Defending the indefensible

Israel has become well-known for its pre-emptive first strikes. There’s no concept of ‘defence’.

As Israel doesn’t seem to mind this aggressive reputation, it struck Iran first. The US, therefore, could have plausible deniability of starting a war.

“Iran also launched new strikes targeting US military installations in Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar.” UAE, Saudi Arabia and Iraq also hold US bases. Were any of these countries warned they were in danger before the airstrikes? Being friends with the US is a dangerous position.

What amazes me is that any Middle Eastern country bends over to the US by allowing bases on its soil.

The death of Iran’s supreme leader is a significant early success in the joint US-Israeli operation.

Murder of a foreign leader can now be called a “success”! Translation:

Netanyahu said that Israeli strikes had also killed “several leaders” involved in the Iranian nuclear programme and that strikes against sites linked to the programme would continue in the coming days.

Translation: We have the bomb so you can’t.

NO country should have nuclear weapons—that’s just common sense. There’s no defence against the possibility of a madman. So ignore it.

Trump claimed Operation Epic Fury would end a security threat to the US.

Israel is your boss hahahahahahahah

21 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Israel is your boss hahahahahahahah

Do you realize Israel is trumps boss?

55555555555

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Trump claimed Operation Epic Fury would end a security threat to the US.

What security threat? As trump himself told us, the Iranian nuclear program was obliterated just a few months ago.

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

What security threat? As trump himself told us, the Iranian nuclear program was obliterated just a few months ago.

But you forgot he had a feeling the USA might be attacked although Hegseth said that was a lie.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

There’s no concept of ‘defence’.

Yes, there is.

Otherwise, they would just go around attacking anybody and everybody indiscriminately.

There is a long list of countries the US will never attack. And that's because they stay in their lane and are not sh*t disturbers and threats.

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

What security threat? As trump himself told us, the Iranian nuclear program was obliterated just a few months ago.

They don't explain military strategy in the mainstream media.

it's not really a nuclear threat.

but I heard sth about China arming them with powerful supersonic Mach 3 missiles. or planning to.

also, they funded Hamas and Hezbollah. which are constant threats.

47 minutes ago, jvs said:

Do you realize Israel is trumps boss?

55555555555

Well yeah. If you are going to be bossed, be bossed by the best.

Thats why they are the boss. Your fear is true. Israel rules the world

11 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Yes, there is.

Otherwise, they would just go around attacking anybody and everybody indiscriminately.

There is a long list of countries the US will never attack. And that's because they stay in their lane and are not sh*t disturbers and threats.

Exactly. Iran earned this beating over the past 47 years. Sucks to be them.

Who is next.

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Who is next.

According to this clue in the Jerusalem post, Erdogan / Turkey maybe.

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-830560

Why Erdogan’s Turkey undermines US and NATO security interests - opinion

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

Erdogan in Turkiye maybe ? Not sure.

Pivot back to Ukraine. Bad for business.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Defending the indefensible

There was constant threat of countries in Europe attacking each other before the EU was formed, wasn't there?

So how did Germany get away with attacking Poland? Either Poland was caught off guard or ... ? You never know who will attack who and some countries prefer to nip it in the bud rather than wait.

Maybe they have learned from history.

23 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Who is next.

Cuba.

Calling it a possible "friendly takeover" , whatever that means.

13 hours ago, save the frogs said:

There was constant threat of countries in Europe attacking each other before the EU was formed, wasn't there?

So how did Germany get away with attacking Poland? Either Poland was caught off guard or ... ? You never know who will attack who and some countries prefer to nip it in the bud rather than wait.

Maybe they have learned from history.

Germany attacked Poland when they were both EU members? When was that?

1 minute ago, RayC said:

Germany attacked Poland when they were both EU members? When was that?

Before EU.

No I mean the formation of EU has minimized war.

2 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Before EU.

No I mean the formation of EU has minimized war.

Thanks for clarification. I agree.