Breaking: Trump was told an attack on Iran wouldn't guarantee the collapse of the regime, and that the U.S. needed more firepower in the region. https://t.co/XQaBfUwMxN

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) January 15, 2026

The_barBEARian said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

In the wake of U.S. threats of military action against Iran if protesters there are killed while demonstrating against the Iranian government, 70% of voters think the U.S. should not get involved, while 18% think the U.S. should take military action…https://t.co/BPd2RBdEk3

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) January 15, 2026

---

Count me in the 70%

---

For me it depends on how involved we are talking.

Bush era land wars and regime change occupations that take a decade and costs trillions? Heck no

Trump type shock attack or special operations night abduction with some kind of missile strike on leadership to destabilize the Regime? Far more open to that kind of limited intervention

---

It may be a golden opportunity to take care of a wart on the ass of humanity.

Some well placed bombs by CIA/Mossad assets and a few tomahawks could go a long way.

I'm definitely not in favor of anything large scale.

---

Why?

Why do we give a **** who is in charge of Iran?

The more I think about Greenland... the more I support a military intervention there if it leads to the destruction of NATO, the EU, and the left wing, globalist authoritarian governments all across Europe who are ethnically replacing the native people.

If war in Greenland precipitated a well-spring of nationalist, pro-native populations of Europe uprisings and regime changes - I would fully support it.

**** fighting sand people wars in the middle east. Focus on America and the restoring nationalism to Europe and the Anglosphere.

---

Because I'm sick and tired of hearing about the regime's antics and support for global terror networks. They are in a weakened state currently and the time may be right. I have a hard time believing whatever would emerge from there would be worse that what is there now, but I suppose its possible. They currently are a destabilizing force in the ME we always seem to have to worry about.

We have all but declared war on them anyway with the bombing and the such. If Biden was pres, in no way wuld I want any action for fear his administration would find 10 ways to screw it up. Hell, they would probably bail out the regime with taxpayer money. But Trump has shown, in general, to execute sound plans better.