Same. On my Android, when there is an IG post it fills the entire screen and when I swipe up to continue it doesn't move. It takes a while to react. If there was anything on the screen NOT on the IG post that I could use to touch and drag, it moves. After it releases the freeze it jumps to a random spot like if it had actually worked while I was trying to drag the screen. Make sense now for the naysayers?
US and Israel attack Iran
- Thread starter Redmt
- Start date
Hem
Well-known member
Bless you Greenie for its true, I never would have stumbled on Barry and your Russian amigos.
PoleX
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2025
- Messages
- 271
Is it bear season yet?
Gulf of America
Well-known member
“Bear season is coming, make sure you are too.”
I already came. I thought bear season did too (maybe it’s the weather), but I guess sometimes they’re faking it. I can try to rally, but I’m not as young as I once was…
Last edited:
Blue Steel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2023
- Messages
- 1,030
Time to bring Jack Bauer out of retirement
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Seems like the bullshit cattle truck has been rolling through this thread and all of HT recently!
Redmt
Well-known member
Nobody is immune. You need to be careful what roads you drive on.
That guy seem a bit off to anyone else, or is it just me?
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,518
I remember reading some remarks on the subject of dealing with a tenacious and dangerous when provked adversary. As best as I recall it went something like this….
“If you are going to try to dispatch a badger with a shovel, once you start you’re committed and it takes more than one hit.”
Was striking Iran now the right move? Time will tell but in my opinion for this to be beneficial for the US and Israel for the next decade or so they cannot leave the Iranian Islamic regime functional enough to wage asymmetrical warfare at the end of this .
From appearances it seems like Iran’s ability to wage conventional war at sea is gone. Their air force and much of their air defense is gone. Their missile program is probably diminished but I think is still robust enough to cause a lot of damage. If this conflict ends soon with the regime intact I’m expecting them to focus on expanding their arsenal of missiles and missile technology as much as possible.
In my opinion the ability of their ground forces are largely intact. Indeterminate in their morale and the cohesiveness of leadership but more than lethal enough to cause significant casualties in the event of a ground invasion. I’m guessing that the American and Israeli armies could prevail in a toe to toe battle but the fragmented Iranian army would immediately resort to an insurgency that would make Iraq and Afghanistan seem minor in comparison.
The best scenario I think we can hope for is a largely intact Iran with a change of leadership and enough internal stability to contain the radical Islamist elements in the country. The only possible scenario that works for a more stable outcome is for that leadership change and government to come internally from within Iran.
I’m not confident it will happen that way.
“If you are going to try to dispatch a badger with a shovel, once you start you’re committed and it takes more than one hit.”
Was striking Iran now the right move? Time will tell but in my opinion for this to be beneficial for the US and Israel for the next decade or so they cannot leave the Iranian Islamic regime functional enough to wage asymmetrical warfare at the end of this .
From appearances it seems like Iran’s ability to wage conventional war at sea is gone. Their air force and much of their air defense is gone. Their missile program is probably diminished but I think is still robust enough to cause a lot of damage. If this conflict ends soon with the regime intact I’m expecting them to focus on expanding their arsenal of missiles and missile technology as much as possible.
In my opinion the ability of their ground forces are largely intact. Indeterminate in their morale and the cohesiveness of leadership but more than lethal enough to cause significant casualties in the event of a ground invasion. I’m guessing that the American and Israeli armies could prevail in a toe to toe battle but the fragmented Iranian army would immediately resort to an insurgency that would make Iraq and Afghanistan seem minor in comparison.
The best scenario I think we can hope for is a largely intact Iran with a change of leadership and enough internal stability to contain the radical Islamist elements in the country. The only possible scenario that works for a more stable outcome is for that leadership change and government to come internally from within Iran.
I’m not confident it will happen that way.
Ben Long
Well-known member
Where have I heard this before...
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
I remember when Stockholm syndrome was considered rare.
Trump was right he can do anything and his supporters will eat it up.
Trump told you he was going to do this in 2011. Midterms around the corner.
Trump was right he can do anything and his supporters will eat it up.
Trump told you he was going to do this in 2011. Midterms around the corner.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
No boots on the ground America doesn't want that.
PoleX
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2025
- Messages
- 271
My BIL sent this to me. I’ve dug into it myself and agree with his general assessment. I think there is a case from a national security/strike while the irons hot standpoint but I think it’s inaccurate to justify falling in line with Israel as if it’s a Christian duty:
Here is how he put it:
Romans 9
6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”
So if God was going to protect Israel at all cost why did God allow the destruction of Israel in 70 ad? Unfortunately people are living Matthew 10 (where Jesus instructions were to go to lost sheep of Isreal first) vs Matthew 28 (to all nations).
In short if you belong to Christ you are the remnant of Isreal. To confuse a modern day land with what is a theological view is dangerous because we have many including Ted Cruz, Mike huckabee, jack hibs basically stating that you’re not acting Christian if you don’t support everything that the modern day land of Isreal wants. If you want to say it’s in Americas best interest then that is debatable but to say it’s the Christian thing to do doesn’t make sense theologically.
One must ask questions like: why aren’t we helping Nigearns Christians like we are in this situation? It’s not accurate to justify involvement purely on Christian theology. Comments from Ted Cruz alluding that is America’s Biblical duty to help modern day Israel is a deceitful justification not entirely grounded in truth. Israel of today is not defined by Israel of the new covenant. I’m glad people are asking questions I would heavily debate it before casting stones. Really dig into your bible if anything.
Here is how he put it:
Romans 9
6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”
So if God was going to protect Israel at all cost why did God allow the destruction of Israel in 70 ad? Unfortunately people are living Matthew 10 (where Jesus instructions were to go to lost sheep of Isreal first) vs Matthew 28 (to all nations).
In short if you belong to Christ you are the remnant of Isreal. To confuse a modern day land with what is a theological view is dangerous because we have many including Ted Cruz, Mike huckabee, jack hibs basically stating that you’re not acting Christian if you don’t support everything that the modern day land of Isreal wants. If you want to say it’s in Americas best interest then that is debatable but to say it’s the Christian thing to do doesn’t make sense theologically.
One must ask questions like: why aren’t we helping Nigearns Christians like we are in this situation? It’s not accurate to justify involvement purely on Christian theology. Comments from Ted Cruz alluding that is America’s Biblical duty to help modern day Israel is a deceitful justification not entirely grounded in truth. Israel of today is not defined by Israel of the new covenant. I’m glad people are asking questions I would heavily debate it before casting stones. Really dig into your bible if anything.
atlas
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2022
- Messages
- 489
Wind Gypsy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2017
- Messages
- 3,006
Bibi talking about focusing on reading about Rome and winning the next time and also calling US "the new Rome" is a pretty good indication that Israel treats america like its adversary/slave more than an ally.
One could look into how the Talmud claims Jesus is burning in feces in hell, its ok to rape kids under 3 YO, non-jews are good for cattle/slaves, etc as another reason why being Israel's biotch should have no ties to it being "the Christian thing to do"..
One could look into how the Talmud claims Jesus is burning in feces in hell, its ok to rape kids under 3 YO, non-jews are good for cattle/slaves, etc as another reason why being Israel's biotch should have no ties to it being "the Christian thing to do"..
Gulf of America
Well-known member
Criticizing Netanyahu being blanket-labeled as anti-Semitism is bullshit, and is happening way too much. But blanket-associated all Jews with Rabbinic Judaism is also bullshit. Bibi is a bad actor and pretty clearly considering his own power over the well-being of the Israeli people, but he's a secular Jew and using the Talmud to say the US shouldn't support him rather than the other actually legitimate reasons isn't helpful.
Similar threads
