see any resolution by fall that actually helps Trump politically.

chuck said...

AFAICT, a goodly fraction of the Iranian population are Israeli agents. The mullahs have spent decades murdering, torturing, and raping the daughters and sons of ordinary Iranians, now they will harvest their reward. And the trigger is drought and economic failure. Maybe the prophecies were correct, but misinterpreted :) Delphian, that is.

hanuman_prodigious_leaper said...

Interesting Armageddon
Christian Zionists want for 2nd coming
Shia want for Iman twelve

narciso said...

They gave 150 billion to iran weve been blowing it up but it takes time

They stand with criminals and terrorist or jocelyn or neda


They dont stand with irina or

narciso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Beasts of England said...

’But they’ve got a whole farm team of a hundred more crazy clerics waiting in the wings.’

They killed 88 of that 100 just yesterday. lol

narciso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
narciso said...

This is like the waiting room in beetlejuice

Keith said...

Kakistocracy said...

I think Democrats have to make clear that they do support the goals, the overall objectives of eliminating this regime and freeing the people of Iran. It just has to be done in the right way.
...
For almost 50Y the strategy of the west was to allow Iran to murder and torture not only its citizens but our soldiers as well. Sure - more under Democrats than republicans - (eg Obama/Biden in particular) - but it has been for the west to kowtow before the mullahs.

THAT is the strategy Trump rejected. Sure some here are OK with the mullahs murdering our soldiers and sailors and facing no consequnces - but please explain to me how doing the same thing that failed the last 50Y would result in a different outcome?

Dem TALKING points is "sure he was a bad guy but you didn't have to attack him." This is obviously nonsense and a lie. The problem is while they root for the United States and Western Civilization to fail - they also recognize they can't be seen doing so, so they have to pretend to support the goal while actually opposing it.

The next week or two they are going to realize they are on the losing side and supporting the Islamists and supporting the domination of Islam over Western Civ was the wrong move tactically and they are going to memory hole that they supported the mullahs while Americans supported America and freedom.

narciso said...

https://x.com/TousiTVOfficial/status/2029722777364664422

Little Excursion™️ said...

Yeah, staying on Twitter is bad for your brain

Breezy said...

“It's hard to see any resolution by fall that actually helps Trump politically.“

“There are none so blind as those who will not see.” - Heywood

Dave Begley said...

I’ve never been in the military, but I’ve got to think that momentum and emotions play a big part for the participants.

I saw the Huskers lose by about 60 points to the Gophers in MN. Nebraska’s players just quit. They were demoralized.

I’ve got to think the average Iranian in the army is demoralized at this point. What’s the point to risk your life in a losing effort?

Mason G said...

“It's hard to see how working to deport illegal alien murderers and rapists actually helps Trump politically.“

Ambrose said...

Don't put is past Democrats to switch sides once they know more about the outcome - like they did re "Nixon's War."

Mary Beth said...

If we win in Iran, in 2028 the Democrats will say they were always for whatever was done to win. It won't matter that there is video and audio evidence to the contrary any more than it matters now when they do a 180 degree turn around.

Jaq said...

Que sera sera.

I guess if you figure that murdering civilians and destroying an ancient city is "worth it if we win," well, I am sure that the Germans felt the same way when they steamrollered Poland and France. I am not saying that Trump is Hitler, what I am saying is that National Review's argument is stupid as a matter of logic.

I mean, look at this:

"I think Democrats have to make clear that they do support the goals, the overall objectives of eliminating this regime and freeing the people of Iran. It just has to be done in the right way."

Why? This makes no sense. Iran overthrew the Shah, a regime that we installed in 1953 order to gain control over Iran's oil and control of Hormuz. We backed Saddam in 1980 in a brutal war, we have been fomenting color revolution attempts ever since, in fact, Bissent has admitted to crashing their currency, in order to create protests, the Mossad has admitted to being among these protesters, and we have used the exact same violent tactics by paid protesters that the Democrats used in Minneapolis. Why should we approve of it?

There is no uprising occurring against the government of Iran, it does not seem to be a thing that the Iranians want. So here we go, sending in the Kurds. Trump said that we would give the regime a little push, and the people would do the rest, and we would be in and out in four days. And now they are talking about 100 days,

Whatever will be, will be, but even if Trump wins some kind of "glorious victory" it won't make things right.

narciso said...

Farmer knock if off youre not fooling anybody

narciso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Achilles said...


Jaq said...

Whatever will be, will be, but even if Trump wins some kind of "glorious victory" it won't make things right.

Some people do not deserve to live in a free country.

They belong in some despotic terrorist state.

buwaya said...

Israel backed Iran vs Iraq in the 1980s. It was the source of arms and spare parts that kept the Iranian military viable. Look at what thanks they got for that.

narciso said...

So did many countries the iran brief has the receipts

buwaya said...

Btw the US covertly assisted Israel supply Iran in the 1980s.
It was a Cold War play. Iraq was a Soviet almost-ally.
The claim that the US backed Saddam Hussein was a late Soviet bit of disinformation. A lot of those ancient Soviet meme-weapons survived for 30+ years. Russia picked some of them back up.

narciso said...

At various times iraq supported abu nidal carlos and abu abbas

Marcus Bressler said...

Kak, go away now. The Dems bet wrong on this one. As they do on anything The Greatest President in my lifetime does or says.

tommyesq said...

Shorter Kak - they are all crazy Islamists and we can't kill enough to get past the crazy Islamists, so we should instead just allow them to develop nukes, because Trump...

JIM said...

Democrats are on the wrong side of history. How in the world do they continue to pick the 20% side of almost every issue?
I know, they 100% believe they are righteous and heroic on every issue. They are the ones they have been waiting for. But holy moly, Iran is a prolific state sponsor of terror, run by a theocratic tyrant who brutally suppresses dissent while seeking a nuclear weapon. How do you not cheer the demise of that regime?

Mason G said...

"How in the world do they continue to pick the 20% side of almost every issue?"

They're not really picking anything. They're backed into that corner by their unthinking automatic dismissal of anything/everything Trump supports.

Keith said...

Jaq wrote:
There is no uprising occurring against the government of Iran, it does not seem to be a thing that the Iranians want. So here we go, sending in the Kurds. Trump said that we would give the regime a little push, and the people would do the rest, and we would be in and out in four days. And now they are talking about 100 days,
...

Jaq - so Trump tells all the Iranians stay inside. Don't want you to get hurt till we're done bombing. Then take your country. So they're staying inside. DAY FIVE.

Are you stupid? I ask that not in a bad spirit. I am legitimately curious. This is DAY FIVE of a massive bombing campaign and you are asking the civilians to go out in the streets? Again - are you stupid?

Finally you have to ask yourself ... do you believe the voices in your head or ALL THE VIDEOS of like EVERY PERSIAN IN THE WORLD dancing in the streets screaming "Thank you Trump! We love America!" in response to the bombing?

"Who you gonna believe? Me or your lyin' eyes?"

Honestly I don't think you are stupid. I think you are more of a liar. You really can't be that stupid.

Leland said...

It takes skill to make everyone hate you.

Well, the theocratic regime of Iran still has Democrats and Tucker Carlson rooting for them.

Leland said...

I think Democrats ... support the goals ... done in the right way.

Democrats want to set the goal post wherever they need them to regain theocratic control of the United States.

Mason G said...

Elisabeth Hasselbeck on The View:

“We need a strong border especially now with the current global situation, and I believe that you may say you don’t want border control and you’re against ICE, but I don’t believe you in your daily lives.”

“How many people in the audience had to go through security to get here? Raise your hand.”

[Camera cuts to audience members raising their hands]

“This is an authorized audience. They had to go through security, to get through the border, to get right here to just hear us talk.”

“We need strong borders more than ever right now.”

Immediately, she was attacked by almost every panelist sitting next to her.

https://x.com/overton_news/status/2029244764269199433

Little Excursion™️ said...

So when exactly is the bombing of a girls' elementary school—likely with AI-assisted targeting—going to become a major headline dominating American news coverage?

Just another school shooting, as far as they're concerned.

Big Mike said...

Rooting against your country against terrorist regimes is not a good look. Tie the Democrats to being on the wrong side of law and order and peace vs terror and they will be a minority party for decades.

Dave Begley said...

Sometime in the next two weeks the war will be over. We win!

Jim at said...

Rooting for American failure against one of our most vicious enemies ... just so they can regain power.

What a bunch of thugs.

gspencer said...

As soon as a sizable number of American receive a truthful answer to the question, "Islam stands for that?," the Ds will really have their hands filled.

Ampersand said...

The victory of the Democratic Party is the highest good. Once that happens, our lives will be immeasurably enriched. It will truly be the final solution.

Koot Katmandu said...

I am starting to wonder how long before the Ds start spitting on the troops again instead of saying the often disingenuous thank you for your service.

James K said...

"This is so much harder than what Trump seems to be assuming."

Yes, it's a shame Trump doesn't bring Kaka and all his knowledge of the intricacies of war onto the team.

On the other hand, maybe, just maybe, Trump, Hegseth, Cain, and the others know just a bit more than this armchair quarterback spewing blog comments.

Jim at said...

Sometime in the next two weeks the war will be over. We win!

I disagree, Dave.

It's going to take more than two weeks to unravel 47 years.

But it had to get started somewhere.

For the last couple days, I've been telling my better half this is the biggest geopolitical event since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

It's going to take a concerted effort to see it through.

Bruce Hayden said...

There is a saying that Pigs get fed but Hogs get slaughtered. The meaning of this in the business world is that making a moderate profit is fine, but price gouging and other exploitations will ultimately destroy you.

The relevance here is that immediate victory over other countries is easy for the US. Not Russia or China, of course. But with Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Venezuela, and now Iran. It was fairly quick and easy in Afghanistan, as well as in Iraq. But then the NeoCons take over, commit ground troops, and try to remake the country. And it becomes a quagmire.

I think that Trump, in particular, understands this. The Kurds have already attacked. And really, all it will probably take is a bunch of guns. Couple hundred thousand Glocks, for the women, and maybe a hundred thousand short barreled AR-15s for the men. We can just hope that, after the bombing campaign, Trump keeps the NeoCons away, and we just leave the Iranians to clean up their issues themselves.

Breezy said...

“For the last couple days, I've been telling my better half this is the biggest geopolitical event since the fall of the Berlin Wall.“

+1.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Betting against American success is extremely on-brand for the traitorous Democrats.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

It’s striking that one can read comments from Democrats and Keir Starmer and they are indistinguishable. Stripped down to unattributed quotes one can’t tell who said it. And both groups spend so much energy cozying up to Islamic immigrants calling for the destruction of their own country while ripping it off for benefits and free housing.

Enigma said...

The Republicans were tagged the "Party of No" circa the Bob Dole 1990s era. "No" can help a party win over the short term, but pessimism is a loser over the long term.

Democrats: It's your turn to spend 40 years in the wilderness. I hear that Sodom and Gomorrah have plenty of space for your base to live.

Kevin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rehajm said...

It’s striking that one can read comments from Democrats and Keir Starmer and they are indistinguishable

I recall media pointing out Clinton and Tony Blair shared the exact same speeches….

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Trump has turned MAGA into neocons!

However, it’s a bit premature to use “was” in reference to the Islamic Republic of Iran. For this to be over quickly, it will have to end like the First Gulf War. For this to be over decisively, it will end more like the Second Gulf War.

Achilles said...

Follow the money.

The biggest loser right now is Lloyds of London.

Temujin said...

They also bet that the American people would love wide open borders, housing and paying for millions of illegal immigrants, using multiple pronouns, deciding that gender was fluid and teaching that to our kids, allowing kids to have body parts removed because trends, having a man dressed as a woman who steals luggage at airports put in a position overseeing our nuclear spent fuel and waste, putting a rutabaga up as President and covering for him for four years as the world and our country blew up, then following it up with a blank-headed person whose top skills were being born a Black woman and being 'brat'.

You know I could go on and on. But you get the drift. Whatever Democrats jump on en masse has nothing to do with the betterment of this country, or your families. It has everything to do with their perception on how to gain and retain power. Period. Nothing else comes into play other than gaining and retaining power.

Which is why they have not had a new idea since the early 60s.

bagoh20 said...

"Democrats will have to spend 2028 arguing that voters should not believe their lying eyes."

They've done it before. For 30% of voters you can tell them anything negative of Trump and have instant acceptance. It's the business model for most of the media.

bagoh20 said...

"Trump has turned MAGA into neocons!"

We could use some updated pejorativocity.

bagoh20 said...

"...this is the biggest geopolitical event since the fall of the Berlin Wall."

No boots on the ground there either. I don't expect it to go anywhere near as peacefully as that, but something like that is the hope.

bagoh20 said...

The problem with removing bad guys in the middle east has always been the plethora of bad replacements always waiting for the opportunity to put their own style of shit in place. I think Trump intends to prevent that, but it's also the hardest part. He will have to play dictator for a while, and home media politics will be the limiting factor. Thank God he's termed out, and can ignore it.

Little Excursion™️ said...

I'm confident that Trump and Hegseth have carefully gamed out all the second- and third-order effects of striking Iran. They've surely prepared strategic responses for every obvious consequence—and probably several layers beyond that. Classic Trump 5D chess: even their contingencies come with contingencies.After all, one used to host a game show, and the other built his career yelling at people on television.

Achilles said...

Kakistocracy said...

I'm confident that Trump and Hegseth have carefully gamed out all the second- and third-order effects of striking Iran.

They have.

When Lloyds of London tried to pressure the US to stop them from removing their pawn in the middle east Trump was ready to take their place insuring global trade.

Now Lloyds will no longer be the gatekeeper to globalist trade.

jim said...

I think they are betting on incompetence and would like to limit the risk and thus the damage.

Given the fact that we are in a war, I expect them to drift toward a war powers resolution that sets limits.

Little Excursion™️ said...

Trump revels in upending the status quo. Where Colin Powell cautioned with the Pottery Barn rule: “You break it, you own it”. Trump’s operating principle seems closer to: “You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs, and the eggshells? Someone else’s cleanup job.

Chaos isn’t an unintended side effect in his approach; it’s baked in—and the aftermath won’t tidy itself anytime soon.

Keith said...

Jim at said...
Sometime in the next two weeks the war will be over. We win!

I disagree, Dave.

It's going to take more than two weeks to unravel 47 years.

But it had to get started somewhere.

For the last couple days, I've been telling my better half this is the biggest geopolitical event since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

It's going to take a concerted effort to see it through.

3/6/26, 1:44 AM


I would argue that this is probably a bigger deal. The Cold War required three extraordinary people. Reagan primarily of course, but also Thatcher and Pope, John Paul, the second.

It did not require direct action against an enemy. It did not mean, putting everything you have on the line for one big decision. The thrust of the effort was to stand Firm, don’t get wobbly as one of them said, and simply just to continue to fund our military to speed the financial impossibility of socialism or communism. But there was no actual direct attack against America’s enemy. In addition while the Democrats of the 1980s opposed America and supported America’s enemies as they do now, there were still the scoop Jackson Democrats that did in fact love the country in contrast to the John Carey Democrats, who hated the country. Most Americans still loved their country and were patriotic in contrast to now.

And start contrast, Trump had to make the decision explicitly to attack civilizations enemy, and also anticipate that this could cause havoc to oil prices and put himself, his power, his reputation at risk to lose it all. He is the character in Richard Kipling‘s poem. He had a much harder choice to be a man as compared to the former three. Much greater risk.

On the other hand, the benefit to the decision made by Reagan, Thatcher, and Pope John Paul, the second was enormous, but really involved freeing millions of slaves within their unproductive societies and lessened to the burden of our military requirements, but did not radically change the world order to my mind.

In contrast, Iran is the world’s terror sponsor, responsible for thousands of deaths of Americans, but also has or had the power to wreak havoc to the world’s energy supply. Less so now that America has become an energy power, despite the best efforts of Democrats and the left. The world has required oil for the economy to function and for prosperity for 200 years. The West had to Cowtown to Muslim dictatorships to greater and lesser extent for 200 years.

The Will of one single man in history, Donald Trump appears to be breaking this pattern. Much of our blood and treasure has been required in order to maintain the flow of oil as that is the lubricant that allows for the world, economy, and prosperity to continue. The Will of one single man now appears sufficient to break that. Presuming that Iran is broken it looks like first through the Abraham accords, second through conservatives, encouraging drill, baby drill, and third through his breaking the main disruptor to peace in the Middle East he may usher in a world where our resources are no longer necessary for us to spell our blood and treasure to maintain the world‘s economy. That responsibility has fallen on our shoulders since World War II.

While they talked about the end of history after the fall of the iron curtain with Islamic expansionism checked , The world, energy supply, secure, and all the important influential Muslim countries rained in the future of peace and prosperity may be at hand.

Keith said...

This, of course, assumes that Iran leadership is not replaced with something worse. However, moments ago, the leadership was fanatical, a deaf quote, and completely dedicated to building a nuclear weapon with which to destroy the west. There is literally no way what goes forward could be worse. I know some of the crazies think but it could be worse. I would love to hear exactly how it could be worse. We appear to have destroyed or are in the process of destroying their ability to build nuclear weapons, and deliver them, destroying their miss delivery capability as well as their Air Force and navy. The worst case scenario would be the government is replaced with a homicidal death cult, no worse than before, but no longer with the ability to project force outside their borders.

Little Excursion™️ said...

It’s in chapter 9 of The Great Gatsby: "They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made".

Keith said...

Kak- there have been a lot of articles published recently saying that Powell was a great general strategically but not philosophically. The Pottery Barn rule was just stupid. If you are an enemy of the United States, our goal is to remove the threat. We have no obligation whatsoever to rebuild your society. If it is to our strategic benefit, we will. After World War II, it appeared that communism was aggressively expanding into the west and there was real concern in the 1920s and 1930s and 1940s that communism would replace freedom. It was critically important for us to rebuild countries at risk of falling to prevent this expansion. However, we rebuild countries that previously were reasonably free or even had a history of democracy. I think the most reasonable response is if you do not threaten the United States we will leave you alone. If you threaten the United States or our ability to ensure a functional world economy, we will kill you. What you do after that is up to you. If it is our interests to rebuild your society, we will, and if it is not well I guess you will learn for next time.

Little Excursion™️ said...

Trump’s war with Iran isn’t ending anytime soon.
Demanding unconditional surrender from a country is, by definition, an act of war—one that constitutionally requires a formal declaration.

Little Excursion™️ said...

Great. Then scrap the $50 billion emergency supplemental handout to pad defense industry profits and sustain Trump’s bottomless war appetite. By his own account, he already has everything required.

"The US military has more than enough munitions, ammo, and weapons stockpiles to continue demolishing the Iranian regime and finish Operation Epic Fury, no matter how long it lasts. Nevertheless, President Trump has always been intensely focused on strengthening our military, which is why this meeting with defense contractors was scheduled weeks ago. The President will continue to call on these US companies to more speedily build American-made weapons, which are the absolute best in the world.” ~ Karoline Leavitt

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Kakistocracy said...
I think Democrats have to make clear that they do support the goals, the overall objectives of eliminating this regime and freeing the people of Iran. It just has to be done in the right way.

Oh, Kak, you're so funny.

The Obama Admin's foreign policy was "mullahs uber alles". The Democrats party hates the people of Iran, and can't possibly support the removal of an America hating government anywhere in the world.

And it IS being done the right way. Which is yet another reason why the Dems oppose it.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Mark said...
If you are so confident Dems are wrong why are you so hung up with their words? Shouldn't you just confidently prove them wrong?

We are, and we will

bagoh20 said...

"I'm confident that Trump and Hegseth have carefully gamed out all the second- and third-order effects of striking Iran. They've surely prepared strategic responses for every obvious consequence—and probably several layers beyond that."

That's called planning for failure. Trump doesn't do that. His response to setbacks is to hit harder until he wins. That's why he's President now. Contingency planning should not take up a lot of time or resources because the situation is unknown in advance. It's better to just insist on winning, with the contingency being how to win another way if needed. This is what the U.S, has been missing since WWII. At least that's what I hope is happening.
"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

bagoh20 said...

"It just has to be done in the right way."

Which is not possible with Trump doing it, no matter how successful it is.
I mean can you even imagine the Dems saying Trump did a great job at anything. It has never happened, since before 2016, when it was admitted on a number of occasions in New York.

Hassayamper said...

This is a case where the Party bigwigs have no choice but to follow the largest, loudest, and most hysterical segment of their base off the cliff.

If they didn't, they would be risking an outcome like the recent Gorton and Denton by-election in England, a Labour stronghold for nearly 100 years. The leftist loonies swung over to the Greens en masse, and Labour came in 3rd, following Nigel Farage's Reform Party.

JAORE said...


Democrats will regret having to argue that:
America is better off with mutilated "Trans" kids. America is better off with millions of illegals coming into this country without any substantial vetting (insert trafficked kids, narcotics and more here). America is better off with violent criminals released due to no cash bail policies. America is better off with an unfunded DHS while the potential for sleeper cells may be at an all time high. America is better off with reliance on intermittent sources of electricity. America is better off with BLM, Antifa and other interest groups bilking billions from Uncle Sugar and delivering nothing to the intended recipients. America is better off with Democrats.

Post a Comment

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.