That's Trump, an hour ago, at Truth Social, somehow declining to add his trademark "Thank you for your attention to this matter," perhaps because it is too cruel... or too lighthearted. I see he's calling God "God" again.
April 7, 2026
"... maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS?"
"A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!"
Posts
115 comments:
…appropriate to add the Althouse commentariat’s trademark Democrats hardest hit. Oh the seething they’re doing these days. I hope and pray it continues..
That definitely sounds like someone who's planning to "chicken out." I hope the absolute imbeciles who pushed that meme sufficiently regret what is about to happen.
Threatening to exterminate a "civilization"? Why do people compare this guy to Hitler? Must be TDS.
Creating uncertainty via a game of "Chicken" with the hope that Iran will snap. I doubt it'll happen and I doubt Trump will delete any civilization ever.
- If he backs down "Wow, he's actually compassionate."
- If he bombs "Wow, he's a man of his word. Fear him."
Get the skinny on TOUSi TV.
In negotiations it’s always in the seeming darkest moments when there is imminent peril that deals are done. In this case, sadly, don’t discount crazy.
Now do you believe that he is planning on committing war crimes tonight? Or do you still think killing a whole civilization (aka genocide) is somehow a legitimate military target?
…sometimes the message is intended for someone besides you ding dongs. Enjoyable how worked up you get over it, though…
Why "God" and not "Yahway" (in various acceptable spellings, pronunciation)
Or even "Allah" which is merely yahweh in arabic
John Henry
If we have complete and total regime change, with different, smarter, and less radicalized minds, then why are we threatening to wipe them off the face of the earth, exactly?
Freder Frederson said...
Now do you believe that he is planning on committing war crimes tonight? Or do you still think killing a whole civilization (aka genocide) is somehow a legitimate military target?
You truly are an imbecile, aren't you?
If the Crown Prince had any courage, he'd roll into Tehran tonight and lead the revolution.
To get an idea how bad the current regime is, they claim that they are going to get little kids to encircle power plants.
You truly are an imbecile, aren't you?
How can this statement be interpreted any other way than, "If you don't do what I want, I will commit genocide"? This imbecile is really curious what you think he meant.
To get an idea how bad the current regime is, they claim that they are going to get little kids to encircle power plants.
And if they do that and Trump bombs anyway, how does that make him better than the Iranian regime?
I think it is fair to observe Roman civilization died but the people who we now call Italians survived, and you could make a similar observation about the Nazis and Germans. Trump's critics seem to have this tic where they either substitute words they wish he had used, or insert words that he didn't, instead of simply disagreeing with what Trump did say.
I’ve been a Trump supporter. He has to end this war quickly. And he needs to crank down the rhetoric.
I’ve been a Trump supporter. He has to end this war quickly. And he needs to crank down the rhetoric.
He can't and he won't. Thank you for your support! Praise Allah!
Freder Frederson said...
To get an idea how bad the current regime is, they claim that they are going to get little kids to encircle power plants.
And if they do that and Trump bombs anyway, how does that make him better than the Iranian regime?
And Fredo proves once again that all the Leftist caterwauling about "war crimes" is dishonest bullshitting. Deliberately placing military assets among a civilian population or placing civilians in harm's way as a defensive tactic is expressly forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.
Persian civilization is not the problem, that's what Trump should be trying to restore. The problem is with the radical Islamists now running Iran.
If there has been a regime change since the war broke out it's now that the IRGC now seems to be more firmly entrenched than before. I do wish for that regime to be dislodged, but Trump's ever shifting deadlines and threats against civilian infrastructure won't do it. You need boots on the ground to that.
Trump's critics seem to have this tic where they either substitute words they wish he had used, or insert words that he didn't, instead of simply disagreeing with what Trump did say.
His statement, if carried out, is a war crime. Genocide doesn't require completely exterminating an entire people. Are saying that the Nazis, by not killing every single European Jew, did not commit genocide?
Deliberately placing military assets among a civilian population or placing civilians in harm's way as a defensive tactic is expressly forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.
Bridges and powerplants are not "military assets" though, bro. Civilians are absolutely allowed to reside near bridges under the Geneva Convention. You should double check. LOL.
Trumpers gonna be trumpy.
Deliberately placing military assets among a civilian population or placing civilians in harm's way as a defensive tactic is expressly forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.
And the fact that your opponents commit war crimes is not a justification to commit war crimes of your own.
Using children (or adults, for that matter) as human shields is a war crime, whether the site is bombed or not. Bombing a legitimate target is not a war crime, even if human shields are killed. Amazing that Freder Frederson doesn't know this.
Similarly, putting guns in the hands of under-18s, as Hamas regularly does, and encouraging them to shoot at Israeli soldiers, is a war crime. Israeli soldiers shooting back at them and killing them is not a war crime: soldiers are allowed to kill people who are trying to kill them, even if they're children. Amazing that so many do not know this.
The Naiveté Scale is topping out heavily this morning. Trump is literally playing the world this week. Astonishing what's taking place.
I, for one, cannot wait to see what happens next, but I doubt very much that he's going to just wipe out the entirety of Iran's population, and those wringing their hands about it now are the same ones who stood in line for their 6th covid booster.
Something big is going to happen. But he's not going to wipe out the population of Iran. I also doubt very much that he is going to order the destruction of their entire power grid and demolish their civilization. He wants the Iranian people to be able to function as a free nation. Or...at the very least, as a functioning nation that is no longer a threat. If we wipe out everything, they are lost and we'll end up having to rebuild and support them forever. We're not doing that.
European leaders hardest hit.
Now I understand how sick my Jewish friends and family feel about what Israel is doing in Gaza in their name.
Trump withdrew from the Geneva Conventions just by changing definitions, the same way Fauci changed the definition of gain of function to inflict COVID on the world.
Republicans have shown that they can never again be trusted with power.
A viewer text at the end of Jessie Waters show last night made an interesting point: this is a head fake and the real target tonight will be taking Kharg Island.
As a first step, taking Kharg would choke the regime without destroying infrastructure needed to rebuild.
On cue:
https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2026/04/07/reports-explosions-heard-at-kharg-island-irans-critical-oil-export-site/
During the Iran-Iraq war, Iran conducted several massive human wave attacks using untrained "martyrs", who had been rounded up by the Basij. These attacks were unsupported by the other military branches.
The idea was that sheer numbers would overwhelm Saddam's entrenched tanks and troops. It didn't work very well. You can imagine the casualty rate.
H/Y Jeff Childers at https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/celestial-rabbits-tuesday-april-7
From the 2014 (Obama) Edition of the DOW (DOD at the time) "Law of War Manual"
https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/DOD-LAW-OF-WAR-MANUAL-JUNE-2015-UPDATED-JULY%202023.PDF
5.6.8.1 Examples of Military Objectives – Leadership Facilities. Facilities used by enemy leaders as headquarters for military operations or otherwise to command military operations have often been regarded as military objectives.237 In some cases, enemy leaders themselves may be made the object of attack.
5.6.8.2 Examples of Military Objectives – Communications Objects.
Communications objects, such as facilities, networks, and equipment that could be used for command and control of military operations or intelligence gathering, have often been regarded of strategic target-bombing. Thus what remained of the protection afforded by International Law to the civilian
population in the matter of aerial bombardment was the principle—generally acknowledged by the Allies, though
not always capable of being adhered to in practice—that the bombing of towns or purely residential parts of towns
which were not in any way related to the war efforts of the enemy was unlawful. At the same time abstention from
such bombing could also be explained by reference to considerations of economy militating against costly
operations for the sake of achieving purely psychological effect—considerations the disregard of which rendered the
use by Germany of the flying bomb and long-range projectiles not only unlawful but, in the judgment of many, also
detrimental to her own war effort.”).
5.6.8.3 Examples of Military Objectives – Transportation Objects.
Transportation objects, including facilities (e.g., port facilities and airfields) and equipment that could be part of lines of communication (e.g., highways, railroads, waterways, and bridges connecting military forces with logistics depots and storage areas), have often been regarded as military objectives.
5.6.8.4 Examples of Military Objectives – Places of Military Significance.
Areas of land that are militarily significant may constitute military objectives. For example, anti-tank mines may be laid on such areas in order to block enemy forces’ tanks. Areas of land that have been regarded as military objectives have included, for example:
• road networks
• known or suspected enemy avenues of approach or withdrawal;
• mountain passes, hills, defiles, and bridgeheads;
• villages, towns, or cities whose seizure is militarily important.
5.6.8.5 Examples of Military Objectives – Economic Objects Associated With Military Operations.
Economic objects associated with military operations or with war supporting or war-sustaining industries have been regarded as military objectives.
Electric power stations are generally recognized to be of sufficient importance to a State’s capacity to meet its wartime needs of communication, transport, and industry so as
usually to qualify as military objectives during armed conflicts.
Or Qeshm Island, immediately adjacent to the Strait.
BREAKING:
US Air Force just bombed Qeshm Island, Iran.
Direct strike on the IRGC’s positions in the Strait of Hormuz — where they were targeting commercial ships.
Massive destruction reported. Thick smoke rising across the island.
Emphasis added above
War consists of destruction and slaughter, but must be played by the rules.
Also
5.12.1.4 Harms Caused by the Attacking Force Versus Harms Caused by Enemy
Action or Beyond the Control of Either Party. The harm caused by the attacking forces’ actions
in conducting the attack must be considered. Harm caused by enemy action, or beyond the
control of either party, need not be considered.
For example, a commander directing an air operation would not need to consider civilians
injured or killed by counter-attacks from enemy air defense measures, such as spent surface-to
air measures or antiaircraft projectiles.439 Similarly, the risk to the civilian population from the
legitimate deception activities of the defending force, such as jamming, smoke, or chaff, would
not need to be considered by the attacking force, although the defending force should consider
such risks as part of its obligations to take feasible precautions in defense.440
When the attacking force causes harms that are the responsibility of the defending force
due to its use of voluntary human shields or due to the employment of civilian personnel in or on
military objectives, the responsibility of the defending force is a factor that may be considered in
determining whether such harm is excessive.
Emph added
John Henry
Christopher B said...
Deliberately placing military assets among a civilian population or placing civilians in harm's way as a defensive tactic is expressly forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.
And bombing or shelling the civilian hostages is specifically permitted by Geneva and our Law of War Manual. (See above)
John Henry
A regime that has threatened us and others with nuclear annihilation has pretty much opened the door to whatever we want to do to them. Proportionality is not simply a restricting mechanism, not after the threat of nukes.
Freder Frederson said...
Are saying that the Nazis, by not killing every single European Jew, did not commit genocide?
Why do you ignore the 3mm non-Jewish Poles, Freder? Are you denying their humanity?
(There were also 3mm non-Polish Jews and 3mm Non-Polish non-Jews murdered by National Socialism)
John Henry
The limits of the FF mind are such he can’t imagine any interpretations other than his own. Which coincidentally is the same prediction of criminality he made since day one of this war. Such imagination!
As hinted by Amexpat Trump’s threat is to the Islamofascist Empire not the Persian one. Iran is not even a majority Muslim country.
Another example where you take Trump seriously but not literally.
Wince,
Interesting point.
But I have questioned before the need to take Kharg Island. Unless we plan to run it and export oil from it.
It is an island. It should be a piece of Cake or easy as pie to isolate it so no ships can dock. We don't even have to DO anything. Just pass the word that any ship docking will be sunk and let the insurance companies do the rest.
If necessary, it should be only a little harder to cut the pipelines supplying oil to Kharg Island.
John Henry
I'm sorry but it just makes me laugh to see all of you people you Democrats you Independence you Republicans you maggots all of you people listening to this huckster con man blather on and on about the destruction of a civilization and doing God's will yada yada yada and you take his words seriously. There will be no regime change and no destruction of civilizations and no genocide and no victory either for the United States. Although no doubt when Trump decides finally to give up because the mullah's won't, he will declare victory and then talk about all of the countries that refuse to help us and you maggots will swallow that hole and jump up and down oh boy are great hero the master negotiator the art of the deal the one true American have shown the rest of the world how mighty and righteous we are and how we are not to be trifled with. That should give you guys a chubby for the next day or two. Too bad your fat bellies won't allow you to see it.
Moreover, you do not need to destroy a power plant to cut power.
A graphite bomb is intended to be a non-lethal weapon used to disable an electrical grid. The bomb works by spreading a dense cloud of extremely fine, chemically treated carbon filaments over air-insulated high voltage installations like transformers and power lines, causing short-circuits and subsequent disruption of the electricity supply in an area, a region or even an entire small country. The weapon is sometimes referred to as a blackout bomb or soft bomb because its direct effects are largely confined to the targeted electrical power facility, with minimal risk of immediate collateral damage.
You guys don’t understand. Freder is not against war crimes. He’s against the USA fighting back at all. Every target of Iran’s rockets has been civilians, indiscriminate and unprovoked.
Wince,
I seem to recall that Bill Clinton used graphite bombs extensively in knocking out the entire Serbian power grid in the 90s.
Was that a war crime? I don't recall any complaints.
John Henry
The first thing we did in Desert Storm was bomb bridges and power plants: dual use systems are always fair game.
Obama was tagged with the "war crimes" label for his drone strikes on Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. But leftists...so nothing happeend...nor with his "kids in cages."
right wing neocon war mongers, always got a fanfare and a lie for ya! WMD'S ,weeks away for Nukes(for 10 years) BOTH SIDES "GULF OF TONKIN my era and service years.(65-72) WE WONT GET FOOLED AGAIN! WRONG... trump got the taste of blood working for BIBI in Gaza AND like any war monger cant get enough.... follow him over the cliff..OIL NOW ANYONE" trump= EASTER wishes "F U YOU F'ING ____
gonna F U up( in so many words AND OH YEAH HAPPY EASTER TO YOUR FAMILY AND ESPECIALLY THE KIDS, gather them around TV to hear me roar!
Why do you ignore the 3mm non-Jewish Poles, Freder? Are you denying their humanity?
I am not ignoring them. But the Nazis stated aim was to exterminate the Jews. While the Nazis considered Slavs and others sub-human, they did not consider them an existential threat to Aryans. In fact, as long as they were compliant, the Nazis were perfectly willing to use non-Jews for slave labor.
So really, fuck you.
@ Wince
We did that in Iraq too. I remember seeing the filaments hanging off of transmission lines. They basically short everything out and trip all the breakers, is how it was explained to me.
It takes a long time and a lot of work for crews to clean all that stuff up so they can turn the power back on. But then it only takes a few minutes to do it again. It's quite ingenious.
Someone calling himself Stxwmxn on Twitter gives a chart of the population of Gaza since 1948. For those too lazy to follow the link, the Muslim population has gone from 200,000 to 2,230,000, the Christian popluation from 35,000 to 1,100, and the Jewish population from 80 to 0. Particularly noteworthy is that there is no notch or bump in the Muslim population curve: it goes up steadily, with an upward curve as the population growth accelerates. All the deaths in the war the Gazans insisted on starting were not enough to affect the shape of the curve. So much for the claim of 'genocide': it's a bald-faced lie, repeated only by other liars and by fools.
I don't have a link, but I've also seen a chart of the world Jewish population. As I recall, the Nazis killed roughly half of all the Jews in the world - much more than half of those in their power - and the total still hasn't recovered. The number of Jews in the world has increased enormously since 1945, but it's still less than the total was in 1939. That's genocide.
Seth Moulton’s (D-Masshole) pucker resides on his face, right between his chin and nose, where it festers and spews
More and more, I miss Old Trump. Or maybe this is Old Trump joking around at a time that demands more seriousness, sobriety, and focus.
Freder, Freder, Freder
The National Socialists attacked the Poles in a way they never did with the Jews. They not only killed 6mm, Jewish and Non, they destroyed libraries, legal records going back centuries, land deeds, schools, historical cultural sites and much much more.
The idea was to eliminate Poles as a race and leave them as uneducated slavs (Slaves) with no more then 3rd grade educations if that.
That was harder to do with Jews, though they certainly tried. But Jewish culture was more widely distributed around the world in places the socialists had no access to.
I would place the Polish genocide on exactly the same level as the Jewish genocide.
But the Jews had people around the world in positions that could be heard. Including movie studios run by folks who had first hand knowledge of pogroms.
Nobody spoke for the Poles. Nobody really speaks for them today.
John Henry
For Howard: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/suicide-prevention-crisis-hotlines
This is typically when a family member takes away the keys.
Only Freder (just rewatched Metropolis the other day!) and those of his ilk would hear Trump saying “God Bless the Great People of Iran!” and conclude (or at least purport to conclude) that Trump plans to genocide the Iranian people.
If PDJT had said "Hey Ayatollah, I'm going to rip your head off and stuff it up your ass. Then I'm going to piss down your neck."
Most of the guys here have probably received similar threats at some point in their lives.
Would anyone believe it?
It is hyperbole or trash talk.
Is what he is saying here any different? I suspect that something pretty spectacular will happen tonight. Such as all the lights in Iran being turned off at the same time or some such.
But I don't believe he is going to commit genocide or all the horrible things he is saying.
John Henry
In reality Trump is probably only barely aware of the game he's playing beyond his instant gratification impulses.
Trump can't actually attack. All of his commentary on the fictitious 'negotiations' are only to keep the S&P afloat -- he knows that once he attacks, the market sinks, costs to Americans go higher and his mid-terms are gone. He is painting himself into a corner.
I'm starting to think that the FIFA peace prize isn't all that it was chalked up to be ...
“In reality Trump is probably only barely aware of the game he's playing beyond his instant gratification impulses.”
The mind reading post. The sure sign of a complete idiot.
@DD Driver and Fredo
As John Mosby points out, civilian casualties incidental to, and not the primary objective of, an attack on infrastructure with military use are to be minimised but need not be avoided by an attacking force, and there is no equivalence between incidental civilian casualties and the deaths of civilians deliberately placed in harm's way in an attempt to deter an attack.
If the Crown Prince had any courage, he'd roll into Tehran tonight and lead the revolution.
I agree. He certainly is popular with expatriates, and I am assured by one of my Iranian colleagues that he enjoys 80- percent support inside the country. He's not a young man, but he's in shape enough to put on combat gear and fly in with a hundred Special Forces and a thousand young Iranian volunteers and throw the dice for victory or death. If I were in his position I would do it, I think. Maybe this is the buildup to a dramatic gesture like that, and the coming attack is just a show to provide him cover.
As I've said repeatedly, I hope they've got enough guns in the hands of the people to allow a revolution to proceed. Israel has a million old Uzis and Galils that I hope they've distributed.
In reality...
Maybe stay in your lane.
Mid-terms are seven months away. If, by then, Venezuela has had a free election with Delcy Rodriguez getting less than 10% and the Nobel prize winner swept into office in a landslide, and hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan refugees have returned home to rebuild the economy; if Cuba is going through a similar process; if Iran has had a popular uprising, the IRGC have all been hanged from lampposts or fled to Afghanistan, a referendum has installed a constitutional monarchy, and Shah Reza II is sitting on the Peacock Throne backed by patriotic democraticly-elected legislators; if world gas and oil and fertilizer prices are below where they were in December; if the U.S. economy is booming, and young Americans are getting multiple well-paid job offers to replace the deported illegals and H1Bs - Democrats will be utterly crushed in the midterms. That all seems more likely than not. So far, so good.
Trump’s approval ratings are plummeting, not only due to the unpopularity of his actions in Iran but also because of concerns about the economy and the cost of living. His approval rating on the economy has reached a new low, with a significant portion of voters expressing dissatisfaction with his handling of inflation and the high price of gasoline. This economic downturn is particularly concerning for Republicans, as it threatens to erode Trump’s support among working-class voters, a key demographic for his electoral success.
When talking about "MAGA", it would help to define terms. Are we talking about all Trump 2024 voters, Republicans, or just the people who are the most hardcore Trump 2024 voters?
An additional thing to look for in polling are shifts between 2024 and 2026 with respect to people who self-identify as Republicans. With respect to one polling firm, Public Polling Project, the data that I see shows that in 2024, 39.7% of voters identified as Republicans. As of March 2026, that voter ID number is 33.4%, which is one of the lowest on record (January 2022 was the lowest at 32.4%).
In other words, a large percent of self-identified "Republicans" still support Trump and Israel's war, but the pool of people identifying as Republicans is also shrinking. A 6% shift in party ID is also pretty significant. Seems likely those numbers will go down as we get closer to the election.
All presidential candidates also win with the support of coalitions, including people who may agree on some policy items, but not others. Based on polling data Trump is clearly bleeding significant support from younger voters. He is also losing a lot of soft support over his handling of the economy, immigration, and foreign policy.
No hard data, but plenty of anecdotal data that Trump is bleeding significant support from people who might be described as Republicans and Republican-leaning with ties to the national security state. I don't think Hegseth is doing Trump any favors either in this regard.
Only Freder (just rewatched Metropolis the other day!) and those of his ilk would hear Trump saying “God Bless the Great People of Iran!” and conclude (or at least purport to conclude) that Trump plans to genocide the Iranian people.
So Trump is contradicting himself in the post. What else is new. You can't very well kill a civilization if you don't kill a whole lot of the civilian population, especially if you are unwilling to occupy the civilization with a huge occupation force.
"No hard data" - indeed, the "bleeding support" is mostly wishful thinking by the kind of assholes (excuse my French) who were hoping the WSO colonel would be killed, or (even better) captured and paraded in a humiliating way, and hoping that dozens or hundreds of his rescuers would die horrible deaths trying to rescue him. Disgusting subhuman creeps.
I, for one, hope unconditional surrender is still the US position. Let the mullahs realize the errors of their ways, or end them.
If not, the administration is repeating the folly of its predecessors in allowing the mullahs' continuing existence, although also setting the mad sick bastards back a generation or so in their apocalyptic programs. So we have that going for us which is nice.
Also, closing an international waterway should have the entire world sending bombers to help the US change the Iranian government's mind, or at least change the Iranian government.
That all seems more likely than not. So far, so good.
I'll take that bet.
A guy who can't even admit that he was wrong about whether using human shields, or bombing targets surrounded by human shields, is a war crime wants to make a bet? No thanks. I don't believe you would pay a lost bet.
mikee:
I sometimes wonder why Regime Change isn't an explicit goal of the US. I hope it's because we don't want to make it look like Reza Pahlavi is a US puppet. Allowing the Iranian people to rise up, overthrow the mullahs and IRGC, and then decide for themselves in a referendum what kind of government they want is the best course. A constitutional monarchy looks likely, and having it develop organically is the best course. That means making Regime Change an unannounced goal. Let the moderates in the regime hope they'll be able to stay in power if they betray the radicals.
Also, if it is true that that the mullahs counter-demands for a cease fire include reparations and the right to control passage through the strait, all I can say is good luck with that, you idiots, and may you enjoy the results of your folly.
I sometimes wonder why Regime Change isn't an explicit goal of the US.
When Trump started this war, he said it was.
A constitutional monarchy looks likely, and having it develop organically is the best course.
Considering the last Shah was a brutal dictator who, with the help of MI-6 and CIA, destroyed the prior constitutional monarchy, what makes you think his son will be any better?
Surprise, surprise! Freder Frederson is as ignorant of the history of Iran as of the Laws of War! None of what he writes here is true.
Freder Frederson is as ignorant of the history of Iran as of the Laws of War! None of what he writes here is true.
Rather than just saying, "you're wrong", why don't you point out what I got wrong. I only wrote one sentence.
Trump and his buddy Bibi, are committing war crimes with my tax dollars and using my countries military. Even one dead American was too many for this immoral attack on a country that is 5000 miles away and is no threat to us.
Trump has become more and more unhinged, and is in danger of destroying his legacy and the Republican party. Outside of the Mark Levin audience and Christian Zionists there is no support for this immoral "war".
Everyone should go listen to Tucker's latest.
$125/Barrell oil isnt good for anyone. I resent having to economically suffer just so Bibi and Israel can destroy one of their enemies. Of course, the Left is mostly silent - except for taking pot shots at trump. Because they aren't against war - and don't have a problem with war crimes. Unless its "The party line".
FF: Why don't you admit that you were wrong about the Laws of War and human shields? Arguing with people who just change the subject when proven wrong is a mug's game. It looks to me like any effort to educate you will be wasted.
Freder Frederson said...
You truly are an imbecile, aren't you?
"How can this statement be interpreted any other way than, "If you don't do what I want, I will commit genocide"? This imbecile is really curious what you think he meant."
I know you're caught up in you're own fear mongering, but if you had listened to his speech you would know what he was talking about.
The United States military is going to target infrastructure. Specifically bridges and power plants. Which, by the way, aren't your precious war crimes. They are legitimate targets when your enemy uses them to persue their goals.
Why don't you admit that you were wrong about the Laws of War and human shields?
Because I am not. As John Henry pointed out (in the text he highlighted above), the use of human shields by "the responsibility of the defending force is a factor that may be considered in determining whether such harm is excessive." It doesn't remove the the determination completely. Bombing from 30,000 feet puts the attackers at very little risk from the somebody shooting at them from behind human shields. Plus, Trump declared today he intends to destroy the civilization.
If this doesn't get him the Nobel prize, I don't know what will.
The amount of people crashing outbover this is remarkable. It's dumb too. Stop falling for social media bait.
The full sentence from the LoW manual John Mosby is quoting reads
When the attacking force causes harms that are the responsibility of the defending force
due to its use of voluntary human shields or due to the employment of civilian personnel in or on
military objectives, the responsibility of the defending force is a factor that may be considered in
determining whether such harm is excessive.
You are simply misinterpreting plain English because your contentions are otherwise unsupported. The determination has little to do with the impact of human shields on the relative safety of the attacking force from defensive fire. You know as well as any one the Iranian thugs are likely holding civilians hostage in military targets in hopes of deterring attack based solely on their presence, and that is precisely why "the responsibility of the defending force" for creating the situation where civilian casualties will occur is a factor in determining if the harm is excessive.
When I think about all of the hypotheticals of going back in time and killing Hitler, even if he was a baby, I I have a difficult time understanding any of the sympathy for this regime. It has had half a century to show us what it is. Was not the Third Reich a "civilization?" Was it not destroyed? Was that not a good thing? Iran as it is currently constituted is the epitome of all the things the progressives profess to be against. Yet, now they are sympathetic.
If we can effect regime change in Iran, we may have a few years of relative stability in the Middle East. Without Iran funding and egging on Hamas and Hezbollah, it looks as though Israel may be able to stand down. Not disarm, not reduce vigilance, but stand down. Maybe without Iranian money and subversion the people of Gaza can have peace and transform their terrorist haven in a seaside destination. I've read that enough money has been poured into Gaza to make it the equivalent of Dubai. That's tragic that those resources should have been made available and squandered.
I hope the Iranian people are given the means to rise up and supplant the current regime. Any regime that is not virulently Islamic fascism and anti-Semitic determined to effect the destruction of Israel has to be a better regime. Hell, if Iran could return to the late 60s I'm sure virtually everyone there, except for the mullahs (who may be taken for one way helicopter rides) will be happier.
That eventuality would make Donald Trump a great man even if it cost him his majorities, his hope of accomplishing much in the remainder of his term and perhaps even his freedom if the vengeful Trump haters have their way.
Ultimately, I think the only solution to the Iranian morass is for it to be leveled as the Allies leveled German and Japan at the end of World War II. Unlike the conclusion of the Great War which left Germany hell bent on a rerun, the end of WWII settled matters for a generation or more.
And let's not forget who started this in 1979. Let's not forget who flourished while poking the paper tiger of various American regimes. This is the consequences all around of Iran deciding we didn't have to be taken seriously and really they had no reason to think otherwise.
I may regret his language and tone at times, but I do not regret his goals.
I just made this query to ChatGPT.
“ A friend just equated bombing power plants with genocide. Which logical fallacies did he just commit? I’ll start. Catagory error.” Of course I was referring to my friend Freder.
Here’s the list Chat came back with.
Category error
Equivocation/Definitional drift
False equivalence
Non-sequitur
Hasty generalization
I’m betting this isn’t even a new record for Freder.
"A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will."
I'm processing that as a "Ruse de guerre".
Wikipedia: "The French ruse de guerre, sometimes literally translated as ruse of war, is a non-uniform term; generally what is understood by "ruse of war" can be separated into two groups. The first classifies the phrase purely as an act of military deception against one's opponent; the second emphasizes acts against one's opponent by creative, clever, unorthodox means, sometimes involving force multipliers or superior knowledge.[1] The term stratagem, from Ancient Greek strategema (στρατήγημα, 'act of generalship'), is also used in this sense."
A distraction meant to draw the attention of an enemy and thereby perhaps catch them by surprise. Remember how Trump readily mentioned "surprise", while sitting next to the Prime Minister of Japan?
Trump is clearly in War Mode. The apparent "psychotic breaks" might be a reflection of that. 'I don't want to but...'
A friend just equated bombing power plants with genocide.
Your reading comprehension sucks. I never said that. Declaring that a whole civilization will die tonight is what I was equating to genocide. Destroying all power plants and bridges is so yesterday. And I said that was a war crime, not genocide. Update your query.
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1AtDumg57F/?mibextid=wwXIfr
OK - Where is this happening? Why are these people not in jail?
Also, arrest the people NOT arresting them.
Deport ALL Muslims, immediately (ONLY exception - those who formally reject Sharia Law and swear sole allegiance to laws of USA)
Stop ALL further Muslim immigration.
Conquest and subjugation is the essence of Islam. It has nothing to do with religion. It is about power.
Trump is afraid to name the Iranians that he claims to be negotiating with because the minute he does, Israel will assassinate them.
Trump is crazier than a bedbug. He thinks that he has been anointed by God, when really he’s just been buttered up by the Zionists, Lindsay Graham, Ted Cruz, Netanyahu, and those Goebbels clones at Fox News.
Cholera will follow the destruction of the power grid, will that do for you? No water treatment, no sewage treatment, is that close enough to genocide for you. We have already attacked pharmaceutical plants.
What is destruction of a five thousand year old civilization, if not genocide?
To Freder: Why don't you admit that you were wrong about the Laws of War and human shields?
Freder: Because I am not. As John Henry pointed out (in the text he highlighted above), the use of human shields by "the responsibility of the defending force is a factor that may be considered in determining whether such harm is excessive." It doesn't remove the the determination completely. Bombing from 30,000 feet puts the attackers at very little risk from the somebody shooting at them from behind human shields. Plus, Trump declared today he intends to destroy the civilization.
Speaking as someone who has had recurrent training in LOAC, and has actually had to employ it, you are wrong. Epically wrong.
What you are missing — no surprise, because you miss a lot — is proportionality. That is, should the Iranian Islamo-fascists employ human shields, we must consider whether the importance of the target outweighs potential loss of civilian lives.
Risk to the attacking force is beside the point. Provided the target's value is sufficient, there is no requirement for the attacking force to assume additional risk.
This is what imTay fails to take on board: Now I understand how sick my Jewish friends and family feel about what Israel is doing in Gaza in their name.
Israel isn't doing anything in your Jewish friends' and families' names, that is just stupid twaddle.
Israel is conducting a war of self defense against Islamo-fascists bent on Israel's destruction. Because of Hamas's extensive use of human shields, to achieve Israel's legitimate war aim — the destruction of Hamas — civilian casualties are inevitable.
Of course, Hamas could have avoided all that by disarming disavowing its goal of destroying Israel. Odd how Jew haters don't ever mention that.
You also said: Declaring that a whole civilization will die tonight is what I was equating to genocide.
What a dumb take. The Islamic Republic is a civilization that embodies Sharia supremacism, about which you are either completely ignorant, or can't be fussed to mention. The US's goal is to eliminate Sharia supremacism as the organizing civilizational principle of the state of Iran. Calling that "genocide" is a category mistake of the very first order.
Destroying all power plants and bridges is so yesterday. And I said that was a war crime, not genocide.
And it is stupid to say that. Support of regional proxies, pursuing long range ballistic missiles, and the continued pursuit of nuclear weapons are the three cassis belli. Presuming that power plants and bridges are essential to the continued existence of this regime and their goals — that you are apparently OK with — then destroying them is not a war crime.
After all, all the IRGC has to do is renounce those three things, and this is over.
But you did, Freder. Now you’re trying to weasel your way out of it.
“ His statement, if carried out, is a war crime. Genocide doesn't require completely exterminating an entire people. Are saying that the Nazis, by not killing every single European Jew, did not commit genocide?”
Steven Wilson, absolutely full points.
Amazing how many people can take none of that on board.
Sometimes Trump doesn't make sense.
1) These barbarians killed 45000 of their own people. Their OWN people. We were so upset and felt so sorry for the Iranian people we sent guns to the protesters - but the kurds stole them.
2) We're goin' bomb them back to the Stone age. Goodbye Iranian Civilization. Going to suck to Iranian. Haha.
Yeah, Trump and Israel care so much about the innocent civilians they'll bomb their hospitals, power stations, oil refineries, schools and apartment buildings.
Freder Frederson said...
Only Freder (just rewatched Metropolis the other day!) and those of his ilk would hear Trump saying “God Bless the Great People of Iran!” and conclude (or at least purport to conclude) that Trump plans to genocide the Iranian people.
So Trump is contradicting himself in the post. What else is new. You can't very well kill a civilization if you don't kill a whole lot of the civilian population, especially if you are unwilling to occupy the civilization with a huge occupation force.
No. You are an evil retard who is here in bad faith and you are pretending Trump has already done the worst things you can imagine.
You are an evil person who wants to subjugate the people of the United States just like the Mullahs subjugate the people of Iran.
That is why you support the Mullahs. You are just the American version of them.
imTay said...
Cholera will follow the destruction of the power grid, will that do for you? No water treatment, no sewage treatment, is that close enough to genocide for you. We have already attacked pharmaceutical plants.
What is destruction of a five thousand year old civilization, if not genocide?
You pretend that the Persians and the Shia are the same civilization.
Nobody should take you seriously.
About those "innocent civilians," Trump just admitted to Fox that we had been sending them weapons, for you know, wink, wink, their "peaceful demonstrations."
But one thing somebody in this thread said that I agree with, if you have a loyalty to a foreign country, *especially* over your own country, you ought not to be allowed to serve in elective office, and shouldn't be given citizenship.
You all know yourselves who that foreign country is, and I don't care what it says in the Book of Esther about the Persians; Martin Luther himself said that it should never have been included in the New Testament, you know, the Christian Bible, because there is no mention of Jesus in it, or even of God, it's just an account of a Bronze Age genocide by the Israelites of the Persians.
How do I go about killing a civilization without killing masses of people?
Am I evil for asking?
Jim. You destroy the trappings that make modern life livable. So people will gather in the dark and discuss what life was like before candles.
What was the intent of the "final solution", Freder?
Nothing's going to happen today, it's TACO Tuesday.
Reading this discussion has really depressed me. It is election day in Wisconsin and I only voted in one race because I was too discouraged to bother looking at all the other candidates. This is the danger. Face it, around 40% of the people will always vote GOP and 40% will always vote Dem. That leaves 20% in the middle who decide things. I voted for Trump twice and support many of the things he is doing. I also think he is a bombastic jerk and wish he would shut up and focus on a few things. I support destroying Iran's nuclear program but not overthrowing their civilization (whatever that means). We should fight because we must, but a civilized person doesn't glorify and celebrate all the destruction and killing. I cannot image voting for a democrat in November but I can imagine staying home because I am sickened by the "Curtis LeMay" attitude...
War is diplomacy with other means. Clausewitz. War is fighting and fighting is killing. Forrest. Ergo, diplomacy is killing. QED
Yea, I've been thinking about LeMay lately too. The Air Force always claims they can win a war with just air power.
You cheered the October 7, 2023 massacre, RC COLLINS II. Why do YOU care about civilian deaths?
You have to give up the dutchboy act
Fresh troll?
You truly are an imbecile, aren't you?
Well, that and he's on the other side.
Jim said...
Yea, I've been thinking about LeMay lately too. The Air Force always claims they can win a war with just air power.
Bollocks.
Do an AI query on "Does the USAF claim it can win a war with just airpower." Easy enough thing to do to avoid embarrassment.
Republicans have shown that they can never again be trusted with power.
Go fuck yourself. Seriously.
https://open.substack.com/pub/shanakaanslemperera/p/the-last-molecule-standing-3a7?r=6p7b5o
🚨 THE TACO IS ON 🚨TACO TUESDAY 🌮
I Don't believe Iran agreed to anything other than to have Trump stop bombing them.
1. Oh, look.
2. Iran gets a vote
Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir, of Pakistan, and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran, and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. This will be a double sided CEASEFIRE! The reason for doing so is that we have already met and exceeded all Military objectives, and are very far along with a definitive Agreement concerning Longterm PEACE with Iran, and PEACE in the Middle East. We received a 10 point proposal from Iran, and believe it is a workable basis on which to negotiate. Almost all of the various points of past contention have been agreed to between the United States and Iran, but a two week period will allow the Agreement to be finalized and consummated. On behalf of the United States of America, as President, and also representing the Countries of the Middle East, it is an Honor to have this Longterm problem close to resolution. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP
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.