TexasScientist said:

---

Mothra said:

---

historian said:

---

In general wars are bad ideas and should be avoided whenever possible. However, some wars are necessary such as WWII. Germany & Japan represented a threat to everyone. Israel is currently fighting a war of necessity. Literally every war in their modern history fits this description and it's obvious when one looks at the map and understands anything about their neighbors & history.

All that said, the problems of the Middle East do not necessitate direct US involvement. They are our ally, we share a common adversary, and we want them to succeed (well, not the antisemites but who cares what bigots think?). We certainly don't need boots on the ground to help Israel out & we don't want to get bogged down in another land war in Asia. OTOH, it definitely is in our interest for Iran to be defanged: they must never be allowed to get nukes. Again, that should be obvious.

The ideal solution is for us to provide israel with just enough aid to accomplish their goal: preventing Iran from getting nukes. To repeat, it's in everyone's interests even those who are too stupid to realize it. Iran's Persian Gulf neighbors certainly do.

While we can hope that this latest example of crazy Iranian adventurism will result in the downfall of the regime, we cannot make it happen and should not try. Ideally, the Iranian people will rise up and create a stable and responsible govt to replace the mullahs. History suggests that that would be exceedingly difficult and is unlikely. Those in power rarely give it up voluntarily, especially ruthless dictators. Outside forces cannot do it unless they conquer and intend to remain in place permanently. It rarely ends well.

---

Well said. And all those throwing conniptions that Trump is going to get us into another ground war in the ME are ignoring both his words and his foreign policy history. It's just wild speculation, at this point, by the pro-Iran, pro-Putin, Woke Right crowd. They're chicken littles and drama queens getting worked up over an event that isn't going to happen.

The positives to come out of this is we now get to see who all the crazies are in the party. And we have a number of kooks, unfortunately, that support Islamic terrorist states and Russian dictators. I thought the Sam Lowry's of the world were the morally-bankrupt, outlier nutjobs, but it appears many inside MAGA share the fruitcakes' beliefs.

---

Quote:

---

While we can hope that this latest example of crazy Iranian adventurism will result in the downfall of the regime, we cannot make it happen and should not try. Ideally, the Iranian people will rise up and create a stable and responsible govt to replace the mullahs. History suggests that that would be exceedingly difficult and is unlikely. Those in power rarely give it up voluntarily, especially ruthless dictators. Outside forces cannot do it unless they conquer and intend to remain in place permanently. It rarely ends well.

---

Why not fund and assist those who are already rallying around the Crown Prince? He's already said he would serve as a transitional focal point to take Iran down the path to democracy. This is what black ops are for. Something/someone has to provide a catalyst and entity for the Iranian people rally around, in order to rise up effectively. It's not likely to happen without some outside support. The Iraq/Syrian border would make a good staging ground.

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wow, sounds like most on this Board are rooting for Iran...

Propaganda machine has done its job well.

---

KaiBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wow, sounds like most on this Board are rooting for Iran...

Propaganda machine has done its job well.

---

Hardly

Some folks are merely flexible Trump haters. Whatever he does or doesn't do is wrong.

Though I believe this 2 week time out is a mistake.

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

BREAKING: Israel's missile defense systems could cost $200M+ per day according to WSJ.

— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) June 20, 2025

Per Grok:

Yes, the United States does fund a significant portion of Israel's missile defense systems, including those that could contribute to the reported $200 million+ daily operational costs mentioned in the post by Dominic Michael Tripi. Here's a breakdown based on the available data and recent context:

• Historical Funding: Since FY 2009, the U.S. has provided Israel with $3.4 billion for missile defense programs, including $1.3 billion specifically for the Iron Dome system starting in FY 2011, according to the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, from 2011 to 2022, the U.S. contributed $2.6 billion to the Iron Dome, as noted on Wikipedia, and has co-funded the Arrow missile program with investments ranging from $2.4 to $3.6 billion, covering 50-80% of the costs.
• Current Commitments: Under a 2019-2028 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the U.S. allocates $500 million annually for Israel's missile defense funding, alongside $3.3 billion for other military aid, per USAFacts. This funding supports systems like Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow, which are likely part of the high daily costs during active conflicts, such as the recent Iranian missile attacks reported last week.
• Recent Context: Given the intensified operations against Iran, as noted by Brig. Gen. (res.) Re'em Aminach's estimate of $1.45 billion spent in the first 48 hours (approximately $725 million daily), the U.S. likely continues to shoulder a substantial share. While exact daily contributions aren't specified, the U.S. has historically replenished Israel's missile stockse.g., a $3.5 billion deal for interceptors in 2023and emergency aid, like the $26.4 billion package approved in April 2024, suggests ongoing support during crises.
• Public Perception and Debate: The X thread reflects varied opinions, with users like
  @RnoHach
suggesting the U.S. pays "for it all," while others question the cost allocation (@DavidJamesMusic's "Cost who"). The web data confirms the U.S. as the primary financial backer, though Israel contributes annually (e.g., $65 million for Arrow) and uses its own budget for operations.

In summary, yes, the U.S. funds a significant portion of Israel's missile defense, likely covering a substantial fraction of the $200 million+ daily cost during active engagements, though the exact proportion varies with each conflict and depends on emergency appropriations. Given the current escalation, additional U.S. support is probable, aligning with longstanding policy to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge."

---

To me that's good spending. I'd rather spend saving lives, than creating wars, or joining wars.

I hope negotiators are just saying out loud what Trump seems to be thinking. You can dismantle your nuclear program, or we will bomb it. It needs to be crystal clear that it's not just rhetoric. Even fanatical zealots can sometimes understand reality.

And for the record, I don't think we should get involved, except to defend Israel, and restrain Israel to a reasonable campaign against the nuclear program; basically don't support Israel if it tries for regime change.

---

My issue is that is an astronomical amount of money that could be spent here on Americans who are struggling to survive and falling into dangerous addictions or suicide.

How many American lives here at home could that $200 million a day save if put to good use?

---

TexasScientist said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and likeminded ideologues in Washington are…

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 5, 2025

Is there anyone here willing to explain your support for initiating a war with Iran when Iran has made no credible threats toward the US homeland? Please raise your Israeli flags high and explain why Americans being financial slaves to Israel isnt enough for you... we actually need to go fight their wars and die for them too.

---

Let's see, the last time I heard a country was weeks, days away from a nuclear weapon was in the first Trump term. I guess they're still weeks away aren't they? Iran is going to develop a nuke, plain and simple, if allowed. Just like NK. Iran hates the US every bit as much as Israel. We haven't seen terrorism in this country like what can be dished out from a nuclear Iran with proxies. A simple dirty bomb would be devastating.

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

BREAKING: Israel's missile defense systems could cost $200M+ per day according to WSJ.

— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) June 20, 2025

Per Grok:

Yes, the United States does fund a significant portion of Israel's missile defense systems, including those that could contribute to the reported $200 million+ daily operational costs mentioned in the post by Dominic Michael Tripi. Here's a breakdown based on the available data and recent context:

• Historical Funding: Since FY 2009, the U.S. has provided Israel with $3.4 billion for missile defense programs, including $1.3 billion specifically for the Iron Dome system starting in FY 2011, according to the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, from 2011 to 2022, the U.S. contributed $2.6 billion to the Iron Dome, as noted on Wikipedia, and has co-funded the Arrow missile program with investments ranging from $2.4 to $3.6 billion, covering 50-80% of the costs.
• Current Commitments: Under a 2019-2028 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the U.S. allocates $500 million annually for Israel's missile defense funding, alongside $3.3 billion for other military aid, per USAFacts. This funding supports systems like Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow, which are likely part of the high daily costs during active conflicts, such as the recent Iranian missile attacks reported last week.
• Recent Context: Given the intensified operations against Iran, as noted by Brig. Gen. (res.) Re'em Aminach's estimate of $1.45 billion spent in the first 48 hours (approximately $725 million daily), the U.S. likely continues to shoulder a substantial share. While exact daily contributions aren't specified, the U.S. has historically replenished Israel's missile stockse.g., a $3.5 billion deal for interceptors in 2023and emergency aid, like the $26.4 billion package approved in April 2024, suggests ongoing support during crises.
• Public Perception and Debate: The X thread reflects varied opinions, with users like
  @RnoHach
suggesting the U.S. pays "for it all," while others question the cost allocation (@DavidJamesMusic's "Cost who"). The web data confirms the U.S. as the primary financial backer, though Israel contributes annually (e.g., $65 million for Arrow) and uses its own budget for operations.

In summary, yes, the U.S. funds a significant portion of Israel's missile defense, likely covering a substantial fraction of the $200 million+ daily cost during active engagements, though the exact proportion varies with each conflict and depends on emergency appropriations. Given the current escalation, additional U.S. support is probable, aligning with longstanding policy to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge."

---

To me that's good spending. I'd rather spend saving lives, than creating wars, or joining wars.

I hope negotiators are just saying out loud what Trump seems to be thinking. You can dismantle your nuclear program, or we will bomb it. It needs to be crystal clear that it's not just rhetoric. Even fanatical zealots can sometimes understand reality.

And for the record, I don't think we should get involved, except to defend Israel, and restrain Israel to a reasonable campaign against the nuclear program; basically don't support Israel if it tries for regime change.

---

My issue is that is an astronomical amount of money that could be spent here on Americans who are struggling to survive and falling into dangerous addictions or suicide.

How many American lives here at home could that $200 million a day save if put to good use?

---

Nobody will disagree, but you could say the same thing about the entire defense budget. Why not nix it all, feed the impoverished, pay for everyone's college, and have medicare/aid cover everyone?

Military spending is done for a reason. We want to be so scary that nobody would ever mess with us. That saves all our lives.

---

ShooterTX said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and likeminded ideologues in Washington are…

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 5, 2025

Is there anyone here willing to explain your support for initiating a war with Iran when Iran has made no credible threats toward the US homeland? Please raise your Israeli flags high and explain why Americans being financial slaves to Israel isnt enough for you... we actually need to go fight their wars and die for them too.

---

Let's see, the last time I heard a country was weeks, days away from a nuclear weapon was in the first Trump term. I guess they're still weeks away aren't they? Iran is going to develop a nuke, plain and simple, if allowed. Just like NK. Iran hates the US every bit as much as Israel. We haven't seen terrorism in this country like what can be dished out from a nuclear Iran with proxies. A simple dirty bomb would be devastating.

---

I don't really care if it's weeks away, months away or years away.... no Islamic nation should ever be allowed to have any kind of nuclear program.
Muslims cannot be trusted with such technology.
They have always been violent, rapists & aggressors. They must be kept in check.
If there is even the possibility of a nuclear program, it's justification to start bombing them into oblivion.

---

KaiBear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Of course it would. When strategic nuclear forces are brought to bear and ICBMS are launched, there is a some uncertainty for the observer about what their target is. A country that adheres to a launch on warning doctrine is very likely to fire back.

It also raises a considerable amount of doubt about what the next move of the aggressor nation will be.

There is also the matter of the Armenians, Georgians, and Kuwaitis being around 500 miles from your proposed ground zero.

I'm surprised at how willing you Boomercons are to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle. Just a reminder that suicide bombing to advance Israeli foreign policy doesn't get you to heaven.

---

Here are the problem with that analysis:
1) Neither Russia nor China is going to risk nuclear exchange with the USA to defend Iran. (on any of several layers of scenario).
2) We do not need to waste ICBMs on such a mission. Air & sea based weapons would be far better suited.
3) Tactical nukes would be the weapon of choice - we're going for a very small target, not annihilation of an entire country.

Be patient…..let Israel keep up the pressure. Keep decapitating military leadership. Start decapitating civilian leadership. Destroy Iranian commercial and military shipping & warships. Freeze Iranian assets. Cut them off from foreign aid. Spare civil population as much as possible. IMessage support for regime change relentlessly.

Be patient……
Ignore fruitcakes alleging that we are going to war.

Be patient….
The mullah regime cannot endure this forever.


Be patient…..
Our military is now in position, locked & loaded. Nobody is going to "eff" with us.

Be patient.

---

Holy *****... you are calling me a nutjob while advocating for the use of a tactical nuke... in a war of aggression that another country (Israel) started???

---

There is no chance the US would ever use nukes on behalf of Israel.

If events got that dire for Israel; they would most certainly use one of their own.

---

Q: Your intelligence community says they have no evidence that Iran is building a nuke

TRUMP: Then my intelligence community is wrong. Who said that?

Q: You director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard

TRUMP: She's wrong pic.twitter.com/RI9Jzouagh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 20, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

Wonder if her days are numbered?

Q: Your intelligence community says they have no evidence that Iran is building a nuke

TRUMP: Then my intelligence community is wrong. Who said that?

Q: You director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard

TRUMP: She's wrong pic.twitter.com/RI9Jzouagh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 20, 2025

---

Mothra said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Mothra said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Tucker: It’s interesting you are trying to derail my questions by calling me an anti-Semite—which you are.

Cruz: I did not.

Tucker: And rather than being honorable enough to say it right to my face, you are, in a sleazy, feline way, implying it. pic.twitter.com/clrFRnATcE

— Acyn (@Acyn) June 18, 2025

---

Cruz must have adopted this tactic from the Boomers on this site that do the same thing... you cannot have a candid conversation about Israel or the Israel lobby without being called racist.

Its a really ineffective way to win an argument.

It makes you look silly and stupid.

---

So, when you do things like blame the Jews for, say, Jeffrey Epstein, or perhaps say for killing Jesus, I would submit that's not indicative of someone merely looking to have a "candid conversation about Israel or the Israel lobby," It is indicative of someone who, for whatever reason, has an visceral reaction to a race of people, and is looking to target them for events that are beyond their control. And it is, quite often, the way racist people respond to certain ethnic groups.

BTW, can you actually name the "boomers" on this website you are referencing? And what are their ages?

It is such a millennial mindset to use that term pejoratively and insultingly.

---

I blame the Israeli government and it's intelligence apparatus for Epstein. I blame the Zelensky regime for the misdeeds of Ukraine in that part of the world. If China attacks Taiwan, it will be the fault of the CCP, not "the Chinese."

A mature observer is able to distinguish between the actions of a government and the entirety of the population that lives there.

The real question is why you want to conflate criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism. I suspect it has a lot to do with your flawed Half Lindsey eschatology. "Left Behind" was a work of fiction, not a foreign policy manual.

As far as the generational question, this is probably a good time to point out that Gen X is the only generation that Trump won as a cohort. If Boomers, Millennials, and Gen Z voters were the only ones voting, we would be talking about President Kamala Harris right now. What's more, Trump's lead among Gen X voters was big enough to overcome Harris' lead in the other three voting blocks.

---

1) Honestly, it's no surprise you blame the Israeli govt. for Epstein, despite the absence of credible evidence establishing a link. People with a bias or prejudice are susceptible to believing in conspiracy theories which support their bias.

2) Never read Left Behind. Is it any good?

3) Proud my generation voted for Trump. Were you under the misimpression that I didn't vote for him or don't support him?

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Wonder if her days are numbered?

Q: Your intelligence community says they have no evidence that Iran is building a nuke

TRUMP: Then my intelligence community is wrong. Who said that?

Q: You director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard

TRUMP: She's wrong pic.twitter.com/RI9Jzouagh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 20, 2025

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

It's really a pretty simple bit of calculus - A world where a nation that is dedicated to the destruction of the US and its allies cannot be allowed to possess a usable "ultimate" weapon. The cost of preventing it will almost certainly be better than the alternative.

---

Your premise is flawed because that world already exists.

We have experienced "the cost" of not preventing North Korea from producing nuclear weapons capable of striking the US and its allies.

---

Again, that is incorrect. There is no evidence that North Korea has a missile platform capable of launching nukes as far as the United States. As far as South Korea, maybe.

---

whiterock said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

It's really a pretty simple bit of calculus - A world where a nation that is dedicated to the destruction of the US and its allies cannot be allowed to possess a usable "ultimate" weapon. The cost of preventing it will almost certainly be better than the alternative.

---

Your premise is flawed because that world already exists.

We have experienced "the cost" of not preventing North Korea from producing nuclear weapons capable of striking the US and its allies.

---

Again, that is incorrect. There is no evidence that North Korea has a missile platform capable of launching nukes as far as the United States. As far as South Korea, maybe.

---

wrong. Hawaii and parts of the US west coast are under the umbrella of known NK systems.

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Of course it would. When strategic nuclear forces are brought to bear and ICBMS are launched, there is a some uncertainty for the observer about what their target is. A country that adheres to a launch on warning doctrine is very likely to fire back.

It also raises a considerable amount of doubt about what the next move of the aggressor nation will be.

There is also the matter of the Armenians, Georgians, and Kuwaitis being around 500 miles from your proposed ground zero.

I'm surprised at how willing you Boomercons are to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle. Just a reminder that suicide bombing to advance Israeli foreign policy doesn't get you to heaven.

---

Here are the problem with that analysis:
1) Neither Russia nor China is going to risk nuclear exchange with the USA to defend Iran. (on any of several layers of scenario).
2) We do not need to waste ICBMs on such a mission. Air & sea based weapons would be far better suited.
3) Tactical nukes would be the weapon of choice - we're going for a very small target, not annihilation of an entire country.

Be patient…..let Israel keep up the pressure. Keep decapitating military leadership. Start decapitating civilian leadership. Destroy Iranian commercial and military shipping & warships. Freeze Iranian assets. Cut them off from foreign aid. Spare civil population as much as possible. IMessage support for regime change relentlessly.

Be patient……
Ignore fruitcakes alleging that we are going to war.

Be patient….
The mullah regime cannot endure this forever.


Be patient…..
Our military is now in position, locked & loaded. Nobody is going to "eff" with us.

Be patient.

---

Holy *****... you are calling me a nutjob while advocating for the use of a tactical nuke... in a war of aggression that another country (Israel) started???

Boomercons are truly the most dangerous and psychotic people on the planet...

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wow, sounds like most on this Board are rooting for Iran...

Propaganda machine has done its job well.

---

Hardly

Some folks are merely flexible Trump haters. Whatever he does or doesn't do is wrong.

Though I believe this 2 week time out is a mistake.

---

Me too. Keep up the pressure.

I have no issues giving or selling weapons to Israel, including the MOAB.

I have no issue with Freedom of Navigation.

I have no issues with our ADA protecting civilian populations. Send over Patriot, THAAD, and Arrow units. That is what ADA does and protecting civilians I am good.

I DO NOT want to see US combat troops involved.

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

BREAKING: Israel's missile defense systems could cost $200M+ per day according to WSJ.

— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) June 20, 2025

Per Grok:

Yes, the United States does fund a significant portion of Israel's missile defense systems, including those that could contribute to the reported $200 million+ daily operational costs mentioned in the post by Dominic Michael Tripi. Here's a breakdown based on the available data and recent context:

• Historical Funding: Since FY 2009, the U.S. has provided Israel with $3.4 billion for missile defense programs, including $1.3 billion specifically for the Iron Dome system starting in FY 2011, according to the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, from 2011 to 2022, the U.S. contributed $2.6 billion to the Iron Dome, as noted on Wikipedia, and has co-funded the Arrow missile program with investments ranging from $2.4 to $3.6 billion, covering 50-80% of the costs.
• Current Commitments: Under a 2019-2028 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the U.S. allocates $500 million annually for Israel's missile defense funding, alongside $3.3 billion for other military aid, per USAFacts. This funding supports systems like Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow, which are likely part of the high daily costs during active conflicts, such as the recent Iranian missile attacks reported last week.
• Recent Context: Given the intensified operations against Iran, as noted by Brig. Gen. (res.) Re'em Aminach's estimate of $1.45 billion spent in the first 48 hours (approximately $725 million daily), the U.S. likely continues to shoulder a substantial share. While exact daily contributions aren't specified, the U.S. has historically replenished Israel's missile stockse.g., a $3.5 billion deal for interceptors in 2023and emergency aid, like the $26.4 billion package approved in April 2024, suggests ongoing support during crises.
• Public Perception and Debate: The X thread reflects varied opinions, with users like
  @RnoHach
suggesting the U.S. pays "for it all," while others question the cost allocation (@DavidJamesMusic's "Cost who"). The web data confirms the U.S. as the primary financial backer, though Israel contributes annually (e.g., $65 million for Arrow) and uses its own budget for operations.

In summary, yes, the U.S. funds a significant portion of Israel's missile defense, likely covering a substantial fraction of the $200 million+ daily cost during active engagements, though the exact proportion varies with each conflict and depends on emergency appropriations. Given the current escalation, additional U.S. support is probable, aligning with longstanding policy to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge."

---

To me that's good spending. I'd rather spend saving lives, than creating wars, or joining wars.

I hope negotiators are just saying out loud what Trump seems to be thinking. You can dismantle your nuclear program, or we will bomb it. It needs to be crystal clear that it's not just rhetoric. Even fanatical zealots can sometimes understand reality.

And for the record, I don't think we should get involved, except to defend Israel, and restrain Israel to a reasonable campaign against the nuclear program; basically don't support Israel if it tries for regime change.

---

My issue is that is an astronomical amount of money that could be spent here on Americans who are struggling to survive and falling into dangerous addictions or suicide.

How many American lives here at home could that $200 million a day save if put to good use?

---

Nobody will disagree, but you could say the same thing about the entire defense budget. Why not nix it all, feed the impoverished, pay for everyone's college, and have medicare/aid cover everyone?

Military spending is done for a reason. We want to be so scary that nobody would ever mess with us. That saves all our lives.

---

We should cut the defense budget in half and start getting serious about paying down the debt.

It will bring back the value of the dollar and bring back prosperity for ALL Americans.

I dont buy the argument we are saving American lives by wasting trillions on foreign proxy wars.

Why is America spending more money hunting down Hamas than the Mexican cartels?

If you watch the riots in LA... they arent holding up Palestinian flags... they are holding up Mexican flags.

---

whiterock said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

It's really a pretty simple bit of calculus - A world where a nation that is dedicated to the destruction of the US and its allies cannot be allowed to possess a usable "ultimate" weapon. The cost of preventing it will almost certainly be better than the alternative.

---

Your premise is flawed because that world already exists.

We have experienced "the cost" of not preventing North Korea from producing nuclear weapons capable of striking the US and its allies.

---

Again, that is incorrect. There is no evidence that North Korea has a missile platform capable of launching nukes as far as the United States. As far as South Korea, maybe.

---

wrong. Hawaii and parts of the US west coast are under the umbrella of known NK systems.

---

🇺🇸🇮🇱 Former US President Bill Clinton says Israeli PM Netanyahu wants a war with Iran so he can stay in office.

"Mr. Netanyahu has long wanted to fight Iran because that way he can stay in office." pic.twitter.com/MaFOy6Jrqt

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) June 21, 2025

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Iran rules out new nuclear talks until attacks stop

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg505kl3zpo

---

1st Iraq war: Congress voted.

Afghanistan War: Congress voted.

2nd Iraq War: Congress voted.

Syria War: Congress refused.

Let’s not pretend any President has authority to engage in a war without a vote and without funding from Congress. The Constitution requires we vote.

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) June 20, 2025

BREAKING:

Netanyahu says Iran still has around 28,000 ballistic missiles. pic.twitter.com/mylmXtcafK

— Globe Eye News (@GlobeEyeNews) June 20, 2025

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

BREAKING: Israel's missile defense systems could cost $200M+ per day according to WSJ.

— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) June 20, 2025

Per Grok:

Yes, the United States does fund a significant portion of Israel's missile defense systems, including those that could contribute to the reported $200 million+ daily operational costs mentioned in the post by Dominic Michael Tripi. Here's a breakdown based on the available data and recent context:

• Historical Funding: Since FY 2009, the U.S. has provided Israel with $3.4 billion for missile defense programs, including $1.3 billion specifically for the Iron Dome system starting in FY 2011, according to the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, from 2011 to 2022, the U.S. contributed $2.6 billion to the Iron Dome, as noted on Wikipedia, and has co-funded the Arrow missile program with investments ranging from $2.4 to $3.6 billion, covering 50-80% of the costs.
• Current Commitments: Under a 2019-2028 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the U.S. allocates $500 million annually for Israel's missile defense funding, alongside $3.3 billion for other military aid, per USAFacts. This funding supports systems like Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow, which are likely part of the high daily costs during active conflicts, such as the recent Iranian missile attacks reported last week.
• Recent Context: Given the intensified operations against Iran, as noted by Brig. Gen. (res.) Re'em Aminach's estimate of $1.45 billion spent in the first 48 hours (approximately $725 million daily), the U.S. likely continues to shoulder a substantial share. While exact daily contributions aren't specified, the U.S. has historically replenished Israel's missile stockse.g., a $3.5 billion deal for interceptors in 2023and emergency aid, like the $26.4 billion package approved in April 2024, suggests ongoing support during crises.
• Public Perception and Debate: The X thread reflects varied opinions, with users like
  @RnoHach
suggesting the U.S. pays "for it all," while others question the cost allocation (@DavidJamesMusic's "Cost who"). The web data confirms the U.S. as the primary financial backer, though Israel contributes annually (e.g., $65 million for Arrow) and uses its own budget for operations.

In summary, yes, the U.S. funds a significant portion of Israel's missile defense, likely covering a substantial fraction of the $200 million+ daily cost during active engagements, though the exact proportion varies with each conflict and depends on emergency appropriations. Given the current escalation, additional U.S. support is probable, aligning with longstanding policy to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge."

---

To me that's good spending. I'd rather spend saving lives, than creating wars, or joining wars.

I hope negotiators are just saying out loud what Trump seems to be thinking. You can dismantle your nuclear program, or we will bomb it. It needs to be crystal clear that it's not just rhetoric. Even fanatical zealots can sometimes understand reality.

And for the record, I don't think we should get involved, except to defend Israel, and restrain Israel to a reasonable campaign against the nuclear program; basically don't support Israel if it tries for regime change.

---

My issue is that is an astronomical amount of money that could be spent here on Americans who are struggling to survive and falling into dangerous addictions or suicide.

How many American lives here at home could that $200 million a day save if put to good use?

---

Nobody will disagree, but you could say the same thing about the entire defense budget. Why not nix it all, feed the impoverished, pay for everyone's college, and have medicare/aid cover everyone?

Military spending is done for a reason. We want to be so scary that nobody would ever mess with us. That saves all our lives.

---

We should cut the defense budget in half and start getting serious about paying down the debt.

It will bring back the value of the dollar and bring back prosperity for ALL Americans.

I dont buy the argument we are saving American lives by wasting trillions on foreign proxy wars.

Why is America spending more money hunting down Hamas than the Mexican cartels?

If you watch the riots in LA... they arent holding up Palestinian flags... they are holding up Mexican flags.

---

And there you have it. barBEAR has decided to balance the budget with suicidally bad foreign policy decisions.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

BREAKING: Israel's missile defense systems could cost $200M+ per day according to WSJ.

— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) June 20, 2025

Per Grok:

Yes, the United States does fund a significant portion of Israel's missile defense systems, including those that could contribute to the reported $200 million+ daily operational costs mentioned in the post by Dominic Michael Tripi. Here's a breakdown based on the available data and recent context:

• Historical Funding: Since FY 2009, the U.S. has provided Israel with $3.4 billion for missile defense programs, including $1.3 billion specifically for the Iron Dome system starting in FY 2011, according to the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, from 2011 to 2022, the U.S. contributed $2.6 billion to the Iron Dome, as noted on Wikipedia, and has co-funded the Arrow missile program with investments ranging from $2.4 to $3.6 billion, covering 50-80% of the costs.
• Current Commitments: Under a 2019-2028 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the U.S. allocates $500 million annually for Israel's missile defense funding, alongside $3.3 billion for other military aid, per USAFacts. This funding supports systems like Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow, which are likely part of the high daily costs during active conflicts, such as the recent Iranian missile attacks reported last week.
• Recent Context: Given the intensified operations against Iran, as noted by Brig. Gen. (res.) Re'em Aminach's estimate of $1.45 billion spent in the first 48 hours (approximately $725 million daily), the U.S. likely continues to shoulder a substantial share. While exact daily contributions aren't specified, the U.S. has historically replenished Israel's missile stockse.g., a $3.5 billion deal for interceptors in 2023and emergency aid, like the $26.4 billion package approved in April 2024, suggests ongoing support during crises.
• Public Perception and Debate: The X thread reflects varied opinions, with users like
  @RnoHach
suggesting the U.S. pays "for it all," while others question the cost allocation (@DavidJamesMusic's "Cost who"). The web data confirms the U.S. as the primary financial backer, though Israel contributes annually (e.g., $65 million for Arrow) and uses its own budget for operations.

In summary, yes, the U.S. funds a significant portion of Israel's missile defense, likely covering a substantial fraction of the $200 million+ daily cost during active engagements, though the exact proportion varies with each conflict and depends on emergency appropriations. Given the current escalation, additional U.S. support is probable, aligning with longstanding policy to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge."

---

To me that's good spending. I'd rather spend saving lives, than creating wars, or joining wars.

I hope negotiators are just saying out loud what Trump seems to be thinking. You can dismantle your nuclear program, or we will bomb it. It needs to be crystal clear that it's not just rhetoric. Even fanatical zealots can sometimes understand reality.

And for the record, I don't think we should get involved, except to defend Israel, and restrain Israel to a reasonable campaign against the nuclear program; basically don't support Israel if it tries for regime change.

---

My issue is that is an astronomical amount of money that could be spent here on Americans who are struggling to survive and falling into dangerous addictions or suicide.

How many American lives here at home could that $200 million a day save if put to good use?

---

Nobody will disagree, but you could say the same thing about the entire defense budget. Why not nix it all, feed the impoverished, pay for everyone's college, and have medicare/aid cover everyone?

Military spending is done for a reason. We want to be so scary that nobody would ever mess with us. That saves all our lives.

---

We should cut the defense budget in half and start getting serious about paying down the debt.

It will bring back the value of the dollar and bring back prosperity for ALL Americans.

I dont buy the argument we are saving American lives by wasting trillions on foreign proxy wars.

Why is America spending more money hunting down Hamas than the Mexican cartels?

If you watch the riots in LA... they arent holding up Palestinian flags... they are holding up Mexican flags.

---

And there you have it. barBEAR has decided to balance the budget with suicidally bad foreign policy decisions.

---

Correction...half the suicidally bad foreign policy decisions.

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wow, sounds like most on this Board are rooting for Iran...

Propaganda machine has done its job well.

---

boognish_bear said:

---

BREAKING:

Netanyahu says Iran still has around 28,000 ballistic missiles. pic.twitter.com/mylmXtcafK

— Globe Eye News (@GlobeEyeNews) June 20, 2025

---

KaiBear said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Iran rules out new nuclear talks until attacks stop

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg505kl3zpo

---

Time to unleash hell.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and likeminded ideologues in Washington are…

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 5, 2025

Is there anyone here willing to explain your support for initiating a war with Iran when Iran has made no credible threats toward the US homeland? Please raise your Israeli flags high and explain why Americans being financial slaves to Israel isnt enough for you... we actually need to go fight their wars and die for them too.

---

Let's see, the last time I heard a country was weeks, days away from a nuclear weapon was in the first Trump term. I guess they're still weeks away aren't they? Iran is going to develop a nuke, plain and simple, if allowed. Just like NK. Iran hates the US every bit as much as Israel. We haven't seen terrorism in this country like what can be dished out from a nuclear Iran with proxies. A simple dirty bomb would be devastating.

---

I don't really care if it's weeks away, months away or years away.... no Islamic nation should ever be allowed to have any kind of nuclear program.
Muslims cannot be trusted with such technology.
They have always been violent, rapists & aggressors. They must be kept in check.
If there is even the possibility of a nuclear program, it's justification to start bombing them into oblivion.

---

But we're not a xenophobic rogue nation acting with complete disregard for international law or anything...no, not us.

---