Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.

---

Tell me you never served without using those words ...

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.

---

Tell me you never served without using those words ...

---

I never worked at Applebee's, if that's what you mean.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.

---

Tell me you never served without using those words ...

---

I never worked at Applebee's, if that's what you mean.

---

You escaped having a boss ask you to wear more flair, then.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.

---

Tell me you never served without using those words ...

---

I never worked at Applebee's, if that's what you mean.

---

You escaped having a boss ask you to wear more flair, then.

---

It did happen once. Once.

---

Johnny Dangerously?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied."

Sounds like you have never negotiated with an Iranian. The three things you can count on, in negotiating with an Iranian, are 1) they have no reason to hurry things, 2) they will not publicly confirm a private agreement, especially if denying it embarrasses their opponent, and 3) the people representing Iran right now, might well not be in power in the near future. They may also delay to gain some personal security for themselves along the way.

Porterosso: "Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?"

Now this is funny. Your side has accused the US of mindless brutality and warned of the cost of occupation. Yet you mock the idea of us negotiating a settlement which saves lives.

---

You're off the mark, as usual. I seriously think we should only negotiate if we think the result will be honored. Does no good to negotiate with someone who cannot get the IRGC to stop shooting at oil tankers.

Also, Trump is famous for bringing up the cost of the Middle East wars. Stop the charade that it's all some Obama plot any time we talk about tax dollars at work, this "your side" drivel. Try to be better.

---

You're bickering because you know I am on the mark (as usual, in these matters).

I notice you can't admit when you get caught in your contradiction. Not a surprise, though.

---

pic.twitter.com/WPrYW3OzCE

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 19, 2026

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied."

Sounds like you have never negotiated with an Iranian. The three things you can count on, in negotiating with an Iranian, are 1) they have no reason to hurry things, 2) they will not publicly confirm a private agreement, especially if denying it embarrasses their opponent, and 3) the people representing Iran right now, might well not be in power in the near future. They may also delay to gain some personal security for themselves along the way.

Porterosso: "Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?"

Now this is funny. Your side has accused the US of mindless brutality and warned of the cost of occupation. Yet you mock the idea of us negotiating a settlement which saves lives.

---

You're off the mark, as usual. I seriously think we should only negotiate if we think the result will be honored. Does no good to negotiate with someone who cannot get the IRGC to stop shooting at oil tankers.

Also, Trump is famous for bringing up the cost of the Middle East wars. Stop the charade that it's all some Obama plot any time we talk about tax dollars at work, this "your side" drivel. Try to be better.

---

You're bickering because you know I am on the mark (as usual, in these matters).

I notice you can't admit when you get caught in your contradiction. Not a surprise, though.

---

Point out the contradiction you argumentative wimp.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons while it loses men and face?

There are two rational possibilities:

1) Iran is selling this claim to garner some credibility in its negotiations; or

2) Iran is receiving drones and missiles from China, and wants to disguise the relationship as much as possible.

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Hardliners still in charge. At least a couple more weeks of blockade it appears.

---

You really think it will change?

If they closed the Strait, there was a deal cut with Russia or China by Iran.

They are playing for Europe and China to get involved. Europe and Asia are the ones hurting by this. Trump going to cave when Xi talks to him, like last time?

---

Nobody's in charge.

Iran's survival strategy was to decentralize, to silo forces around the country into semi-autonomous units with an action plan that did not require constant command & control from central authority. Our bombing then removed much of the central authority, who had no role except to emerge from a hole and say "coast is clear now, resume normal operations." But there is no credible central authority at the moment. So now you've got generals on the periphery who've never met the people operating the political apparatus. The analogy would be....State, DOD, CIA, NSC, DHS all exist in tension with one another, each with its own mission, own needs, own perspectives. Rarely do they all line up seamlessly, particularly so with State whose perspectives are shaped by a total lack of means to force anything to resolution. So what happens when you remove the Head of State, the entire cabinet plus all the Deputies, plus all the Deputy Assistants, plus all the Congressional leadership? The answer is....chaos. Not one of them has authority to issue orders to the others, so they tend to function on their best interpretation of last orders, the interpretation being shaped by their own real but parochial interests. Dr. Strangelove-esque......

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

BREAKING: Iran's Tasnim says the country currently has "no decision" to send a negotiating team to meet with the US in Pakistan "as long as there is a US naval blockade."

Just 2 hours ago, President Trump said the US and Iran would be meeting in Pakistan tomorrow.

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 19, 2026

🚨 BREAKING: President Trump tells FOX News' @TreyYingst that this is the "last chance" for Iran to agree to a deal, vowing to not make the same mistake as former President Obama.

"If Iran does not sign this deal, the whole country is getting blown up," Trump said. pic.twitter.com/u5679L8AnR

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 19, 2026

BREAKING: President Trump announces US representatives are going to Pakistan to meet with Iran for a second round of negotiations tomorrow.

Trump says if Iran does not make a deal, "the US is going to knock out every single power plant and every single bridge in Iran." pic.twitter.com/14Ae2Eq3hA

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 19, 2026

JUST IN:

US navy has deployed autonomous underwater drones to the Strait of Hormuz to clear sea mines placed by Iran, aiming to reopen the critical shipping lane – WSJ pic.twitter.com/V9YnU7GZij

— Current Report (@Currentreport1) April 19, 2026

Europe is in a full-blown energy crisis.

In fact, Europe's energy crisis has gotten so bad that the European Commission is now recommending Europeans to work from home.

They are also recommending using public transportation to cut fossil fuel use.

Meanwhile, new IEA data shows…

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 19, 2026

Realitybites said:

---

Well, looks like the on-again off-again Jewish Jihad is back on.

---

BREAKING: Iran has rejected taking part in the second round of negotiations with the US, per Iranian state media.

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 19, 2026

Strait of Hormuz is Open!
Strait of Hormuz is Closed!
Open! Closed! pic.twitter.com/EyysWrTFdR

— GrrrGraphics 🇺🇸- Ben & Tina Garrison Cartoons (@GrrrGraphics) April 18, 2026

boognish_bear said:

---

Strait of Hormuz is Open!
Strait of Hormuz is Closed!
Open! Closed! pic.twitter.com/EyysWrTFdR

— GrrrGraphics 🇺🇸- Ben & Tina Garrison Cartoons (@GrrrGraphics) April 18, 2026

---

It’s believed Iran has enough highly enriched uranium to make at least 10 nuclear bombs. What would it take for the U.S. to secure it? Sunday, 60 Minutes reports on a past covert mission code-named Project Sapphire that could be a blueprint for a similar operation in Iran.… pic.twitter.com/9qYUCnlXQJ

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) April 19, 2026

POTUS is laying out two courses of action—a negotiated settlement, or a major escalation.

There is a third option, and he should take it: recognize there is no way to force a positive outcome and simply leave.

The region is not ours to fix. President Reagan chose this path in… pic.twitter.com/5ovi05FdwE

— Joe Kent (@joekent16jan19) April 19, 2026

FLBear5630 said:

---

But, Reagan was an adult.

---

BREAKING: Syria releases footage of them seizing and arresting Hezbollah operatives and their equipment.

A new Middle East is on the horizon. pic.twitter.com/c1sAksJOwd

— Eyal Yakoby (@EYakoby) April 19, 2026

TRUMP ON IRAN: CONCEPT OF THE DEAL DONE — AXIOS

— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) April 19, 2026