I hope he doesn’t drink his liquor straight, he’ll be even more confused than he already is.
Trump Attacks Iran, IV
- Thread starter Tidewater
- Start date
I hope he doesn’t drink his liquor straight, he’ll be even more confused than he already is.
Yeah, it’s far more likely that old photos on the internet are actually from last week.
if you would like to go above and beyond the call of duty, you can contact usa today here
“TDS is a helluva drug.”
- Rick James, probably
Help Center - USA TODAY
help.usatoday.com
My fear is that he's living in a delusional la-la land. All this talk about shipping their precious uranium to the US, etc. At first, I thought it was just his weird negotiating. Now, I'm getting concerned, particularly with the clowns around him...
He's constantly reminding me of a cartoon character.
Like maybe this one:
"I'm Yosemite Trump, the griftiest grift that ever grifts for graft!"
Last edited:
BREAKING: 
Archaeologists in the Holy Land just uncovered a 3,000-year-old Israelite tablet…
It reads: “Iran is only weeks away from developing a nuclear weapon.”
Archaeologists in the Holy Land just uncovered a 3,000-year-old Israelite tablet… It reads: “Iran is only weeks away from developing a nuclear weapon.”
But this one is even more accurate:
Obviously fake news. A real ancient tablet would have said that “Araya is weeks away from a nuclear weapon.”
BREAKING:
It reads: “Iran is only weeks away from developing a nuclear weapon.”
Obviously fake news. A real ancient tablet would have said that “Araya is weeks away from a nuclear weapon.”
Lets just say that if Trajan had failed in his invasion of Parthia... The world would be approaching 2000 years as a nuclear wasteland...
At a broad level, it’s important to acknowledge a hard truth: this war is a textbook case of the old saying - "Strategy must precede action"
The underlying assumption in the US and Israel was that weakening Iran kineticly would eventually lead to the collapse of the regime and that a sustained U.S.-Israeli campaign, targeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, could trigger systemic change thay will change the Middle East.
But this war overlooked a critical variable: the Islamic Republic of Iran is a different kind of actor. Traditional cost-benefit calculations don’t apply in the conventional sense.
Moreover, the war has generated second-order effects that have made the strategic landscape more complex — not less. From Iran’s growing assertiveness around the Strait of Hormuz, to the hardening of its internal decision-making processes, to the rising influence of Mojtaba Khamenei and the expanding dominance of the IRGC, the Iranian system has, in many ways, become more rigid and more ideological.
These dynamics are pushing the administration into a narrowing set of options, none of them good. The choice increasingly looks like this: accept a deal that is, in essence, a strengthened version of the previous nuclear agreement, or return to military escalation that carries significant regional risks without guaranteeing meaningful change in Iran’s behavior.
In effect, this war has helped shape what could be called “Islamic Republic 3.0” — a system forged not only through pressure, but also through strategic miscalculation. While the regime may have been weakened militarily and economically, it has, paradoxically, been strengthened internally, particularly among its core base.
This may well be the campaign’s most significant strategic miscalculation.
The protests inside Iran had left the regime increasingly exposed, struggling to respond to public demands, led by an aging and ailing supreme leader. There was a moment of internal vulnerability.
Yet the campaign, despite its tactical achievements, has given the regime a renewed sense of purpose at a time when it was fighting for its political future. Instead of weakening it from within, it has helped consolidate its base and rally its supporters.
It remains unclear how this will end. But at this stage, one conclusion is difficult to avoid: alongside tactical gains, the war has produced a more challenging strategic environment for Iran’s neighbors, for Israel, and for the United States.
And most importantly, Iran’s leadership has no intention of capitulating. Neither pressure nor escalation is likely to force a deeply ideological regime to abandon its foundational principles.
There is no decisive blow. No silver bullet.
Only two realistic paths remain:
a deal that looks remarkably similar to what Iran was willing to consider before the war — or an expanded conflict with no clear endgame.
This is the reality.
The underlying assumption in the US and Israel was that weakening Iran kineticly would eventually lead to the collapse of the regime and that a sustained U.S.-Israeli campaign, targeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, could trigger systemic change thay will change the Middle East.
But this war overlooked a critical variable: the Islamic Republic of Iran is a different kind of actor. Traditional cost-benefit calculations don’t apply in the conventional sense.
Moreover, the war has generated second-order effects that have made the strategic landscape more complex — not less. From Iran’s growing assertiveness around the Strait of Hormuz, to the hardening of its internal decision-making processes, to the rising influence of Mojtaba Khamenei and the expanding dominance of the IRGC, the Iranian system has, in many ways, become more rigid and more ideological.
These dynamics are pushing the administration into a narrowing set of options, none of them good. The choice increasingly looks like this: accept a deal that is, in essence, a strengthened version of the previous nuclear agreement, or return to military escalation that carries significant regional risks without guaranteeing meaningful change in Iran’s behavior.
In effect, this war has helped shape what could be called “Islamic Republic 3.0” — a system forged not only through pressure, but also through strategic miscalculation. While the regime may have been weakened militarily and economically, it has, paradoxically, been strengthened internally, particularly among its core base.
This may well be the campaign’s most significant strategic miscalculation.
The protests inside Iran had left the regime increasingly exposed, struggling to respond to public demands, led by an aging and ailing supreme leader. There was a moment of internal vulnerability.
Yet the campaign, despite its tactical achievements, has given the regime a renewed sense of purpose at a time when it was fighting for its political future. Instead of weakening it from within, it has helped consolidate its base and rally its supporters.
It remains unclear how this will end. But at this stage, one conclusion is difficult to avoid: alongside tactical gains, the war has produced a more challenging strategic environment for Iran’s neighbors, for Israel, and for the United States.
And most importantly, Iran’s leadership has no intention of capitulating. Neither pressure nor escalation is likely to force a deeply ideological regime to abandon its foundational principles.
There is no decisive blow. No silver bullet.
Only two realistic paths remain:
a deal that looks remarkably similar to what Iran was willing to consider before the war — or an expanded conflict with no clear endgame.
This is the reality.
New Posts
-
-
-
Pitching discussion (was: When is the last time you've seen a NCAA Football team...)
- Latest: selmaborntidefan
-
-
Trending content
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thread 'Good luck dealing with a pandemic, depending on this administration...'
- TIDE-HSV
Replies: 8K -
Latest threads
-
-
ESPN: 'It's his superpower': Inside Fernando Mendoza's extraordinary rise to No. 1- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Reid's seven-round NFL mock draft: A forecast of every pick from No. 1 to No. 257
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Schefter's draft intel: Everything he's hearing ahead of Round 1
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: The blue blood and the new blood: What we learned at Notre Dame and Indiana this spring
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
No. 11 Alabama Ends Weekend in Austin with 2-1 Win at No. 4 Texas- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 1