Hvalsey

@ThrillaRilla369 @SaraHaboubi1 Yeh. But now explain when to use shite. And why you can have horse shite but bull only goes with shit.

To be truly fluent in English, you must know your shits Dogshit: Very poor quality Bullshit: Not true Horseshit: Nonsense Apeshit: Rambunctious Batshit: Insane Chickenshit: Cowards Ratshit: Poor quality No shit: Obviously Holy shit: Unbelievable Hot shit: Very good Dipshit: Total dumbass Tuff shit: Take it or leave it. Jack shit: Nothing The shit: Perfection

@CosmicCaper2170 @ianmiles Agreed. Especially when they assassinate their opponents during negotiations.

@4tee4tee @ianmiles A slippery slop when you negotiate with terrorists. Never give them the power to use to destroy you.

Iran doesn’t own the Strait of Hormuz and the longer the world and especially Europe humors this delusion, the longer and more long-lasting the effects of the impending economic crisis will be. The economic crisis is inevitable and it’s already happening in slow motion. At the same pace of a bicycle, in fact. Because that’s how slow oil tankers travel. It might not feel like a crisis right now because orders for oil that went out months ago are still coming in. Those ships will stop arriving in Europe on the 10th. That’s when they run out of oil, and that’s when there will be a massive rush to buy the only oil available on the market, which will drive the price up for everyone. You can’t defeat market forces. You can only survive them by being antifragile, like the UAE is. Some economies will collapse entirely as a result of this, particularly in Europe, which has depended on the stability of energy and oil prices to keep itself afloat while it wastes whatever resources it has on fool’s errands like Net Zero and decarbonization. They had cheap Russian energy before, but they cut their own nose off to spite their face. Some countries are cutting deals with Iran to let their ships through, but it won’t make a lick of difference when the vast majority of ships aren’t going through the strait. Economies don’t exist in a vacuum and even those countries, like Spain and Egypt, will have to endure what is to come. And besides, expensive oil is the least of Spain’s problems. They’re already broke.

@MarsCanals @ianmiles You are probably the guy who thought attacking Russia’s nuclear bases with drones launched from commercial trucks was a great idea. Let us see if some of the 10 million let across the border by Biden included sleeper cells.

@4tee4tee @ianmiles We're blowing the power plants today.

@thegunnerab @ianmiles Europe will find it Cheaper than paying trumps tariff blackmail. The neighbourhood bully has changed. We just give the lunch money to someone else. Also the best cure for high oil prices is high oil prices. Europe will start to frack.

@4tee4tee @ianmiles This is such a stupid argument. What if they will decide to charge $50 per barrel instead of $2 according to your calculations. It's not theirs to control or charge tolls.

@SwipeWright @WingsScotland Jackson Hinkle is a communist but is coded write wing here.

More viewpoint diversity would be better, but that's impossible to create when one side actively rejects it. Before Elon bought Twitter, the right created alternative platforms out of necessity because the left severely censored right-wing views. When Elon bought Twitter, the left voluntarily created alternative platforms specifically to avoid contact with right-wing views, not because they were being censored. So when leftists criticize X for its users skewing right, that's their own fault. They could always just... start posting on X to balance things out. Bluesky is even more ideologically skewed than X, but to the left. But the right isn't able to meaningfully increase viewpoint diversity there because they get banned for uttering basic facts.

@FabiusMaximus01 @AnthonyAgu88102 @policytensor I prefer Vizzini’s take from the Princess Bride. The movie is only 90 minutes.

@AnthonyAgu88102 @policytensor Clausewitz said that “a ground war into Iran will be very costly and will be a tactical, operational, and strategic failure”? Can you give more detail? “On War” is 8 books long, and I don’t recall that text.

Thoughts from a retired Special Operations Officer. Though I am not an aircraft surgeon, nor a Coniurationis Fautor, I have some thoughts that may be on interest, presented in three points, a conclusion, and a hypothesis, regarding the US rescue operation in Iran, with consideration to the photos of the aircraft used. I have flown on the C-130H and the MC-130J in training and in combat, to include static line airborne operations, Military Freefall (HALO) operations, and combat infiltration and exfiltration in austere environs, such as the Kobani Landing Zone (KLZ) in Northeast Syria during Operation Inherent Resolve. Point one: it is important to note that the aircraft used in this operation were NOT the standard C-130 Hercules model, which have 4-blade, steel propellers (see picture #2). The fixed-wing aircraft used were the MC-130J, Commando II, operated by the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command for clandestine operations. The MC-130J uses six-bladed Dowty R391 composite propellers (see picture #1). These blades are constructed from composite materials, specifically featuring a carbon fiber structure rather than the metal (aluminum) used on older C-130 models. Point two: carbon fiber does not melt in the traditional sense, as it does not turn into a liquid. However, the resin matrix holding the fibers does melt and become viscous. Point three: Steel/aluminum blades snap and break. MC-130J R391 blades shatter and can melt. The images we see from the destroyed aircraft (picture #6) show 6 blades. Therefore, these are the MC-130J Dowty blades (they can melt). And as you can see in picture 4 and 5, when not melted, but rather broken, they shred and snap. They do not bend. As you can see from the steel/aluminum variant on the C-130H model, the blades snap and break and bend, they do not shatter or melt. Conclusion: To declare that the aircraft "definitely" were shot down based on the "bent" propellers is false. Could the aircraft have been shot down? Yes. Could the aircraft have been shot down AND the blades melted in the extreme heat of the fire from the BIP (blown in place)? Yes. Both can be true. But it can also be true that the aircraft was not shot down, nor crash landed, and the propellers do indicate burning and melting, not a crash. Hypothesis: The rescue operation expanded to become the desired Delta Force, JSOC, SOF, ST-6 high-risk operation to ALSO seize the uranium in Iran; hence the need for so many operators, support, aircraft, etc. This WAS intended to be that operation. It failed. So what happened to the aircraft. I do not believe that they were "stuck". I have seen MC-130Js plow through dirt, mud, snow, gravel, etc. I doubt they were stuck. It is more likely that the aircraft took hits upon entry and also likely took hits and damage while on the ground at the hasty FARP at the old airfield in Isfahan, "conveniently" close to where the suspected uranium may have been stored. Lesson: A ground war into Iran will be very costly and will be a tactical, operational, and strategic failure (Clausewitz).

@CWDX_Wiz @PGTAnalytics I am curious why would two transport planes land to extract one pilot oven that helicopters have been invented.

@PGTAnalytics The proof is in the pictures. No reasonable explanation for two C-130s to be in that configuration

🔥Breaking🔥 The people who think that landing two C-130s and two Black Hawks just to rescue pilots are living in a fool’s paradise. It wasn’t just a rescue attempt — it was an operation to confiscate and bring back Iran’s enriched uranium, which miserably failed. Dubai/Iran/Israel war

@Epluribus1776 @tanvi_ratna Option a) Trump is surrounded by geniuses and is playing 5D chess. option B) Trump is in early dementia and surrounded by arse lickers. Occam’s razor says B.

@tanvi_ratna If you think that much thought went into this childish, unhinged tweet then you are even more delusional than Donald Trump. Get a life you apologist hack!!!

START OPERATION: [01] Baseline picture — U.S. spends millions to recover one airman [02] Counter-picture — Islamic Republic killing its own, using civilians as cover [03] Strategy selected — Tweet level: unhinged [04] Message deployed — outrage, global wall-to-wall saturation within minutes [05] Threat defined — “Power Plant Day,” “Bridge Day,” Hormuz deadline [06] Iranian decision point — bluff or real? cannot take risk [07] Rapid mobilisation — missile defense up, mines laid across approach pathways [08] IRGC posture hardens on Strait/ GCC - panicked escalations, no room for slow interpretation [09] CENTCOM / allied ISR — real-time visibility on all movement [10] Operational readiness rises — forces move to immediate standby [11] Internal Iran battlespace CIA / Mossad amplification underway “Value of one life” narrative spreads (pilot rescue) “Praise be to Allah” — signal for Iranian regime opposers, not Americans [12] Message line — U.S. trying to cut a deal, minimize civilian harm. US values human life. [13] Tehran response — nobody cares. Global media drowning in outrage over tweet COMMS IS NOT OUTSIDE OPERATIONS COMMS IS AN OPERATION This is war

@Warcraftchamp @KobeissiLetter Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are more likely.

@KobeissiLetter Iran overplaying their hand. There is a clear offramp right now. Once boots hit the ground Iran going to turn into Syria or Somalia. What a shame.

In another major escalation, we may lose another ~7 million barrels of daily oil supply. A key advisor to Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, is now threatening to close the Bab al-Mandab Strait, which connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden. "If the White House thinks of repeating its stupid mistakes, it will quickly realize that the flow of global energy and trade can be disrupted with a single signal," he said. On top of the ~7 million barrels of daily oil supply flowing through this Strait, ~22% of global seaborne container trade travels through Bab al-Mandab each year. Between the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab, we could see as much as 25 million barrels in daily oil supply offline. And, Iran has officially rejected a US proposal to open the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for temporary ceasefire, per WSJ. Oil prices are setting up for $120+/barrel.

The Israel Lobby was a core reason the US, contrary to its security interests, picked a fight with Iran after 9/11. The most reformist president in the history of the Islamic Republic, Muhammad Khatami, was elected in a shocking - Khamenei publicly endorsed his opponent - landslide in 1997 on a platform of normal relations with the West ("dialogue of civilizations"), and was in office through 2005. The Clinton Administration publicly expressed optimism about improved ties between the countries. This was despite the 1996 Khobar Tower Bombings by Saudi Hezbollah, which killed 19 American soldiers and in which the US suspected, but could not to Clinton's satisfaction prove, the IRGC played a role.* After the 9/11 attack by Al Qaeda (Sunni extremists supported by the Taliban), we now had a common enemy with Shiite Iran. The Khatami gov forcefully condemned the attack and organized public protests against 9/11 (which Iranian people also spontaneously condemned in great numbers). In October 2001, the IRGC collaborated with the US in the invasion of Afghanistan (which we attacked for the Taliban's sheltering of Al Qaeda), providing the US intelligence, access to Iranian air space, and coordinating the Northern Alliance to help us overthrow the Taliban, notably leading the 2001 uprising in Herat, where Hazaras, Northern Alliance fighters, and Quds Force elements (under the command of Qasem Soleimani) captured the city from the Taliban. Yet months after Iran helped us in Afghanistan - even as an effective co-belligerent in Herat - Bush slammed the door: the January 2002 “Axis of Evil” speech lumped Iran with Iraq and North Korea as existential threats, with the US promising 'confrontation.' In 2003, Iran's grand-bargain proposal (offering an end to its nuclear program, and even an end to support for Hamas/Hezbollah in exchange for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine), which sought security guarantees against a US attack, was rejected by the White House. The pivot wasn’t driven by sudden new Iranian aggression; there is no such aggression one can point to in this period. (Tehran was pursuing a nuclear program, but it had for many years, as US Intelligence knew.) It was instead shaped by a network of senior Bush Administration officials who viewed Iran policy through the lens of their deep ideological attachment to Israel and its security interests. These officials included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser (@Wurmserscribit), all three of whom were among the eight co-authors of the "Clean Break" memorandum for Benjamin Netanyahu (@netanyahu), which called for overthrowing Saddam Hussein in Iraq and 'engaging' Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran militarily. (Rather odd that three senior US officials were writing policy papers for Netanyahu, about how to ensure Israeli security, a few years before they joined a US Administration, but I digress.) These men won the ideological battle against Bush Administration "realists" like Colin Powell, who favored a much less belligerent stance towards Iran. They persuaded Vice President Cheney in particular, and Bush (at least in the First Term), that Iran must be taken out as part of the Administration's doctrine of pre-emptively eliminating potential enemies after 9/11; and also that Iran would be an ideal staging ground for the Administration's "Freedom Agenda," by which pro-US democracies would be established in the Middle East. However, there can be little doubt from their history that these men were in truth ideologically committed to Israel's interests. The Bush Administration would go on to dramatically intensify sanctions against Iran, as part of the largely successful US policy over the last two decades to impoverish that country. The only reason they didn't invade the country was that, following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the US military became bogged down in a prolonged, fantastically violent insurgency, in the course of which hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of US soldiers were killed. In the course of this insurgency, the IRGC funded, trained, and equipped, Shiite militant groups in Iraq that killed hundreds of US soldiers, often via roadside bombs. This was the so-called Iranian "aggression" against the US that is now used to justify the current war of aggression. In reality, the Americans blatantly picked a fight with the Iranians after September 11, who were actively seeking détente. And they did so in large part because of the influence of the pro-Israel Lobby in the Bush Administration. * In assessing the allegation of IRGC involvement, it is noteworthy that the Saudis, who were keen to blame the Iranians for the bombing, refused the US access to a range of critical evidence in this case. Clinton's Defense Secretary during the attack, William J. Perry, did not believe Iran was involved in the attack, and Clinton himself did not believe the evidence was strong enough to justify armed retaliation against Iran.

That moment in 2016 when Victoria Nuland was bragging to the US Congress about how thoroughly Washington had taken over Ukraine after the 2014 coup. She spelled it out without shame: 🔴US operatives embedded in a dozen Ukrainian ministries. 🔴American-trained cops patrolling 18 cities. 🔴The US Treasury gutting 60 Ukrainian banks while sparing depositors to keep people quiet. 🔴Hundreds of millions of dollars funneled into molding Ukraine’s military. This wasn’t "assistance", it was a takeover dressed up as aid.

@KTHopkins @JadenBr19778614 @zarahsultana Now now Katie. The word Jaysus is copyrighted by the Irish. And if you are going to do cultural appropriation. At least get it right. It’s Sweet Jaysus.

@JadenBr19778614 @zarahsultana Dear jaysus

Dear @zarahsultana I’m not one for incitement or violence. Unlike you. But on behalf of the decent Far Far Far Right Community, I accept your challenge. You and me. Sportswear & headgear. Naked. Name your time and place. (Be aware, I used to fight for the British Army.)

@miketgm00 @TheStudyofWar So obvious. The prize for retard of the week goes to ISW. Narrowly beating Trump and the perennial runners up - the entire European political establishment.

@TheStudyofWar I don’t know why you morons are fixated on the rate of Iranian missile fire. Nobody knows when this war will end, it could be years. So why would they launch hundreds of missiles every day? US-Israeli sortie rate has greatly decreased so what does that say about their airpower?

MORE | Iran's Missile Threat🧵(1/3): The majority of Iranian ballistic missiles are combat-ineffective, even if they remain “intact.” - Assessing Iran’s missile threat accurately requires distinguishing between different missile types. The combined force has rendered many of Iran’s missile launchers combat ineffective, but it is entirely unclear whether these “launchers” refer to launchers for medium-range or short-range systems or whether any of the launchers are interchangeable between medium-range and short-range systems. - The rate of Iranian missile fire suggests that Iran’s medium-range ballistic missile force has been significantly degraded.

@MightyMightyO1 @v_j_freeman You win the internet today.

@v_j_freeman “There’s gold in them there hills!” “Just leave it. The price of gold is set internationally and anyway, we can import gold from other countries, some with appalling human rights abuses.” A summary of the argument against drilling in the North Sea.

As someone with many years involvement in the physical movement of natural gas around Europe from field to end customer the ignorance in this post physically pains me.

@JamesSurowiecki That was the deal 8 months ago and the Israel first era restarted the war.

Isn't the obvious deal that we agree to stop bombing, Iran agrees to open the Strait and stop tolling, and we call it even and everyone goes home?

@tconnellyRTE Depressing. Europe is still pedal to the metal on energy suicide. When will they realize the euros has changed for ever.

Can Europe remain on the sidelines in a long Iran war? rte.ie/news/world/202…

How long can Europe sit on the sidelines as the US Israel war on Iran continues? My latest on a crushing dilemma: Link below 👇

🚨 In 1513, a man was thrown in prison, tortured, and exiled. So he wrote a book about power. The Catholic Church banned it. Napoleon was caught with a copy in his carriage after his final defeat. Stalin kept it on his bedside table and wrote notes in the margins. Mussolini read it. Kissinger and Nixon used it as bedtime reading. The book is The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli. It's 500 years old. It invented the word "Machiavellian." And it's still the most dangerous book on power ever written. I turned Machiavelli's core strategies into 12 Claude prompts. You describe any power struggle (office politics, negotiations, competition, leadership) and it gives you the exact Machiavellian counter-move. Here are all 12:

@GregChew14 @Sargon_of_Akkad @AriFleischer @philthatremains @realDonaldTrump Alternatively, Trump is bought and paid for by the Israel First people

It’s quite incredible that this isn’t the obvious narrative. It’s the correct response to this kind of whining. BUT! Here is the thing: what if @realDonaldTrump actual objectives are to end NATO, end the war of American imperialism and withdraw to defending America and American interests alone - classic American isolationism. He started the war. He must have know that the Iranian response would be to close the Straits - Hormuz and and the Gate of Tears through the Houthis. Now he claims that this is everyone else’s problem, not his. He is right. The USA is energy independent. European nations have chosen to purse ridiculous ‘green’ (red, red Marxism in a dress) agendas and become energy dependent in a multi-polar world. It’s no good whining, in a world where might is right (always has been, the veneer has just been stripped back) who is going to stop America acting purely in its own interests and without any thought to second, third and forth order impacts that don’t directly hit them? An isolationist America is the definition of #MAGA because American exceptionalism is a truth: the bounty they have to exploit and the rugged individualism upon which the nation was built needs nothing that we have to offer. Except maybe some tourism so they they can come to the dying museum of Europe and see what a great civilisation once was and how it destroyed itself by forgetting what it was. As much a seminal lesson as a cultural review.

When this is over, the western part of NATO will never be the same. Spain, England, France and Italy have sold us out, as they too often have a history of doing. Eastern European nations are the heart of NATO. They spend money on defense, know how to fight and love the US. France particularly deserves fault and blame. From supporting China and Russia at the UN to denying Americans overflight rights, they’re doing what they’ve always done - showing weakness, while cutting deals with terrorists. (The reason the US has a Marine Corps and Navy is unlike France, we refused to pay a ransom to the Barbary Pirates. France is always happy to cut a deal.) Wars have unintended consequences as nations show their true colors. NATO will never be the same, and Western European weakness and acquiescence is the cause.