30 minutes ago, JerryM said:

National Security Strategy

of the United States of America

November 2025

America will always have core interests in ensuring that Gulf energy supplies do

not fall into the hands of an outright enemy, that the Strait of Hormuz remain open,

that the Red Sea remain navigable, that the region not be an incubator or exporter

of terror against American interests or the American homeland, and that Israel

remain secure. We can and must address this threat ideologically and militarily

without decades of fruitless “nation-building” wars. We also have a clear interest in

expanding the Abraham Accords to more nations in the region and to other

countries in the Muslim world.

But the days in which the Middle East dominated American foreign policy in both

long-term planning and day-to-day execution are thankfully over—not because the

Middle East no longer matters, but because it is no longer the constant irritant, and potential source of imminent catastrophe, that it once was.

It is rather emerging as a place of partnership, friendship, and investment—a trend that should be welcomed and encouraged. In fact, President Trump’s ability to unite the Arab world at Sharm el-Sheikh in pursuit of peace and normalization will allow the

United States to finally prioritize American interests.

pages 28-29 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf

The only problem in the Middle East is Israel, if that State had not been created years of conflict would have disappeared years ago.

The USA has been there main sponsor, armourer, and financier from the beginning.

Empire's from the beginning of time have managed to cock this region up every time, the Romans, Otterman, British and the latest one , the USA. To be fair, the last two are/were only there for the oil, both of which have plenty of their own.

The white mans burden is the white man, anyone else is beneath them and must be subjugated. Racism at its finest.

Let us not forget Religion, there is no imaginary friend waiting for you when you shuffle off this mortal coil, no virgins, flying around heaven, or the red hot coals of hell, there are no chosen people, either.

25 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

The only problem in the Middle East is Israel, if that State had not been created years of conflict would have disappeared years ago.

The USA has been there main sponsor, armourer, and financier from the beginning.

Empire's from the beginning of time have managed to cock this region up every time, the Romans, Otterman, British and the latest one , the USA. To be fair, the last two are/were only there for the oil, both of which have plenty of their own.

The white mans burden is the white man, anyone else is beneath them and must be subjugated. Racism at its finest.

Let us not forget Religion, there is no imaginary friend waiting for you when you shuffle off this mortal coil, no virgins, flying around heaven, or the red hot coals of hell, there are no chosen people, either.

Which means you're on Iran's side in what they've done over the years, or haven't been listening? Link provided. Oil is not the only reason America is there, but that's an easy assumption seeing the Middle East is a huge oil supplier.

This has nothing to do with being a white man's thing, as America is all types in one place, which for the most part get along, besides the usual suspects.

As far as religion, it's best not to argue on that, as there are many who will be surprised when they pass on to other places when they die..,.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism

13 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Which means you're on Iran's side in what they've done over the years, or haven't been listening? Link provided. Oil is not the only reason America is there, but that's an easy assumption seeing the Middle East is a huge oil supplier.

This has nothing to do with being a white man's thing, as America is all types in one place, which for the most part get along, besides the usual suspects.

As far as religion, it's best not to argue on that, as there are many who will be surprised when they pass on to other places when they die..,.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism

This from the guy who uses the term 'armchair quarterback' against others. For balance, why not list the state sponsored terrorism of Israel and the USA? Or is everything they do for the good of the world, whilst everything that Iran does is for bad reasons?

Is that what you believe? That Iranians are just bad people? Please do not separate the people from their leaders...

As you can see, no matter how disgusting and depraved the leaders, they have their supporters.

So again, do you think America acts for good or for self interest? Do you think Iran only acts in bad faith or to protect their interests?

12 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Which means you're on Iran's side in what they've done over the years, or haven't been listening? Link provided. Oil is not the only reason America is there, but that's an easy assumption seeing the Middle East is a huge oil supplier.

This has nothing to do with being a white man's thing, as America is all types in one place, which for the most part get along, besides the usual suspects.

As far as religion, it's best not to argue on that, as there are many who will be surprised when they pass on to other places when they die..,.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism

I'm on the side of the Human Race, fed up with listening to BS.

So excluding the oil, why are the USA there?

The USA was built on getting rid of the Redman and being Black, Brown or Yellow has always been fantastic as long as you have money, otherwise they are at best tolerated, as long as they know there place.

Religion, don't make me laugh, so funny.

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

This from the guy who uses the term 'armchair quarterback' against others. For balance, why not list the state sponsored terrorism of Israel and the USA? Or is everything they do for the good of the world, whilst everything that Iran does is for bad reasons?

Is that what you believe? That Iranians are just bad people? Please do not separate the people from their leaders...

As you can see, no matter how disgusting and depraved the leaders, they have their supporters.

So again, do you think America acts for good or for self interest? Do you think Iran only acts in bad faith or to protect their interests?

You see, there's that lack of comprehension and skimming you do. Now go back and see that I'm all for Iran's citizens first. I've never said anything against Iran's people but hope for their survival. Iran's government isn't all bad, as anyone has this information, and has all along.

That should answer your mistakes, unless you come back and try the usual insults and demeaning of a person who's so far ahead of your thinking it's laughable.

Better yet, go back and look at what I've said all along and make believe someone else said it, as it's much the same as many others here, including richard, who goes further into explaining things yet also gets thumbs down because he is telling the truth and some don't understand. That would leave out your personal attacks because I proved to you that New Jersey Pizza was as good as Italy's on average, which started all of your crapola against me as NowNow long ago.

Trump made another one of his enormous strategic errors by not backing off when a Iran agreed to reopen the strait, it would have helped to settle down the economic chaos, things would have simmered down and a deal might have been possible.

But being the highly unintelligent man he is, being the klutz and the bull in the China closet that he is, he just couldn't help but continue his bullying, his ranting, his raving and his insanity, and he completely screwed up any chances of peace. Those kind of tactics might work with Equatorial Guinea, but they're certainly not going to work with Iran.

Trump does not have the talent to negotiate his way out of a paper bag, and he's always been in completely over his head with Iran. Sending the completely talentless nimwits Vance, Witkoff and Kushner team to Iran was anything but helpful. They are deeply disliked and universally disrespected.

4 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

I'm on the side of the Human Race, fed up with listening to BS.

So excluding the oil, why are the USA there?

The USA was built on getting rid of the Redman and being Black, Brown or Yellow has always been fantastic as long as you have money, otherwise they are at best tolerated, as long as they know there place.

Religion, don't make me laugh, so funny.

Maybe to stop Iran's regime from killing innocent people for speaking their minds, or perhaps to prevent a megalomaniac leadership from developing nuclear weapons they might use against who knows, all because their insane thinking differs from many of the free worlds.

What the US did in it's infancy is exactly what all other countries did to get their land, and which some are still doing.

7 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

You see, there's that lack of comprehension and skimming you do. Now go back and see that I'm all for Iran's citizens first. I've never said anything against Iran's people but hope for their survival. Iran's government isn't all bad, as anyone has this information, and has all along.

That should answer your mistakes, unless you come back and try the usual insults and demeaning of a person who's so far ahead of your thinking it's laughable.

Better yet, go back and look at what I've said all along and make believe someone else said it, as it's much the same as many others here, including richard, who goes further into explaining things yet also gets thumbs down because he is telling the truth and some don't understand. That would leave out your personal attacks because I proved to you that New Jersey Pizza was as good as Italy's on average, which started all of your crapola against me as NowNow long ago.

Can you not control yourself from descending into mad and irrelevant ranting?

I didn't see anything from you with regard for Iranian citizens. No one needs to search your posting history for that. Make it clear on every occasion. But of course you don't care at all. You just give lip service, without doing even the most cursory of research to look from the other side.

You don't have a balanced mind. A balanced mind will look at both sides before making a decision. Whereas you have picked a side and are sticking with it, come what may. That makes you the equivalent of a mad extremist. Exactly the thing of which you accuse Iranians. Only you think you are the normal one and they are mad. That's how extremism works. Deciding that you are right and anyone who doesn't see it your way, is wrong.

Look at both sides and then make a decision. Look at it from the side of normal Iranian people. Look at who and what has tried to control and influence their country. Don't just consider your country the supreme arbiter of what is right and wrong. Think for yourself. You are not able to do that, because you are totally closed minded. You have hardly been anywhere else other than the USA, but you still think that you know everything better because you read it somewhere. You think that the USA is all nations in one. You are totally deluded. But it's all you know.

13 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

megalomaniac leadership

You mean like the USA and Israel? Are you blind, deaf and dumb? is someone posting here for you?

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Can you not control yourself from descending into mad and irrelevant ranting?

I didn't see anything from you with regard for Iranian citizens. No one needs to search your posting history for that. Make it clear on every occasion. But of course you don't care at all. You just give lip service, without doing even the most cursory of research to look from the other side.

You don't have a balanced mind. A balanced mind will look at both sides before making a decision. Whereas you have picked a side and are sticking with it, come what may. That makes you the equivalent of a mad extremist. Exactly the thing of which you accuse Iranians. Only you think you are the normal one and they are mad. That's how extremism works. Deciding that you are right and anyone who doesn't see it your way, is wrong.

Look at both sides and then make a decision. Look at it from the side of normal Iranian people. Look at who and what has tried to control and influence their country. Don't just consider your country the supreme arbiter of what is right and wrong. Think for yourself. You are not able to do that, because you are totally closed minded. You have hardly been anywhere else other than the USA, but you still think that you know everything better because you read it somewhere. You think that the USA is all nations in one. You are totally deluded. But it's all you know.

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

1

Can you not understand that ranting has always been the wrong word? You didn't see because you didn't look, or you looked but can't understand simple written words. Or possibly skimmed yet again. In almost every reply I've made, it's been wanting Iran's people free from the regime that's been killing them for decades.

You simply cannot make a reply without multiple assumptions or cutdowns, as you again did here which shows mental illness. It's too bad you can't comprehend what people say here, and only fill in your own blanks with your nonsense and insults.

Once again, you aren't that bright, and your constant assumptions proves this time and time again. You use the wrong words, which means your vocabulary needs some bolstering.

I've never seen such an ignorant adult in my life, even though I've interacted with many other narcissists. At least they were intelligent enough to stop while they were behind and move elsewhere. You've been proven wrong every single time, and called out on your incessant trolling, yet haven't the common sense to just go away while you're behind.

Everyone here sees how you deflect, which shows that low self esteem brought on from childhood abuse. Now, just go away, as I'm finished with your childlike whimpering.

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Can you not understand that ranting has always been the wrong word? You didn't see because you didn't look, or you looked but can't understand simple written words. Or possibly skimmed yet again. In almost every reply I've made, it's been wanting Iran's people free from the regime that's been killing them for decades. You simply cannot make a reply without multiple assumptions or cutdown,as you again did here which shows mental illness. It's too bad you can't comprehend what people say here, and only fill in your own blanks with your nonsense and insults.

Once again, you aren't that bright, and your constant assumptions proves this time and time again. You use the wrong words, which means your vocabulary needs some bolstering.

I've never seen such an ignorant adult in my life, even though I've interacted with many other narcissists. At least they were intelligent enough to stop while they were behind and move elsewhere. You've been proven wrong every single time, and called out on your incessant trolling, yet haven't the common sense to just go away while you're behind. Now, just go away, as I'm finished with your child like whimpering.

195 words. How many on topic? Ranting is the correct word to describe your form of verbal diarrhea.

You merely confirm what I have asserted. You don't care a jot about the Iranian people, otherwise you would condemn your deranged leaders for threatening to wipe out their civilisation, for threatening to destroy their power plants and bridges, for doing this in God's name. Instead you make excuses for it at every juncture, even though you know it is wrong. You and people like yourself are an abomination.

You are cheering on the destruction. Just disgusting.

31 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Maybe to stop Iran's regime from killing innocent people for speaking their minds, or perhaps to prevent a megalomaniac leadership from developing nuclear weapons they might use against who knows, all because their insane thinking differs from many of the free worlds.

Iran before the Revolution was a cesspit of corruption, ruled by the Shar and backed up by a secret police, the SAVAK, suppressing political dissent, and restricting multi-party rule.

The rapid economic changes, brought on by modernization and oil revenues often benefited the elite, leaving many rural and traditional populations feeling left behind.

The final collapse of the Pahlavi dynasty occurred shortly after on 11 February when Iran's military declared itself "neutral" after guerrillas and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in armed street fighting. Iran officially became an Islamic Republic on 1 April 1979, after Iranians overwhelmingly approved a national referendum to make it so a day before.

Let's not forget the pre-history to the above:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iran#Contemporary_period

In 1951 Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq received the vote required from the parliament to nationalize the British-owned oil industry, in a situation known as the Abadan Crisis. Despite British pressure, including an economic blockade, the nationalization continued. Mosaddeq was briefly removed from power in 1952 but was quickly re-appointed by the Shah, due to a popular uprising in support of the premier, and he, in turn, forced the Shah into a brief exile in August 1953 after a failed military coup by Imperial Guard Colonel Nematollah Nassiri.

Shortly thereafter on 19 August a successful coup was headed by retired army general Fazlollah Zahedi, aided by the United States (CIA)[ with the active support of the British (MI6) (known as Operation Ajax and Operation Boot to the respective agencies). The coup—with a black propaganda campaign designed to turn the population against Mosaddeq. This forced Mosaddeq from office. Mosaddeq was arrested and tried for treason. Found guilty, his sentence was reduced to house arrest on his family estate while his foreign minister, Hossein Fatemi, was executed. Zahedi succeeded him as prime minister, and suppressed opposition to the Shah, specifically the National Front and Communist Tudeh Party.

Iran was ruled as an autocracy under the Shah with American support from that time until the revolution. The Iranian government entered into agreement with an international consortium of foreign companies which ran the Iranian oil facilities for the next 25 years, splitting profits fifty-fifty with Iran but not allowing Iran to audit their accounts or have members on their board of directors. In 1957 martial law was ended after 16 years and Iran became closer to the West, joining the Baghdad Pact and receiving military and economic aid from the US. In 1961, Iran initiated a series of economic, social, agrarian and administrative reforms to modernize the country that became known as the Shah's White Revolution.

15 hours ago, JerryM said:

On 4/20/2026 at 5:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Thus: The overall picture, certainly as reported is that the U.S. responsibility appears probable, but still remains unconfirmed, and the specific cause - including whether this was a targeting error due to outdated intelligence - is still not fully established (although I believe likely).

https://aseannow.com/topic/1388594-takeaways-from-the-iran-strike/page/15/#comment-20409959

'Outdated' intelligence - meaning what what once a military installation at some point became a school.

Thats what the NYT article posted by Alan suggests.

Do you [JerryM] believe the USA Military deliberately targeted a school under direct order from Trump or otherwise ? because it seems that's what this discussion is coming down to to.

14 hours ago, IsmeUno said:

You are cheering on the destruction. Just disgusting.

FAFO. You whine because your side lost.

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

FAFO. You whine because your side lost.

5555555555555555555555555555 The Iranians don't even want to talk with the loser in the WH. Watch this space to know who the loser will be at the end of the game.

Hint : start looking in a mirror, so you get used to it

3 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

5555555555555555555555555555 The Iranians don't even want to talk with the loser in the WH. Watch this space to know who the loser will be at the end of the game.

Hint : start looking in a mirror, so you get used to it

So you think that Iran hasnt been defeated, and will win?

Got it.

19 hours ago, JerryM said:

No -- I have recently had 2 short comments published on the NY Times -- one received 135 recommends and the other 45 -- one a comment on their tarticle about Stephen Miller and the other on Hegseth which is probably a lot more than read any of your stuff.

Congratulations... I'm not sure what else to say to that - seems you also enjoy focusing on various topics and immersing yourself to not only learn more but share that learning in the form of an opinion.

Would you say your opinions on the NY Times articles are more valid than your opinions posted on this forum ?

15 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Trump made another one of his enormous strategic errors by not backing off when a Iran agreed to reopen the strait, it would have helped to settle down the economic chaos, things would have simmered down and a deal might have been possible.

Which shipping lane are you referring to ???

The internationally recognised Traffic Separation Scheme in the Strait of Hormuz was never genuinely reopened.

What Iran signalled was most certainly not a return to normal maritime transit, but a restricted, conditional corridor:

- An outbound route squeezed between Qeshm Island and Larak Island.

- An inbound route just south of Larak.

- Passage subject to prior approval, oversight and inspection by the IRGC.

That is not “reopening” in any meaningful, legal, or commercial sense. It is controlled access.

There are also credible reports of:

- Selective enforcement - some vessels permitted, others turned away.

- Interference with shipping despite prior clearance (reports of tankers being fired upon).

- Financial extraction (reported “fees” or de facto tolls - with $2 million being reported).

- Continued security risk, making insurers and operators unwilling to treat the route as viable.

In other words, the key conditions for a true reopening were missing:

- Freedom of navigation.

- Neutral, rules-based passage.

- Predictability for commercial shipping.

Without those, global traffic doesn’t resume - which is exactly why volumes remained far below normal.

So the question isn’t whether Iran said it “opened” the strait. It’s whether it restored genuine international transit rights and its abundantly clear it didn’t and never had the intention to.

So... if access is selectively granted, tightly controlled, and leveraged for political or economic gain, then it’s not an open shipping lane - it’s a strategic choke point under unilateral control and thats exactly what Iran was doing and why the US had little choice but to respond in kind.

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Would you say your opinions on the NY Times articles are more valid than your opinions posted on this forum ?

No -- just that I know that, if they are posted with moderator approval, they will be read.

BTW this from the April 1 Supreme Court oral argument with President Trump in attendance:

GENERAL SAUER: No, but, of course,

we're -- we're in a new world now, as Justice

Alito pointed out to, where 8 billion people

are one plane ride away from having a -- a

child who's a U.S. citizen.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, it's a

new world. It's the same Constitution.

(Laughter)

My NYT comment on the same issue as to when the Article 14 was written and now was on March 28 with 136 recommends.

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Do you [JerryM] believe the USA Military deliberately targeted a school under direct order from Trump or otherwise ? because it seems that's what this discussion is coming down to to.

New York Times: Strike on Minab elementary school result of

Mar 11, 2569 BE — According to the paper's sources, the tragedy occurred due to outdated targeting data, causing US bombs to hit a school complex that had

U.S. military may have bombed Iranian girls' school using ...

The Globe and Mail

Mar 11, 2569 BE — U.S. military may have bombed Iranian girls' school using outdated targeting data, sources say. Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart. Reuters

And my post as screenshot above was MARCH 8

46 minutes ago, JerryM said:

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Do you [JerryM] believe the USA Military deliberately targeted a school under direct order from Trump or otherwise ? because it seems that's what this discussion is coming down to to.

New York Times: Strike on Minab elementary school result of

Mar 11, 2569 BE — According to the paper's sources, the tragedy occurred due to outdated targeting data, causing US bombs to hit a school complex that had

U.S. military may have bombed Iranian girls' school using ...

The Globe and Mail

Mar 11, 2569 BE — U.S. military may have bombed Iranian girls' school using outdated targeting data, sources say. Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart. Reuters

And my post as screenshot above was MARCH 8

If unequivocally proven or formally acknowledged, it would suggest that a site previously identified as a military asset had since become a school, and that the intelligence used for targeting had not been updated accordingly.

In my view, this remains the most likely explanation.

In that scenario, this would represent a catastrophic targeting error rather than a deliberate strike against a school.

I have also seen, firsthand, instances where Iranian munitions have struck civilian locations across GCC countries. While the damage and impact were real, I do not believe those incidents were intentional attacks on civilians, despite the rhetoric that often surrounded them at the time.

52 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

If unequivocally proven or formally acknowledged, it would suggest that a site previously identified as a military asset had since become a school, and that the intelligence used for targeting had not been updated accordingly.

Updated?

According to satellite imagery, the building housing the school was walled within the IRGCN compound in 2013 and walled off by September 2016 at the latest. Imagery of an outdoor play area was visible as late as August 2017.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_attack

6 hours ago, Yagoda said:

So you think that Iran hasnt been defeated, and will win?

Got it.

They are winning, there is only one loser in this war, and it's the TACO master you are supporting,

Still don't get it?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-aims-seal-iran-deal-165848299.html

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump said he’s not likely to extend the two-week ceasefire with Iran, increasing the urgency for negotiators to conclude a deal to end the war.

https://finance.yahoo.com/economy/policy/articles/trump-extends-iran-truce-maintains-205054402.html

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump announced he was extending a ceasefire with Iran indefinitely a day before it was set to expire, even as plans for a fresh round of talks between the two countries fell apart.

Vice President JD Vance had been set to travel to Pakistan to resume talks with Iran, but representatives from Tehran refused to attend, citing what they said were unreasonable American demands. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency said that there is currently no prospect of Iran participating in negotiations.

Iran didn’t request an extension of the ceasefire, semi-official Tasnim news agency reported

8 hours ago, JerryM said:

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

If unequivocally proven or formally acknowledged, it would suggest that a site previously identified as a military asset had since become a school, and that the intelligence used for targeting had not been updated accordingly.

Updated?

According to satellite imagery, the building housing the school was walled within the IRGCN compound in 2013 and walled off by September 2016 at the latest. Imagery of an outdoor play area was visible as late as August 2017.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_attack

If that timeline is accurate, it suggests the intelligence on that site was years out of date - potentially identifying a location once associated with a military compound that was later functioning as a school. If that specific building was deliberately targeted, that would point to a serious intelligence failure, not a deliberate attack on a school.

There are also other plausible explanations. I’ve personally been in areas under targeting where GPS was clearly being scrambled - civilian systems placing me kms from my actual position.

Can military guidance can also be affected in contested environments - thats why I would assume GPS is being scrambled when warnings of incoming munitions are encountered.

I’ve also seen real-world failures:

A Patriot was launched from a US site in Bahrain, a video clearly shows the missile failing to reach altitude malfunction and fall / fly into a residential area (locals were killed).

Was the Airport in Dubai really targeted - or again, was this a munition either jammed and taken off location or had it been deflected / deactivated and exploded upon impact following interception.

Eight US Missile were launched by HIMARS at the North of Manama Bahrain towards Qeshm back in March - one of them struck the desalination plant there - what happened to the other seven - intercepted falling harmlessly into the sea ? landing on civilian infrastructure ?

There have also been incidents involving strikes or attempted strikes toward GCC's - including reports of multiple missiles launched toward the region, with unclear outcomes beyond interceptions that have been questioned - whether they were truly targeted or affected by munitions that were jammed, deflected, or intercepted and fell off-course. These things do happen, and not always by intent.

So while outdated or misinterpreted intelligence remains the most likely explanation, it’s not the only explanation. Possibilities include guidance disruption, interception effects, or broader targeting errors. At this stage, we still lack official confirmation.

Investigative reporting - including from outlets like the New York Times - has been detailed and useful, but it is still not the same as a formal military release of targeting data, intelligence sources, or telemetry, which would clarify what was actually intended and what went wrong.

If it was a US strike, then credibility depends on transparency - either acknowledging the error or releasing the data showing what was targeted and why. Right now, we know the area was struck and that nearby installations may have been the intended objective, but why a school and clinic were hit remains unresolved.

From a purely factual standpoint, the possibilities remain open. Conclusions should be based on verifiable evidence rather than assumptions driven by politics - we of course have our inferences and suspicions and a terrible series of negligence by means of intelligence and targeting error IMO seems the most likely - but not yet proven or asknowledged - whatever 'media' claims to have investigaged.

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

From a purely factual standpoint, the possibilities remain open.

Yes -- to get at the truth will require balance and understanding and attention to the nuances.

The results of the final military evaluation and the investigation can be (as with NTSB): INCONCLUSIVE

10 hours ago, CallumWK said:

They are winning, there is only one loser in this war, and it's the TACO master you are supporting,

Still don't get it?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-aims-seal-iran-deal-165848299.html

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump said he’s not likely to extend the two-week ceasefire with Iran, increasing the urgency for negotiators to conclude a deal to end the war.

https://finance.yahoo.com/economy/policy/articles/trump-extends-iran-truce-maintains-205054402.html

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump announced he was extending a ceasefire with Iran indefinitely a day before it was set to expire, even as plans for a fresh round of talks between the two countries fell apart.

Vice President JD Vance had been set to travel to Pakistan to resume talks with Iran, but representatives from Tehran refused to attend, citing what they said were unreasonable American demands. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency said that there is currently no prospect of Iran participating in negotiations.

Iran didn’t request an extension of the ceasefire, semi-official Tasnim news agency reported

You are alleging that Iran is beating the USA on the battlefield? LOL

11 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

You are alleging that Iran is beating the USA on the battlefield? LOL

Nope, I'm only stating the FACT that your hero in the WH is a born loser, and that he again TACO'd on his previous comments.

36 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

Nope, I'm only stating the FACT that your hero in the WH is a born loser, and that he again TACO'd on his previous comments.

Got it. So is Iran winning?

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. So is Iran winning?

As usual you don't get it. The loser in the WH is losing, otherwise why would he need to TACO after TACO.

You got it now?

On 4/18/2026 at 2:00 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

It was Trump that got the straights closed resulting in the oil price hike.

He doesn’t get plaudits for backing out of the mess he himself made.

Just Watch, he will probably blame Hegseth or somebody else for starting this war justike he always blames someone else for his moronic mistakes and lies.