Do you need me to be a minority here? Do you need the crowd to support you?
You want rights for people?
As far as our society right now, the next generation is listening and reading on the internet. They are learning what dictatorships want to tell them. Do you think that is healthy? Or honest what the dictatorships are telling them?
Nope, I would like people to post things that are factual and accurate. You posted something that misrepresented an image from 2014 to suggest that Iranian dissidents are being targeted in 2026. I don’t think that is healthy. I think that misinformation should be countered on all fronts.
@eldemonio your report is possible, the report I posted by Mossad is about protesters, not murders. The rate of protesters being hung is rising.
It is not fully outside their control. It is their market, it is captive, and supply happens to be cut off.
Tell us what happens if we bow out? I can talk to a teenager who would say that.
We choose our problems in life. I am cynical that any of them want a way out.
The indifferent opinions have been added to the against column. It makes the people against feel as if the entire country is with them. We do not actually know what percentage is indifferent or against. We know 40% is for war with Iran. That is a large group for war. Wars usually are not even that popular.
I do not know if the image is from 2014, but regardless you are wrong the regime is seeking revenge against the protesters. You can find evidence by asking google.
Public opinion polls regarding the conflict with Iran do not track “indifference” directly. Instead, major surveys show that the public is overwhelmingly engaged and divided into clear camps of active support or opposition, with very few respondents remaining completely unsure
@eldemonio I’d submit that most of the Against are not treating it as a single voter issue. Instead it is part of a collection of issues. If it tries to stand alone there is a major indifference.
Al Jazeera
While major national surveys show that a clear majority of Americans (around 53% to 64%) oppose the military action, voters typically weigh foreign conflicts alongside domestic priorities like the economy, inflation, and healthcare rather than voting on that single matter alone. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
There is no specific or official polling data showing that a distinct, measurable percentage of people who oppose Israel view it strictly as a “single-issue voter” priority. While public disapproval of Israel’s military actions and government policies has risen significantly—with polls showing broad majorities of Democrats and younger voters expressing critical views or opposing military aid—foreign policy is rarely tracked as an exclusive single-voter determinant. [1, 2, 3]
@eldemonio The press does not know…possibly… depends; they might use you. No way! Way?
We have 175k tail kits for our supply of over 200k dumb bombs. The cost is low. With production, we will never run out of them. The tail kits are satellite GPS-guided.
The economy would be worse off without the war. China has had 10 quarters of deflation. China is having the worst economic failures of any country. Ironic. We are still having the biggest successes. For now. It wont last.
Then post something truthful to support what you’re saying.
We’d stop spending billions on a war we can’t win.
For all your AI slop, you don’t know how to use Google Lens? Come on. Believe what you will, but when you post things, you’re responsible for verifying the information.
How do we know that? Last I checked, the vast majority are against the war. Those who are in favor are probably sucking up disinformation slop that is intended to sway their opinion.
Netanyahu’s life’s work has been to get the USA to attack Iran and solve a “problem” for Israel. Up until 2nd term Trump, every US President told Bibi to pound salt when he brought up the idea. It didn’t even past muster with 1st Term Trump, I suspect because the President’s mental instability wasn’t severe enough during the first term.
I’m very sure that the uniformed military and CIA told Trump that attacking Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz, and cause worldwide economic havoc because of the oil disruptions. None of this is even remotely in America’s interest, we shouldn’t be doing it, and it needs to stop.
intercst
You thought we would topple the regime in a few weeks. Instead we strengthened it. You thought we would end their nuke program. Instead we lost control of it. Now you are arguing that their ability to strangle the world’s supply is a win because oil companies are gouging high prices out of the oil shortage we caused. What next?
That and the Venezuela adventure. I’m sure he took a lesson from that, saying “I didn’t know this stuff was this easy! And all those stupid Generals and advisors warned about Venezuela, too and look what happened.”
And then Bibi came calling.
I recall someone saying we would get tired of winning. That’s what’s next. We’re tired of ‘winning.’
Add to that
A problem for the Iranians primarily. It is not just Israel. A big problem for SA, the UAE, and others. It is a global problem regarding nuclear weapons and oil coming through the Strait.
Who created this problem? You’d say Israel. That is a horrible misjudgement. The Iranian regime created this problem. Can you counter that?
Pops,
My analysis has changed because I keep looking at the players. Most here are just one track records.
@eldemonio You write as if you can get likes and prove your point. Shallow.
Human rights activists say the Iranian government has been rapidly escalating executions. The latest prompted public protest, videos appear to show.
Most you here do not care about anything. Not US foreign policy, not lives overseas, etc…you are trying to paint that somehow differently, but you are cut and run. Give up in defeat and run harder. Youth or advanced age, no major responsibilities and time to shout on line.
@goofy,
Just a side note about your love of the press, the Blanche Note for the Senators is “A deal to be broken”, the public knows this. It is obvious, but the press have not framed it as “A deal to be broken”. Without framing the crime there is no way to stop it. We all know the score. Is it possible the press is several hundred journalists and editors that kind of just $uck at their jobs?
At least no one stuck their necks out.
Well a few have tried to say something, but not on target.
No reporters have been documented using the exact phrasing “A deal to be broken” to describe acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s confirmation agreement with Senate Republicans. [1, 2]
While that specific quote does not appear in media coverage, mainstream reporters and political columnists have heavily emphasized that the deal has loopholes and may not hold. Skepticism regarding the permanence of the agreement stems from several factors: [3, 4]
If you are looking for a specific op-ed or social media post containing that exact phrase, please let me know the date you saw it or the platform it was on so I can narrow down the search.
Don’t we all try and prove our point? I don’t think there’s anything shallow about that.
I should apologize, my intent wasn’t to question whether or not protesters are being executed, but rather to question the supporting evidence you used. Facebook is a dubious source.
The fact that people are being executed doesn’t change my opinion, we should bow out of the war. Our past meddling is one of the primary causes of the current humanitarian fiasco. There’s no indication that our continued meddling will make things better. We’ve made a mess of things. When your stuck in a hole, the first step is to stop digging.
Even if continuing the war made sense (which it doesn’t), the people driving current US foreign policy are corrupt nimrods who are only looking to make a deal to enrich themselves. Those leading the war effort are incompetents with no strategic plan. We shouldn’t trust any of them.
I care a great deal about lives overseas. That’s why I’m outraged by what we’re doing to Cubans. That’s why I’m deeply upset by the US ending many foreign aid programs that saved lives. That’s why I’m against the continued bombing of Iranian civilians. That’s why I’d be against a shoot-from-the-hip ground invasion that would risk tens of thousands of American and Iranian lives.
This is what I mean by shallow. It is a waste of your time and everyone else’s and you harped on it. Meanwhile the lives meant nothing to you. The idea that Israel is to blame is more shallowness. The regime is the regime. The regime is causing all of these problems. Meanwhile your popularity contest and you are not alone is about Israel. Shallow.
Netanyahu is doing as much damage to Israel as Trump is doing to the US. He bitterly opposed Obama’s Iran deal which Trump torpedoed upon his 2016 election. You’d be thankful to reinstate Obama’s deal today, but that’s well beyond reach.
Iran wasn’t closing the Strait of Hormuz prior to Israel’s surprise attack on February 28th.
Please listen carefully to Rubio’s statement " …we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded because the department of war assessed that if we did that, if we waited for them to hit us first after they were attacked and by someone else, Israel attacked them, they hit us first and we waited for them to hit us we would suffer more casualties and more deaths."
Netanyahu is not operating in the US interest, nor according to stated US Policy (e.g., no settlements on the West Bank, two state solution, etc.) We need to stop funding him until he toes the line.
intercst
A deal is between two parties. Iran in 2016 was in a very different place.
Was Trump a mess is trump a mess? Yes, yes, but in life you play the ball where it lands. You do not play last June 18th’s golf game all over again as if it is June 18th. It is what it is.
Time to move to better analysis than we know who to blame. That is a nothing burger. Do you know what we do next? How could you? The press says we are out of ammo. We have not scratched the surface of dumb bombs. So how could you know?