Based-Frog

@ryangrim And if we win Israel will end up taking control of Iran, they’ll be a true global super power, and don’t see how that benefits America.

And Americans are not actually rooting against their country, they’re rooting against the savage faction that took power by promising to end wars and focus on America and instead launched this insane war. Nobody really believes that Trump and Netanyahu are “America” — not even them. Probably nobody cares less about America than them, frankly. By rooting against Trump and Netanyahu many people are trying to root *for* America, for America to survive and overcome them.

If this is an honest question, I’d say: Americans are rooting against America because we facilitated a genocide and followed it with a surprise attack on a girls elementary school followed by attacks on universities, medical centers, more schools, a world famous pharmaceutical research center, a volley ball team, an unfinished bridge we claimed was transporting weapons and then a nuclear power plant. We are now promising endless attacks on civilian infrastructure. We are hunting and targeting anyone who might be involved in ceasefire negotiations. Most people do not pay enough attention to have absorbed all the propaganda about the U.S. and Iran. So people coming to this fresh see us for what we are: absolute monsters. And monsters must be stopped. That’s why people are rooting against us and for civilization to prevail.

@Timodc Rest of the world needs to call Iran and say we’ll cut off America let our oil through

The rest of the world needs to grab the Strait of Hormuz by the pussy.

@Tx1First @JoeyMannarino Europe would become closer to China. And they would stop trading in the dollar and they use the Euro. It hurts us a lot more than you think. It will hurt Europe, but they’ll be fine, we won’t be the empire anymore.

@based_froger @JoeyMannarino The amount of subsidies is what I was referring to in terms of survival. Most European countries underspend and without our $s it will become very painful

Extremely disappointed to see Meloni side with a jihadist like Pedro Sanchez.

@Tx1First @JoeyMannarino not true. Russia isn’t about to invade Germany. The EU without us could beat Russia. They’d have to cut back on some of their socialist programs but they’d be fine. If we aren’t the global currency we would go bankrupt.

@based_froger @JoeyMannarino It’s not as beneficial to us as it is them

@Tx1First @JoeyMannarino The deal is we defend the EU, and in return the EU props up the $ and gives us bases making us the world super power. It’s mutually beneficial. That doesn’t mean the EU is incapable of defending themselves.

@Tx1First @JoeyMannarino Idiotic take. Why can’t they survive? Russias GDP is the size of a small state. Their military uses Soviet Union equipment. The EU can’t beat Russia? The EU doesn’t have nukes? Without them China is the global super power not us. We can’t survive without them

@MonitorX99800 This feels like the first launch in a very long time. Iran better not be de-escalating

🇮🇷🇮🇱⚡️NOW: Launches from Iran towards Israel.

@mad_timer @GuntherEagleman If this was some necessary war to protect Europe it makes a lot of sense that we started this war without even talking to Europe about it

@mad_timer @GuntherEagleman Yes bc you know what is a threat to Europe better than they do. We started a war with Iran to protect England even though England doesn’t see Iran as a threat. Genius

Defund the UN and NATO. We don't need them.

@EricLDaugh Go see what happens to our $40 trillion debt when the EU isn’t propping up the $ and we are no longer the global currency. Go see if we’re still a global super power if EU doesn’t let us have military bases there. These people are morons

🚨 HOLY CRAP! SecWar Pete Hegseth just dropped a truth nuke on NATO “You don't have much of an ALLIANCE if you have countries that are not willing to STAND with you when you need them!” NATO is officially on notice. President Trump never forgets.

@mad_timer @GuntherEagleman We started a war that hurt them without even consulting them. Europe will be fine. They’ll trade in the euro or get close to China. We benefit from Europe just as much as they benefit from us, and they can dump us for China or themselves we can’t replace Europe

The hypocritical behavior of NATO members is truly shameful. While NATO’s very existence has been sustained by American financial and technical support, these allies are now failing to stand with the United States in the fight against the Islamic terrorist regime in Iran. ​Perhaps they fear that the collapse of the Islamic Republic will trigger the collapse of their own political parties and ideologies. For decades, these politicians have championed a policy of appeasement toward this rogue, blackmailing regime, and their failure has birthed the very monster that now threatens global security. Their hesitation is not about 'peace'; it is about protecting a corrupt political status quo that is built on the survival of the Mullahs.

@GuntherEagleman MAGA is a bunch of idiots now. Without the EU propping up our $ and having our bases China runs the world.

YES, THE WAR AGAINST THE IRANIAN REGIME IS GOING VERY WELL Despite the fact that the war against the Iranian regime is going very well -- it is only a few weeks old, after all, and casualties are less than when we went into Panama to capture Noriega, rescued college students in Grenada, and virtually every other military action, the voices of despair -- some real, some contrived -- are seemingly everywhere. But are they really? First, the President's base has never been more solid, and that includes MAGA and the GOP generally. Second, the Democrats, including the Marxists and Islamists, are strongly opposed for a variety of reasons, including TDS, political exploitation, and a growing population of hate America constituencies (both homegrown and imported). They're a very loud crowd and overrepresented in the public square. Third, the Woke Reich isolationists oppose all military action and certainly any preemptive actions, even against a regime with a half-century record of killing American soldiers and citizens, and even when that regime is provably and unequivocably developing nuclear material and missiles to reach our shores (short of that, they can still explode a dirty bomb). They are ideological kindred spirits with the extremist left. Fourth, the public has been relentlessly fed negative stories and fearmongering by a nearly unanimous media and organized ops campaigns on social media. Fifth, the rising antisemitism and Israel-hatred serves as a useful tool of the Marxist-Islamist left and Woke Reich for scapegoating, claiming the President was forced in the war by the Jews. Sixth, the public cares about affordability and the military campaign is said to be a distraction (although if the operation came to an immediate halt, that issue would not disappear; indeed, it predates the military campaign). Seventh, the latest propaganda point is to blame the military operation for potentially costing the GOP the mid-term elections, should that election cycle be lost to the Democrats (although polls showed the mid-term elections to be a challenge before the military campaign). Eighth, it is easier to explain and understand military action taken after a catastrophic attack, which focuses the attention and demands a strong response. A preventive military campaign, based on explanations of threats and subject to even disingenuous debate, muddies the water for some if not many. Talk of the threats from Islamists prior to 9/11, and the need to go to war with al-Qaeda, wouldn't have galvanized the nation. No doubt, there are other reasons. There is constant pressure for the President to abandon the military campaign -- gas prices (which are temporarily up), claims of violating campaign promises against forever wars (this is hardly a forever war), the cost of the military campaign (of course, the cost of a nuclear Iran with thousands of ballistic missiles is incalculable), the charge that the war is illegal (it is not), that there was no imminent threat (the inexactitude with which one can precisely determine what's imminent or not is ridiculous, preemption is a better measure), and so forth. The geopolitical, economic, and national security consequences of an early or premature cessation (an off-ramp as they say) could be devastating. Few Presidents would seek a ceasefire and precipitous end under present-day circumstances. It would be stunningly unwise. The Iranian regime would have enough power as a police-state to continue on and rebuild, both domestically and internationally, and with the help of countries like China, Russia, and North Korea. It would be the biggest gift to the Axis of Evil imaginable, and a disaster for our national security. Opposition to nearly all military campaigns is a given, as history demonstrates. But let me suggest that in the current situation, much of it is politically partisan, ideological, emotional, contrived, and unwarranted. In each case, it is important to discern who is in opposition (both individuals and groups) and their motivations. Of course, they will claim good intentions and love of country. No doubt, some are. But for too many, that obviously is not the case. It is more sinister than not. In the end, victory has endless benefits, including political. And here, victory is the elimination of the current threat against us and our allies in the region, and the people of Iran. The opponents in our country want everything done yesterday, even though they wanted nothing militarily done at all in the first place. They had no and have no strategy as their previous approaches -- appeasement, massive payoffs, and the lifting of sanctions -- did nothing but further empower the regime. This is not intended to be a comprehensive review. More later.

@HamzehAmro @RealToddChapman @AsifAli_Haider @georgegalloway @grok Please do

Breaking 🚨 iran attack Tel Aviv Airport

@drgringoe @jackunheard wtf do I care if their missiles can hit London. If england doesn’t care neither do I. You’re believing BS propaganda. Iran also denies they fired that missile. If they have missiles that can 4,000 miles why arent they firing those at our ships?

@drgringoe @jackunheard wtf are you talking about. The furthest missile they launched was 2400 miles and it missed its target by a good amount. NATO it very skeptical they have missiles that can 4,000 miles. And if they can let England worry about it. You’re more mad about it than England.

Whoa. Stephen A. Smith just left Bill Maher’s audience SHOCKED with his take on Iran: "You got a lot of damn nerves to say, 'Iran has to be dealt with’ and when Trump deals with them, all of a sudden you're complaining. It doesn't really make sense."

🚨BREAKING: Iran has done significant damage to Israeli energy facilities

@TheBarbLandZone @jackunheard England and Oman were in the room for the negotiations both said Iran agreed to hand over all their uranium, and make it impossible to build a nuke. Jared Kushner wanted the war so we went to war.

@based_froger @jackunheard um, no.

@TheBarbLandZone @jackunheard You don’t know what you’re talking about. We lifted sanctions to lower oil prices last week. Handing Iran billions. Tulsi Gabbard said there was no evidence Iran was building a nuke under oath.