Maximusure

PRESIDENT TRUMP: When this excursion in Iran is completed, we’ll have a much safer world. Iran is a serious threat to the Middle East and to the world. Everybody agrees with me.

He just justified the holocaust.

The “fatwa never existed” claim is lazy cope. Khamenei’s ban on nuclear weapons use, production, and stockpiling has been publicly stated since the early 2000s, relayed to the IAEA in 2005, repeated in official speeches, and posted on english.khamenei.ir under nuclear policy. It’s not a dusty scroll in a fatwa binder; it’s a high-level oral ruling repeatedly affirmed as regime doctrine. In Shia jurisprudence, a supreme leader’s public declaration carries binding weight no calligraphy required. Dismissing it because it’s “not listed with other fatwas” ignores how these edicts actually function. Regime officials (Rouhani, Araghchi, etc.) have explicitly extended it to acquisition. Even critics like MEMRI acknowledge the repeated haram declarations on use; the softer language on possession is deliberate diplomatic wiggle room, not proof it’s fake. Iran cheats on inspections, hides sites, enriches to 60%.no argument. But they’ve also stayed below breakout threshold for years, remained in the NPT, and leaned on this religious framing for legitimacy and delay. That’s cold pragmatism, not death cult suicide. If they truly worshipped martyrdom over survival, they’d have weaponized decades ago. Bottom line: the fatwa is real regime policy verbal origin, public repetition, diplomatic shield not Western fantasy. Joe Kent citing no intel violation of it aligns with pre-escalation U.S. assessments. You can (and should) distrust the mullahs they lie when convenient but calling the religious prohibition pure fiction is the actual self-deception. It’s given them plausible deniability for 20+ years. That’s the brutal fact.

Joe Kent said on Tucker Carlson that the Iranian regime has a rule forbidding use of nukes. But that fatwa was never written. Nor is it listed along other fatwas. Westerners fail to understand: You can’t take the word of fanatical regimes who waste life and worship death.

Durant didn’t preach nihilism he mapped how civilizations claw their way out of the slaughter pit. They rise not by surrendering to “might makes right,” but by forging something stronger than naked force: ideas, codes, myths, and shared obligations that turn temporary allies into lasting civilizations. Brute strength without those things is just another warlord’s bonfire bright, brief, and gone. The claim that “Jesus has no edge over Genghis Khan if you’re ruthless enough” isn’t insight; it’s intellectual cowardice dressed as realism. It pretends evil only loses when out-evil’d, that the only currency is body count and terror. That’s not wisdom it’s surrender with extra steps. It quietly concedes that the Khan model wins unless you become a better Khan. Power is non-negotiable. Ideals without power get their bearers crucified, shot, gassed, or macheted history’s default setting. But power stripped of any principle higher than “I won” isn’t victory; it’s deferred suicide. Pure dominance empires rape, loot, enslave, and then rot from within because nothing binds the next generation except fear and fear eventually breeds knives in the dark. This isn’t “tough-minded anti-pacifism.” It’s romanticizing the abyss and calling the romance strategy. Real strength marries violence to a vision that outlives the violence. Anything less doesn’t make you the realist in the room it makes you the next tyrant history will spit on. You don’t beat the monster by becoming it faster; you beat it by making its way of life impossible to sustain. That requires both the sword and the reason men will die holding it. Half-measures just produce corpses with better branding.

He’s quoting historian Will Durant to the effect that this is the way of the world. History is a record of conquest, and might typically prevails regardless of who is right. Christianity is in full agreement that Satan is the prince of this world and his side often prevails.

And what good point might that be? Durant described reality, not prescribed nihilism. He chronicled how civilizations rise above brute force through ideas, laws, and shared values, not by embracing "survival defines good." Saying "Jesus has no advantage over Genghis Khan if you're strong/ruthless enough" isn't profound wisdom it's a dangerous slide. It frames evil's victory as inevitable unless met with superior brutality, sidelining the very moral framework that sustains alliances and long term legitimacy. Power matters. Ideals alone invite slaughter. But power divorced from ideals becomes another Khan: empires that conquer, terrorize, and collapse because they offer nothing beyond dominance. This isn't anti pacifism realism; it's flirting with the abyss while calling it strategy. True strength pairs force with principles that outlast empires. Anything less risks becoming the monster you fight.

I deleted my earlier repost of this because it was pointed out to me that Netanyahu was quoting an author, something the accounts reposting this clip fail to mention in an effort to make it appear as though these are Netanyahu’s own words. He’s actually making a good point along the lines of evil prevails when good men do nothing.

The claim that Islam disrespects Jesus and Mary by mentioning them in the Quran is a selective and dishonest reading that ignores context, while cherry picking verses to paint a caricature. Naming a chapter Surah Maryam highlights Mary's unique honor in Islam she is the only woman named in the entire Quran, praised for her chastity, devotion, and miraculous birth of Jesus (a virgin birth affirmed in the Quran, something the Bible doesn't detail as explicitly). Surahs like Al-Baqarah (The Cow), An-Nahl (The Bees), or An-Naml (The Ants) are named after incidents, animals, or stories that serve as lessons or signs of God's creation not because cows, bees, or ants are "revered" figures. The naming convention reflects thematic content, not equivalent "respect" levels. Trying to equate them is a false equivalence meant to mock rather than engage seriously. The "sister of Aaron" line in Quran 19:28 isn't historical confusion or illiteracy it's an idiomatic Arabic expression (common in Semitic cultures) calling someone by a pious ancestor's name to denote lineage or honor. Mary was from a priestly family descended from Aaron (like how Elizabeth in Luke 1:5 is "of the daughters of Aaron"). Authentic hadith (Sahih Muslim) record the Prophet explaining exactly this: people were named after righteous figures of the past, just as one might call someone "brother of Tamim" to denote tribal affiliation. Classical scholars like Ibn Kathir affirm this as honorific, not literal siblinghood. The charge of mixing up Mary with Miriam ignores both linguistic custom and the Quran's own awareness of chronology elsewhere. Islam affirms Jesus (Isa) as a major prophet, born of a virgin, performer of miracles (including speaking as an infant and healing the blind/lepers by God's permission), the Messiah, and one who will return. It doesn't "strip" him it rejects later Christian doctrines (Trinity, divinity, vicarious atonement) that developed centuries after Jesus and aren't in his own reported words. Quran 5:116 addresses a hypothetical where God asks Jesus if he told people to worship him and Mary as gods Jesus denies it, showing the critique targets perceived excesses in some Christian practice, not Jesus himself. On the crucifixion (4:157): Islam denies Jesus died on the cross, saying "they did not kill him, nor crucify him, but it was made to appear so to them." The majority view involves divine intervention (appearance/substitution theory), but the core point is God saved Jesus from death and humiliation at the hands of his enemies hardly portraying him as a "weakling." The "deceiver" jab at Allah (from 3:54, where God is "best of planners") refers to outmaneuvering plots against prophets, not tricking millions for fun. The hadith about Jesus' return (Sahih Bukhari, etc.) describe him descending as a just ruler to "break the cross" (refute false doctrines built around it), "kill the pigs" (end consumption of what is forbidden in original monotheistic law), abolish jizyah (as universal justice prevails), and implement truth. Muslims see this as Jesus confirming Islam's message and correcting deviationsnot "destroying Christianity" out of spite, but fulfilling prophecy by uniting believers under pure monotheism. Calling it "disgusting" is just emotional rhetoric; it's no more offensive than Christian eschatology where Jesus returns to judge and defeat falsehood. In short: Islam honors Jesus and Mary far more than many realize virgin birth, miracles, messiahship, end times role while rejecting post Jesus theological additions. Your post relies on misrepresentation, outdated polemic, and ignoring Islamic exegesis to score cheap points. If the goal is honest dialogue, engage the actual sources instead of straw-manning them.

Muslims love to parade the Quran’s mentions of Jesus and Mary as if it’s some grand gesture of respect. They claim that because the Quran has a chapter named after Mary (Surah Maryam), this proves Islam respects her. But if simply naming a chapter after something is an act of reverence, then what does it mean that the Quran also has chapters named after cows (Surah Al-Baqarah), ants (Surah An-Naml), and bees (Surah An-Nahl)? Are those sacred too? The Quran mentions Mary more than Muhammad’s own mother, yet it does so only to affirm Islam’s false narrative. The Quran confuses Mary, the mother of Jesus, with Miriam, the sister of Moses (Quran 19:28), proving its author was historically and theologically illiterate. The Quran strips Jesus of everything that makes Him the cornerstone of Christianity. It denies His divinity (Quran 5:116), denies His Sonship (Quran 19:35), and denies His redemptive death on the cross (Quran 4:157). Instead of being the Messiah who sacrificed Himself out of love, the Quran portrays Him as a weakling who needed Allah to deceive people in His place. Jesus doesn’t willingly sacrifice Himself for humanity’s sins. Instead, Allah supposedly tricked people into killing someone else in Jesus’ place (Quran 4:157). It also makes Allah the greatest deceiver (a title given to him in Quran 3:54), suggesting that millions of people were deliberately misled into believing in a false crucifixion. Islam acknowledges Jesus existed, but only to redefine Him. Islam claims He was a prophet, but only to reduce Him below Muhammad. Islam denies His crucifixion and resurrection, because if those were true, Muhammad would be irrelevant. Perhaps the most disgusting insult Islam directs at Jesus is the claim that He will return at the end of time, not to bring salvation, but to break the cross, kill pigs, enforce sharia law, and destroy Christianity.

Hegseth: "We're still dealing with the environment Joe Biden created—depleting our stockpiles and sending them to Ukraine instead of our own military. Every time we face a challenge, it traces back to 'Well, sent it to Ukraine.'" It looks like they’re just going to blame Ukraine whenever anything goes wrong now, doesn’t it? It’s depressing to watch because while this administration will eventually leave office, a segment of Americans will keep hating Ukraine without even remembering why.

In just 19 days, Trump has already wasted $25 BILLION on his reckless war of choice with Iran. That’s enough to fund the State Department for half a year. He chooses bombs over diplomacy. Disgusting & just plain stupid.

Say no to war!

Jesus wouldn’t need swords, arrows, or a horde of screaming warriors to obliterate Genghis Khan. The bloodthirsty butcher who stacked pyramids of skulls and bathed the steppe in the blood of innocents would shatter like cheap glass under the gaze of the Lamb. With words sharper than any Mongol blade “Love your enemies” and “What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul?” Jesus would eviscerate the Khan’s black heart, exposing his empire of rape, slaughter, and dust as the fever dream of a soulless demon. The conqueror who thought himself a god would drop to his knees, broken by mercy he despised and truth he couldn’t escape, his evil legacy rotting in hell while the true King of Kings reigns eternal. That’s how Good defeats Evil: not by becoming the monster, but by making the monster confront the abyss staring back.and then casting it into the fire. Genghis was a plague on humanity; Jesus is its salvation, and that savage would have been nothing but another footstool under the foot of the Messiah.

Oooh I really hate this nigga

“Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan. Because if you are strong enough, ruthless enough, powerful enough, evil will overcome good. “

Jesus Christ defeated death by rising from the dead. Death defeated Genghis Khan.

Lord Jesus, we pray a hedge of protection and wall of fire around our troops, Israel, and the Iranian people during Operation Epic Fury. Protect them from every evil, cover them with your blood, and fulfill your divine purpose in their lives! Help us to put your glory on display in such a way that those of all nations will come to know you and declare, “Surely He must be the Son of God!” In Your Mighty And Matchless Name—the name above every Name, Jesus, we pray, Amen!”🙏🕊️🇺🇸🇮🇱🇮🇷

Stop trying to water down what he said. Netanyahu's recent invocation of historian Will Durant's insight that history favors the strong and does not prefer Jesus Christ over Genghis Khan lays bare a stark realpolitik: morality without power is often futile against ruthless adversaries. Durant described reality, not prescribed nihilism. He chronicled how civilizations rise above brute force through ideas, laws, and shared values, not by embracing "survival defines good." Saying "Jesus has no advantage over Genghis Khan if you're strong/ruthless enough" isn't profound wisdom it's a dangerous slide. It frames evil's victory as inevitable unless met with superior brutality, sidelining the very moral framework that sustains alliances and long-term legitimacy. Power matters and ideals alone invite slaughter. But power divorced from ideals becomes another Khan: empires that conquer, terrorize, and collapse because they offer nothing beyond dominance. History doesn't just reward survivors; it exposes what they built. This isn't anti pacifism realism; it's flirting with the abyss while calling it strategy. True strength pairs force with principles that outlast empires. Anything less risks becoming the monster you fight.

Netanyahu is quoting Durant here and says “it’s unfortunate.” The goal of this clip being circulated is to enrage Christians, which is funny because if you are a Christian this shouldn’t enrage you at all- rage is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit. In fact, this should invoke you to WANT to share Jesus with the lost even more. To let others know the truth -that ruthlessness evil actually loses when all is said and done, because its price is the soul. Jesus’s message is all about eternity. As Christians we live with and for eternal purpose.

Netanyahu didn't "quote a historian." He stood at a podium today and said, flat out: "It is not enough to be moral. It is not enough to be just. Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan... if you are strong enough, ruthless enough... evil will overcome good." That's not some profound Durant seminar. That's a leader of a nuclear democracy telling the world morality is optional unless backed by superior firepower. You can wrap it in "existential survival against genocidal fanatics" all you want. But invoking "evil overcomes good if stronger" as your philosophical north star while claiming the moral high ground is the kind of Orwellian flip that makes actual Machiavellians blush. If survival alone defines good, then congratulations: your enemies' caliphate dreams are just as "valid" if they win.

He was quoting William Durant. And, if you hear his point, it wasn't to insult Jesus. Don't bear false witness. It is one of the ten.

Oh, look another keyboard warrior who just discovered Will Durant and thinks she's unlocked the cheat code to geopolitics. "Nature and history define good as that which survives." Congrats, genius. That's not "unflinching realism"; that's 8th-grade social Darwinism with a history degree. Durant wasn't handing you a license to cosplay Genghis Khan with F 35s. He was describing the brutal ledger, not prescribing "be ruthless or die" as Israel's foreign policy TED Talk. The man spent his life chronicling how civilization claws its way above the Khans through law, art, reason, and yes, the very moral ideals you dismiss as "suicide pacts." He wasn't your based red-pill uncle; he was a humanist who saw progress despite the blood. Netanyahu didn't "quote a historian." He stood at a podium today and said, flat out: "It is not enough to be moral. It is not enough to be just. Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan... if you are strong enough, ruthless enough... evil will overcome good." That's not some profound Durant seminar. That's a leader of a nuclear democracy telling the world morality is optional unless backed by superior firepower. You can wrap it in "existential survival against genocidal fanatics" all you want. But invoking "evil overcomes good if stronger" as your philosophical north star while claiming the moral high ground is the kind of Orwellian flip that makes actual Machiavellians blush. If survival alone defines good, then congratulations: your enemies' caliphate dreams are just as "valid" if they win. And spare me the "surgical strike at the Christian id" victimology. Christians aren't "fragile egos" for noticing their founder the guy whose core teaching was love your enemy and turn the other cheek being explicitly sidelined as irrelevant next to a Mongol butcher. Yeah, Christianity rode empires and swords after Constantine; empires do that. But pretending that validates equating Christ with Khan is like saying "the Inquisition proves Jesus wanted torture." No. Your "Christianity survived by the sword" gotcha is sophomore-level gotcha history that ignores why the faith spread in the first place: an idea that outlasted emperors precisely because it wasn't pure Khan-ism. The real manipulation here? This post itself. You scream "decontextualized outrage" while surgically omitting that Netanyahu's clip isn't some abstract philosophy seminar it's a wartime presser where he's justifying endless ruthlessness. You call critics "grifters trafficking sacred triggers" while your entire screed is nothing but tribal rage bait: "Fuck your outrage. Fuck selective bullshit. Read Durant or fuck off." Pot, meet kettle covered in blood-soaked pages. If nuance doesn't farm engagement, neither does your all-caps profanity parade. Here's the adult truth you can't handle: Yes, ideals without power are suicide pacts. Hamas proves it. But power without ideals is just another Khan another empire that rises, slaughters, and eventually rots because it has no "why" beyond survival. Durant knew that. History's indifferent gods don't crown saints, sure. But humans built cathedrals, laws, and alliances precisely to defy that indifference. Israel survives not because it went full Genghis (it didn't), but because it pairs steel with a story that resonates beyond raw force alliances rooted in shared values, not "we're stronger, deal with it." Your "modern jihadist hordes" boogeyman is real. Your solution ditch the sermons, embrace the ledger is the nihilism that turns defenders into the very monsters they fight. Grow the fuck up yourself. Read the full Durant, not the cherry-picked survivor porn. Study power and the civilizations that transcended it. And spare us the cartoon villain framing of anyone who calls this what it is: a leader flirting with the abyss while pretending it's wisdom. Fuck your selective realism. History doesn't just reward survivors. It judges what they built with the power they stole.

You clip-chopping, context-murdering fucking pricks... this is peak intellectual dishonesty, the kind that would make Machiavelli blush and Goebbels nod in professional approval. Netanyahu didn’t pull some anti-Christ soliloquy out of his ass. He was quoting Will Durant...the towering American historian, that Christian humanist who spent a lifetime dissecting civilization in The Story of Civilization and The Lessons of History. Durant observed the brutal ledger of history with merciless clarity: “Nature and history do not agree with our conceptions of good and bad; they define good as that which survives, and bad as that which goes under; and the universe has no prejudice in favor of Christ as against Genghis Khan.” That’s not blasphemy; that’s unflinching realism, forged in the blood-soaked pages of every empire that rose and every prophet who fell. Netanyahu, staring down genocidal fanatics who rape, behead, and hide behind their own civilians, was driving home the philosophical truth that ideals without iron are suicide pacts. Your precious moral posturing means jack shit if you lack the power to enforce it. Evil doesn’t yield to sermons...it yields to superior force. History’s classroom is soaked in the blood of the unprepared. This clip is pure venomous manipulation: a surgical strike at the Christian id, engineered to bypass reason and ignite tribal outrage. “How dare he say that about Jesus!” they say, conveniently forgetting the historian’s name, the strategic context of existential survival, and the fact that Christianity itself survived not merely by turning the other cheek but by becoming the faith of empires that knew precisely when to wield the sword of Constantine. Selective amnesia, fragile egos, and algorithmic rage-bait at its finest...classic playbook for grifters who traffic in sacred triggers because nuance doesn’t farm engagement. Will Durant understood the tragedy of the human condition: nature and history are indifferent gods that crown survivors, not saints. In a world crawling with modern Genghis Khans...jihadist hordes dreaming of caliphates...the Jewish state doesn’t have the luxury of naive pacifism. Fuck your decontextualized outrage. Fuck the dishonest framing that turns a profound historical insight into cartoon villainy. Grow the fuck up. Read Durant. Study power. And truly, fuck off with this selective fucking bullshit. 💀

@jacksonhinklle Deuteronomy 28:20 "The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him."

🚨🇮🇱 Netanyahu: "Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan. Because if you are strong enough, ruthless enough, powerful enough, evil will overcome good." He is actually the antichrist...

@kangminlee Deuteronomy 28:20 "The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him."

Wrong. Christ is King over all rulers and authorities, past present and future.

@ksorbs Deuteronomy 28:20 "The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him."

What?

@Megatron_ron Deuteronomy 28:20 "The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him."

NEW: 🇮🇱Netanyahu: “Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan. Because if you are strong enough, ruthless enough, powerful enough, evil will overcome good.”