Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

The UK, France, and Australia have refused to send ships.

---

Strange since UK and Australia possess no oil productivity.

Oh well.


Destroy Iranian oil facilities.

Won't take much effort at all.

---

Why?

---

For the same reason we sank all of Japan's oil tankers during WW2

To cut off the life blood of their military and economy.

This is not remotely a tough decision.

---

I thought the purpose here was removing the nuclear threat... not slaughtering millions of people or raise the cost of oil to 100 a barrel.

Unlike Japan, Iran didnt attack America. America attacked Iran.

---

Iran has been attacking us for the better part of half a century.

---

That's news to me... I've lived in this country for the nearly 4 decades and never knew Iran had been attacking me this entire time. When did this happen? When did Iran attack American soil?

---

1979.

---

Pretty weak argument for Iran attacking us first if I'm being honest.... but you were unlikely to convince me just as I am unlikely to convince you.

---

I am not particularly worried about "who started it." You could go back to the 1950s when we helped to overthrow a government in Iran. I am more concerned about who will finish it.

Here are two statements:



1. The United States, as a matter of policy, will not allow Iran to become a nuclear power. This has been US policy for decades.

2. The end of the current Iranian government is the only viable way for the second statement to be true because it is not acceptable to the current Iranian government to NOT have nuclear weapons.

I don't blame the government of Iran for wanting nuclear weapons. Once they have them, they get a significant immunity boost. We, and South Korea, will not attack North Korea, even if China decided to cut them off because they have nukes. Iran knows this and they know nukes would give them a significant power upgrade. Iran would also be freed up to continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars promoting terrorism without threat of serious consequences. It makes a lot of sense for them, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for others.

The solution to the problem of Iran and nuclear weapons is the same as it was last year and the year before that: an end to the Islamic government.

One can reasonably debate whether a big military campaign is the best way to accomplish that goal, and one can debate whether the United States should have adopted a no nukes policy to begin with, but it is pretty clear that you are either going to have a nuclear armed Islamic government in Iran or you are going to have no Islamic government in Iran.

---

The only slight problem is that you're flying in the face of all available evidence.

Other than that, great analysis.

---

Who is it that you trust to know the extent of the Iranian nuclear program?

---

UN inspectors and US intelligence agencies.

---

I don't think that's unreasonable. But the people who know for sure are the Iraelis, right? Problem is you cannot trust what they say. Facts are not their mission, the survival of Israel is.

---

The expansion of Israel is their mission, though I suspect survival is a growing concern since the war started. I doubt they know any more about Iran's nuclear program than we do. They couldn't care less about it, in a sense. It's a pretext for action, and if they don't have proof, they're happy to lie.

---

That's not fair or accurate though. You could say that about Bibi but not the whole country. Survival is the priority for all of them, and yes for some, they see expansion as survival.

They are the only ones who probably have operatives in Iran's nuclear research program even now. Iran arrested dozens yesterday, I think it was, trying to root Israeli spies out.

You can accurately say that many Israelis use the theoretical nuclear Iran as a way to get what they want, but none of us really know how close to reality their nuclear capability is. Certainly not the UN inspectors. The UN isn't even sure how much nuclear material they have, so obviously they never knew where all of it was.

I can buy that they largely put a pause on nuclear weapons development at some point, and that Trump was too hasty in doing away with the treaty. Otherwise they'd have a nuke today. But I cannot buy that the UN knows the entire extent of their nuclear research.

---

The UN repeatedly reported that they did not have full access to inspect all of Iran's nuclear facilities. Their reports were always of what they saw, but with reservations. There was never definitive word on Iran's nuclear capability. This was pointed out to Sam from the UN website in other threads.

---

And I probably pointed out that when you say "full access," you're talking about demands that were far in excess of Iran's obligations (and Iran had complied with many of them nonetheless).

---

Even though the UN was concerned about not getting the obligated access.

---

I don't recall any evidence of that.

---

🚨#BREAKING: Officials say that President Donald Trump plans to take full control of the Strait of Hormuz by force, in a move that could also last several weeks

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) March 17, 2026

Doc Holliday said:

---

2 more weeks to flatten Iran

🚨#BREAKING: Officials say that President Donald Trump plans to take full control of the Strait of Hormuz by force, in a move that could also last several weeks

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) March 17, 2026

---

KUDLOW: China is the number one consumer of Iranian oil, so they have a huge stake in the Strait or Hormuz. Would they join the coalition to open the strait? We haven't had any luck with NATO

GREER: I don't know if they'll join, but I agree with you. Our hope is they'll be… pic.twitter.com/cRI921APJv

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 17, 2026

BREAKING: "Gulf states press US to neutralise Iran for good," per Reuters

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) March 17, 2026

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

National Counterterrorism Center resigns over Iran war

---

And you know what that means….

---

It means I don't post the link.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/national-counterterrorism-center-resigns-iran-war-rcna263692

---

What does his resignation mean? I don't know

---

Embarrassment in the near term. Probably not enough authority to impact the agency.

---

Another perspective:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/good-riddance/

At first blush, the resignation of America's Director of the National Counterterrorism Center in wartime indeed, in protest against a war with the world's foremost exporter of Islamist terror is an unnerving development. Fortunately, the former director, Joe Kent, authored an open letter explaining the thinking that led him to abandon his post. A cursory survey of his deliberative process should reassure trepidatious Americans that they're better off without him.

---

Kent is no snowflake. He was as MAGA as it gets until MAGA went full neocon.

---

Full neocon? What does that even mean?
A nuclear Iran is an imminent threat

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

National Counterterrorism Center resigns over Iran war

---

And you know what that means….

---

It means I don't post the link.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/national-counterterrorism-center-resigns-iran-war-rcna263692

---

What does his resignation mean? I don't know

---

Embarrassment in the near term. Probably not enough authority to impact the agency.

---

Another perspective:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/good-riddance/

At first blush, the resignation of America's Director of the National Counterterrorism Center in wartime indeed, in protest against a war with the world's foremost exporter of Islamist terror is an unnerving development. Fortunately, the former director, Joe Kent, authored an open letter explaining the thinking that led him to abandon his post. A cursory survey of his deliberative process should reassure trepidatious Americans that they're better off without him.

---

Kent is no snowflake. He was as MAGA as it gets until MAGA went full neocon.

---

Full neocon? What does that even mean?
A nuclear Iran is an imminent threat

---

Fully interventionist and on board with widespread regime change, which has been the goal for 30+ years.

Iran has a right to nuclear power under the NPT. There's no reason that has to lead to nuclear armaments or an imminent threat to the US.

---

Wangchung said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Things have just got real in Tel Aviv, and Israel. The actual pain and destruction have begun.

Earlier today, Iran targeted a train station in the center of the country. I didn't want to draw conclusions from it, and waited to see if it was the onset of something new.

Now,…

— Alon Mizrahi (@alon_mizrahi) March 17, 2026

---

Isn't it funny how we get reports in this thread about every successful hit that Iran makes, usually MULTIPLE posts about that one success, but none about the specifics of successful strikes by the U.S.? It's almost like a narrative is being pushed through omission.

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Cooper: The president seemed to indicate that he had not been briefed that Iran might strike out at its neighbors or try to shut down the strait of hormuz. Is that conceivable to you?

Bolton: I know for a fact that he was aware of those potentials. I raised the option of regime… pic.twitter.com/Kqm2xrxgQv

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 18, 2026

Cooper: The president seemed to indicate that he had not been briefed that Iran might strike out at its neighbors or try to shut down the strait of hormuz. Is that conceivable to you?

Bolton: I know for a fact that he was aware of those potentials. I raised the option of regime change in Iran several times during the time I was national security advisor. I never persuaded the president to adopt that position. And one reason was that others had different views. And every time I raised it, they raised a whole long list of difficulties that are entailed by a regime change campaign and if you're going to embark on it, you better have answers to them. And certainly, closing the strait of hormuz was always one of them. And so were attacks on the gulf Arab states, particularly their oil infrastructure. So he knew about it in his first term. I find it hard to believe that he forgot about it in the intervening years.

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Go back to my posts. We had excellent access under the JCPOA. Even after we ditched the agreement, Iran exceeded its obligations. There may have been some disagreements about the process, but we had a very good idea of what they had and what they were doing with it...unlike now.

---

Go back to the actual reports by the UN. I linked them in reply to your posts.

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

National Counterterrorism Center resigns over Iran war

---

And you know what that means….

---

It means I don't post the link.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/national-counterterrorism-center-resigns-iran-war-rcna263692

---

What does his resignation mean? I don't know

---

Embarrassment in the near term. Probably not enough authority to impact the agency.

---

Another perspective:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/good-riddance/

At first blush, the resignation of America's Director of the National Counterterrorism Center in wartime indeed, in protest against a war with the world's foremost exporter of Islamist terror is an unnerving development. Fortunately, the former director, Joe Kent, authored an open letter explaining the thinking that led him to abandon his post. A cursory survey of his deliberative process should reassure trepidatious Americans that they're better off without him.

---

Kent is no snowflake. He was as MAGA as it gets until MAGA went full neocon.

---

Full neocon? What does that even mean?
A nuclear Iran is an imminent threat

---

Fully interventionist and on board with widespread regime change, which has been the goal for 30+ years.

Iran has a right to nuclear power under the NPT. There's no reason that has to lead to nuclear armaments or an imminent threat to the US.

---

Iran's habit of hiding elements of their nuclear program and enriching uranium well beyond anything that would be appropriate for civilian use, it seems to be reasonable to expect it to lead to nuclear armaments.

At the very least they wanted to be able to threaten to create nuclear weapons very quickly.

Should you wait until they actually have the weapons to decide to do something about it?

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Things have just got real in Tel Aviv, and Israel. The actual pain and destruction have begun.

Earlier today, Iran targeted a train station in the center of the country. I didn't want to draw conclusions from it, and waited to see if it was the onset of something new.

Now,…

— Alon Mizrahi (@alon_mizrahi) March 17, 2026

---

Isn't it funny how we get reports in this thread about every successful hit that Iran makes, usually MULTIPLE posts about that one success, but none about the specifics of successful strikes by the U.S.? It's almost like a narrative is being pushed through omission.

---

Doubtful. How many trusted media members are in Iran right now ready to go check military sites to see if we have hit them? You are right that the flow of information is one sided, but I don't blame journalists for not being suicidal.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Go back to my posts. We had excellent access under the JCPOA. Even after we ditched the agreement, Iran exceeded its obligations. There may have been some disagreements about the process, but we had a very good idea of what they had and what they were doing with it...unlike now.

---

Go back to the actual reports by the UN. I linked them in reply to your posts.

---

I know how to link UN reports too. The question is whether they support your argument.

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Cooper: The president seemed to indicate that he had not been briefed that Iran might strike out at its neighbors or try to shut down the strait of hormuz. Is that conceivable to you?

Bolton: I know for a fact that he was aware of those potentials. I raised the option of regime… pic.twitter.com/Kqm2xrxgQv

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 18, 2026

Cooper: The president seemed to indicate that he had not been briefed that Iran might strike out at its neighbors or try to shut down the strait of hormuz. Is that conceivable to you?

Bolton: I know for a fact that he was aware of those potentials. I raised the option of regime change in Iran several times during the time I was national security advisor. I never persuaded the president to adopt that position. And one reason was that others had different views. And every time I raised it, they raised a whole long list of difficulties that are entailed by a regime change campaign and if you're going to embark on it, you better have answers to them. And certainly, closing the strait of hormuz was always one of them. And so were attacks on the gulf Arab states, particularly their oil infrastructure. So he knew about it in his first term. I find it hard to believe that he forgot about it in the intervening years.

---

It is easy to believe he forgot, and also that he consulted so few people about starting this war, that nobody brought these scenarios up this time.

The founders were not idiots. They thought Congress should declare wars like this, not 1 guy and his yes men.

---

🚨 Breaking: Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has been assassinated in northern Tehran. https://t.co/T1col6ED1L

— The Middle East (@A_M_R_M1) March 17, 2026

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Go back to my posts. We had excellent access under the JCPOA. Even after we ditched the agreement, Iran exceeded its obligations. There may have been some disagreements about the process, but we had a very good idea of what they had and what they were doing with it...unlike now.

---

Go back to the actual reports by the UN. I linked them in reply to your posts.

---

I know how to link UN reports too. The question is whether they support your argument.

---

The question is, why are you unable to accept that you might be wrong, or your opinion might turn out to be off when you have been given receipts from the source.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Things have just got real in Tel Aviv, and Israel. The actual pain and destruction have begun.

Earlier today, Iran targeted a train station in the center of the country. I didn't want to draw conclusions from it, and waited to see if it was the onset of something new.

Now,…

— Alon Mizrahi (@alon_mizrahi) March 17, 2026

---

Isn't it funny how we get reports in this thread about every successful hit that Iran makes, usually MULTIPLE posts about that one success, but none about the specifics of successful strikes by the U.S.? It's almost like a narrative is being pushed through omission.

---

Doubtful. How many trusted media members are in Iran right now ready to go check military sites to see if we have hit them? You are right that the flow of information is one sided, but I don't blame journalists for not being suicidal.

---

Considering that 80+ percent of our targets are civilian, the media wouldn't really be doing Trump any favor by reporting on them.

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Things have just got real in Tel Aviv, and Israel. The actual pain and destruction have begun.

Earlier today, Iran targeted a train station in the center of the country. I didn't want to draw conclusions from it, and waited to see if it was the onset of something new.

Now,…

— Alon Mizrahi (@alon_mizrahi) March 17, 2026

---

Isn't it funny how we get reports in this thread about every successful hit that Iran makes, usually MULTIPLE posts about that one success, but none about the specifics of successful strikes by the U.S.? It's almost like a narrative is being pushed through omission.

---

Doubtful. How many trusted media members are in Iran right now ready to go check military sites to see if we have hit them? You are right that the flow of information is one sided, but I don't blame journalists for not being suicidal.

---

Considering that 80+ percent of our targets are civilian, the media wouldn't really be doing Trump any favor by reporting on them.

---

80+ percent. How would you purport to know that if media isn't reporting on it?

---

🚨 Breaking: Israeli officials have begun directly contacting Iranian field commanders, threatening them and their families if they do not side with the people in the event of an uprising against the regime.

According to the Wall Street Journal, one such call involved a senior…

— The Middle East (@A_M_R_M1) March 18, 2026

You're a real piece of shit.

How many Bronze Stars did you earn? Joe has 6.
How many years did you serve? Joe served 20.
How many tours in combat did you serve? Joe did 11 combat deployments.
Did your kids lose their mom in combat? Joe's did.

How many of these do you have:… https://t.co/y5zceswTkM pic.twitter.com/BgSQUFG0Eg

— Loren Culp (@LorenCulp) March 17, 2026

KaiBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Kent did this correctly. If your boss is going in directions you can't support and won't listen to your advice, you resign. You don't resist and undermine like the embedded democrats do.

He's setting himself up for some good talk show money if he choses to go that route.

The conflict drags on. Trump desperately needs oil flow to continue through the straight for political reasons. I'm wondering why we don't escort ships through. I suspect it's currently too risky for our very expensive naval ships. Even if Japan was to mobilize their navy (which is probably modest) how long would it take to get there?

Iran is like if we are going down, we are going to make everyone feel the pain. Is droning the Gulf countries igoing to backfire? We will see.

This is going to really strain relations within NATO and the Ukraine war. Next time Ukraine comes with its hand out, I suspect Trump is going to send them to Europe and rightfully so.

---

The US economy has its own oil reserves.

Japan, India , China and most of Europe are the ones that need access through the Straits the most.

Past time to bomb Iranian oil facilities.

It's the obvious target.

---

Squeezing out Iranian supply squeezes everyone's supply, and thus price inflation.

---

Good grief......it s real ****ing war we are dealing with.

The goal is regime change otherwise these mullah's are going to just keep up their crap.

Bomb the Iranian oil fields and the locals will demand a new government when they begin to go hungry.

Really think the United States gave a **** about price inflaction when we were sinking the huge Japanese oil tanker fleet ?

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

A March 11 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies said that 20 to 30 percent of global fertilizer exports, including about 35 percent, of urea shipments, transited the Strait of Hormuz in 2023.

---

We can't make more than half our own urea! What are we doing to ourselves?

Is our livestock not producing enough?
Do we need beer drinkers to donate?


"In 2024, the United States produced approximately
5.8 million tons of urea, with domestic production rising by about 3.2% compared to 2023. While production increased, the U.S. remained a significant importer, with imports reaching 5.1 million tons to meet high demand."

---

It wasn't a problem until we made it a problem.

The theory of "competitive advantage" states that you specialize in the areas that you have an advantage. As a nation, we were doing that brilliantly, until…

---

Comparative.

But to add to your point, we were also able to manipulate others comparative advantage due to our consumption power and currency.

---

What are your thoughts on Iran pushing yuan for oil. What impact do you see on the US?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Go back to my posts. We had excellent access under the JCPOA. Even after we ditched the agreement, Iran exceeded its obligations. There may have been some disagreements about the process, but we had a very good idea of what they had and what they were doing with it...unlike now.

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

You're a real piece of shit.

How many Bronze Stars did you earn? Joe has 6.
How many years did you serve? Joe served 20.
How many tours in combat did you serve? Joe did 11 combat deployments.
Did your kids lose their mom in combat? Joe's did.

How many of these do you have:… https://t.co/y5zceswTkM pic.twitter.com/BgSQUFG0Eg

— Loren Culp (@LorenCulp) March 17, 2026

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Kent did this correctly. If your boss is going in directions you can't support and won't listen to your advice, you resign. You don't resist and undermine like the embedded democrats do.

He's setting himself up for some good talk show money if he choses to go that route.

The conflict drags on. Trump desperately needs oil flow to continue through the straight for political reasons. I'm wondering why we don't escort ships through. I suspect it's currently too risky for our very expensive naval ships. Even if Japan was to mobilize their navy (which is probably modest) how long would it take to get there?

Iran is like if we are going down, we are going to make everyone feel the pain. Is droning the Gulf countries igoing to backfire? We will see.

This is going to really strain relations within NATO and the Ukraine war. Next time Ukraine comes with its hand out, I suspect Trump is going to send them to Europe and rightfully so.

---

The US economy has its own oil reserves.

Japan, India , China and most of Europe are the ones that need access through the Straits the most.

Past time to bomb Iranian oil facilities.

It's the obvious target.

---

Squeezing out Iranian supply squeezes everyone's supply, and thus price inflation.

---

Good grief......it s real ****ing war we are dealing with.

The goal is regime change otherwise these mullah's are going to just keep up their crap.

Bomb the Iranian oil fields and the locals will demand a new government when they begin to go hungry.

Really think the United States gave a **** about price inflaction when we were sinking the huge Japanese oil tanker fleet ?

---

When the boots hit the ground is when the war becomes really real. Perhaps understanding it isn't oil keeping them in power would be a good perspective for you. This is a nation that has spent decades under economic hardship. They are beholden to an ideology, and our Israeli bilateral war with them confirms to many their Friday prayer chants. You'd serve the purpose of regime change more by carpet bombing Tehran and Qom than taking out oil facilities. There's no appetite for such brutality, so if you just want to aggravate the global economic situation thus putting more pressure on the US to pull out, then sure, take out their oil infrastructure.

---

Prime Minister Starmer wants to give President Trump advice about our fight with Iran.

That’s like taking advice from a nun about sex. pic.twitter.com/OE05TRUSVB

— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) March 17, 2026

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Things have just got real in Tel Aviv, and Israel. The actual pain and destruction have begun.

Earlier today, Iran targeted a train station in the center of the country. I didn't want to draw conclusions from it, and waited to see if it was the onset of something new.

Now,…

— Alon Mizrahi (@alon_mizrahi) March 17, 2026

---

Isn't it funny how we get reports in this thread about every successful hit that Iran makes, usually MULTIPLE posts about that one success, but none about the specifics of successful strikes by the U.S.? It's almost like a narrative is being pushed through omission.

---

Doubtful. How many trusted media members are in Iran right now ready to go check military sites to see if we have hit them? You are right that the flow of information is one sided, but I don't blame journalists for not being suicidal.

---