Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

ASEAN NOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

US fires 49 tomohawks at iran

Featured Replies

  • Author

the us has run out of weapons lol

  • Replies 56
  • Views 902
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Slowhand225
    Slowhand225

    Why are you worried about it ? Take a nap

  • Hummin
    Hummin

    What is the USA draining its arsenal for? Around 1,100 Tomahawks spent on a war that was absolutely unnecessary, while weakening its reserves for conflicts that may be much harder to avoid.

  • novacova
    novacova

    The US needs to finish this and stop toying around with negotiating with these dead-end zealots and just wipe them off the face of the earth once and for all.

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

the us has run out of weapons lol

The supply isn’t endless.

Iran will respond with their ‘totally destroyed military’.

Lol

Three Indian sailors killed in US strike

https://resources.news.com.au/author-profiles/cf7157eb-7bf6-4699-a122-aaccd725286d.png

Bianca Soldani

Three Indian nationals have died after a Palau-flagged commercial vessel was hit by US forces off the coast of Oman.

The sailors’ deaths were confirmed by India’s shipping minister who described the incident as “tragic” on Thursday.

“It is deeply unfortunate to learn of the tragic incident aboard the Palau-flagged MT Settebello,” Sarbananda Sonowal said in a statement.

“Sadly, three Indian seafarers initially reported missing are now confirmed dead after bodies have been located and identified”.  US politics, Iran war live updates: Trump vows to take ‘total control’ of Iran’s oil and gas amid escalation | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site for latest headlines

5 minutes ago, still kicking said:

Three Indian sailors killed in US strike

https://resources.news.com.au/author-profiles/cf7157eb-7bf6-4699-a122-aaccd725286d.png

Bianca Soldani

Three Indian nationals have died after a Palau-flagged commercial vessel was hit by US forces off the coast of Oman.

The sailors’ deaths were confirmed by India’s shipping minister who described the incident as “tragic” on Thursday.

“It is deeply unfortunate to learn of the tragic incident aboard the Palau-flagged MT Settebello,” Sarbananda Sonowal said in a statement.

“Sadly, three Indian seafarers initially reported missing are now confirmed dead after bodies have been located and identified”.  US politics, Iran war live updates: Trump vows to take ‘total control’ of Iran’s oil and gas amid escalation | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site for latest headlines

But he won't explain how he will control Irans oil and Gas. Iv'e got more chance of speaking fluent Thai then he has of doing this latest comedy.

10 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

But he won't explain how he will control Irans oil and Gas. Iv'e got more chance of speaking fluent Thai then he has of doing this latest comedy.

Latest is the moron is going to put boots on the ground and try and take Kharg island this from CNN

12 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

But he won't explain how he will control Irans oil and Gas. Iv'e got more chance of speaking fluent Thai then he has of doing this latest comedy.

Tell that all the MAGAS

  • Author
  • Popular Post

trump is theatening to take kharg island & irans oil and gas so a good deal for us taxpayers

Edited by 3NUMBAS

  • Popular Post
6 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

American TAX Dollars going down the tubes for what !!!

Liberation of a populace living under tyranny. America will always be there to liberate populations around the world from such things.

In terms of the US War Powers Act of 1973, a sitting president may not commit the country to an armed conflict without the “statutory authorisation” of Congress. On Trump’s orders, the US military has been bombing so-called “narco terrorists” in international waters in what some US lawmakers say are unlawful extrajudicial killings.

Congressman Adam Smith of the armed services committee expressed his fears that there may be more to come after the Venezuela invasion as Trump and his sycophants implement their strategy to dominate the western hemisphere, the so-called Monroe Doctrine.

American author Chris Hedges writes: “Violence does not generate peace. It generates violence. “If there is one lesson we should have learned in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, it is that regime change spawns Frankensteinian monsters of our own making.”

The American leader is meant to be a unifier, a strong and soothing presence in the world. Trump is an anarchic toddler, constantly causing upheaval across the globe, transgressing and remaking everything in his helter-skelter image. He has no interest in fireside chats; he wants to set fires.

He’s more about droit du seigneur than noblesse oblige. He feels entitled to whatever he wants, from Greenland to Canada to the Kennedy Center to a Nobel Prize he didn’t win. Unlike previous presidents, he isn’t countering Russia; he’s catering to it. He disparaged the NATO troops who died for us in Afghanistan and belittled our nicest neighbor, claiming that “Canada lives because of the United States.”

Respected academic Professor

Jeffrey Sachs says said Trump, with his unlawful actions, has positioned the US as a “global thug”. So who is going to stop the global thug?

Russia is knee-deep in its invasion of Ukraine. Does it hold any moral authority to admonish Trump over Venezuela?

China is champing at the bit itching to take Taiwan by force. India is just about one incident away from formally declaring war against eternal enemy Pakistan. What about the multi-lateral structures?

The bad news is that almighty Trump is thumbing his nose at all of them.

https://share.google/shFjZIx5Ciu3W7MGy

Trump promised to end American adventures overseas, and reel in the involvement in more overseas conflicts, yet in the past year it would appear he has done the exact opposite of that. Does this mean he's abandoning his base and is betraying the ideals of MAGA?

I'd be curious to look at a worldwide survey and see who the average world citizen is more afraid of at this point in time. Putin, Xi or Trump?

My guess it would be Trump, since he has shown himself to be a War President, a warmonger, unafraid to break the law, and unafraid to act without congressional approval. He just might be the most dangerous man on the planet at the moment. And it's very likely Miller and Vance are number two and three.

shutterstock_1490830715W-1 (1).jpg

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, spidermike007 said:

In terms of the US War Powers Act of 1973, a sitting president may not commit the country to an armed conflict without the “statutory authorisation” of Congress. On Trump’s orders, the US military has been bombing so-called “narco terrorists” in international waters in what some US lawmakers say are unlawful extrajudicial killings.

You are incorrect.

https://psc.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/War-Powers-Act.pdf

SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

There is a collusion: the President is the Commander-in-Chief, while Congress has the power to declare war. If Congress were truly serious about this issue, it would take legal action against the executive branch to resolve the matter once and for all. However, Congress often avoids doing difficult work.

The War Powers Act is mainly used as a political weapon. Back when Obama bombed Libya, I argued that he violated the War Act, and all the left-wing types disagreed with my interpretation of the War Powers Act. Obama argued the "Hostilities" loophole.

The "Hostilities" Loophole: The Obama administration's Office of Legal Counsel argued that the WPR did not apply because U.S. involvement did not constitute "hostilities". They contended that the mission was limited in scope, did not involve troops on the ground, and posed little risk of escalation compared to full-scale ground combat

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/vol125_libya_and_war_powers.pdf

You may have differing opinions, but Obama set the precedent.

41Kj9jGjnGL.webp

Edited by Effective altruism

  • Popular Post
4 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

You are incorrect.

https://psc.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/War-Powers-Act.pdf

SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

There is a collusion: the President is the Commander-in-Chief, while Congress has the power to declare war. If Congress were truly serious about this issue, it would take legal action against the executive branch to resolve the matter once and for all. However, Congress often avoids doing difficult work.

The War Powers Act is mainly used as a political weapon. Back when Obama bombed Libya, I argued that he violated the War Act, and all the left-wing types disagreed with my interpretation of the War Powers Act. Obama argued the "Hostilities" loophole.

The "Hostilities" Loophole: The Obama administration's Office of Legal Counsel argued that the WPR did not apply because U.S. involvement did not constitute "hostilities". They contended that the mission was limited in scope, did not involve troops on the ground, and posed little risk of escalation compared to full-scale ground combat

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/vol125_libya_and_war_powers.pdf

You may have differing opinions, but Obama set the precedent.

41Kj9jGjnGL.webp

A bizarre explanation and excuse for the current quagmire.

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war.

Could could you please explain to us what the current situation was, and why they represented an imminent danger of hostilities? Bet you can't.

Also he has said over and over again this is not a war, it's just an excursion.

I always thought an excursion was a trip to the Bahamas. The chief clown feels otherwise.

Edited by spidermike007

  • Popular Post
9 hours ago, Packer said:

Liberation of a populace living under tyranny. America will always be there to liberate populations around the world from such things.

And would in the world asked you to be the worlds policeman !!!!!! total arrogance

14 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

At least we know how many nukes. Too many!

This escalation--during a "ceasefire"-- will end badly. Iran is no pushover.

When you have time then take a look and you will find that it’s the Iranian regime that is getting pushed over. But I guess the mainstream media pushover’s are having trouble recognizing it.

2 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

And would in the world asked you to be the worlds policeman !!!!!! total arrogance

The populations in need of liberation from such evil tyrannies cannot ask for help due to living under evil tyranny. It's part of what makes America so great for the world. Selflessly liberating populations that cannot even ask for liberation.

1 minute ago, Packer said:

The populations in need of liberation from such evil tyrannies cannot ask for help due to living under evil tyranny. It's part of what makes America so great for the world. Selflessly liberating populations that cannot even ask for liberation.

And Who determines this !! trump !! what stupid arrogance !! look what your yank arrogance is done today, the world going into a recession America threatening genocide and nuclear war you stupid yanks need to look to your own people homeless people, people that cannot afford grocery's no medical no jobs inflation going up !! i for one don't require Americas help and so do a lot of other country's, there are a lot of other country's which would have been better off without Americas so called help ! examples Iran (1953 coup), Chile (1973 coup), and more recent conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan, where interventions led to long-term instability

11 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

If Congress were truly serious about this issue, it would take legal action against the executive branch to resolve the matter once and for all. However, Congress often avoids doing difficult work.

The War Powers Act is mainly used as a political weapon. Back when Obama bombed Libya, I argued that he violated the War Act, and all the left-wing types disagreed with my interpretation of the War Powers Act. Obama argued the "Hostilities" loophole.

The "Hostilities" Loophole: The Obama administration's Office of Legal Counsel argued that the WPR did not apply because U.S. involvement did not constitute "hostilities". They contended that the mission was limited in scope, did not involve troops on the ground, and posed little risk of escalation compared to full-scale ground combat

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/vol125_libya_and_war_powers.pdf

You may have differing opinions, but Obama set the precedent.

41Kj9jGjnGL.webp

Many people think of Obama as a peace president. He was anything but. I had great hopes for him as a professor of constitutional law but it turns out his primary asset was his skin colour. I was disgusted, for example, with the cold-blooded murder of Osama, indicating, this is the was the new America, lawnorder nor law and order.

I agree, Alt, that Congress has no interest in getting off its collective duff to rein in the Goober-in-Chief. And its not only that they are most Trump sycophants. They're too busy sniffing out where that whiff of smoke from the forest fire is coming from, how to avoid it and get the leucotomised to vote for them.

Congress rubber-stamps these trillion-dollar spending bills with money the US don't got. Did these idiots never have a home mortgage?!?

Left, right, up, down, I'm with the antiwar crowd and I don't recall any American, of any stripe, supporting the bombing of Libya. In fact, Gadaffi's tent oasis in NJ on his trip to the UN was pretty cool.

Leave the goddamn dictators alone. Every country, every culture has to have sovereignty and self-determination. Let them work it out for themselves.

You did not, however, provide any justification for the bombing of unarmed civilian boats in int'l waters.

2 hours ago, ArchieBunker said:

When you have time then take a look and you will find that it’s the Iranian regime that is getting pushed over. But I guess the mainstream media pushover’s are having trouble recognizing it.

Seems to me they've killed off all its heads, and the 'regime' is still going strong and very much in power.

More, actually, than the US regime which is already fraying around its edges. Soon may be crumble.

48 minutes ago, Packer said:

The populations in need of liberation from such evil tyrannies cannot ask for help due to living under evil tyranny. It's part of what makes America so great for the world. Selflessly liberating populations that cannot even ask for liberation.

On second thought, Packer, don't pass me that Kool-Aid! Somebody done laced it with some really bad drugs!

47 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

And Who determines this !! trump !! what stupid arrogance !! look what your yank arrogance is done today, the world going into a recession America threatening genocide and nuclear war you stupid yanks need to look to your own people homeless people, people that cannot afford grocery's no medical no jobs inflation going up !! i for one don't require Americas help and so do a lot of other country's, there are a lot of other country's which would have been better off without Americas so called help ! examples Iran (1953 coup), Chile (1973 coup), and more recent conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan, where interventions led to long-term instability

Witnessing unbecoming jealousy of great America and great Americans is a small price to pay for our great selfless work at liberating those suffering under evil tyrannies. 🙂

This is why the Yanks are poor when it comes to war. Fancy informing your enemy where your going to Attack. Oh well you better stock up your body bags your going to need them. Don't you think the Iranians will be dug in ready lol. Reminds of that famouse song by billy joel Goodnight Saigon " They heared the hum of our moters they counted our Roters and waited for us to arrive " .

16 minutes ago, Packer said:

Witnessing unbecoming jealousy of great America and great Americans is a small price to pay for our great selfless work at liberating those suffering under evil tyrannies. 🙂

The fact is that the US can no longer insert itself in the affairs of other countries without consequences. Constant US presence halfway around the world will only incite more unrest and further contribute to the US’ growing reputation as a “bully” superpower. The time has come for the US to mind its own business on the international stage, and let other countries determine how to respond to conflict as best they can on their own.

The notion that America should somehow police the world in the name of democracy while ignoring its internal affairs is fundamentally flawed and dangerous. Where does a government’s allegiance lie if not with its people? America cannot even police itself, and its continuing failure to attend to its own affairs has invited a plethora of concern. National debt, rising unemployment, dwindling education, and high crime rates domestically should take priority above foreign interests.

What happened to the mentality of ‘America first?' Why should US citizens stand for a government dedicating resources to foreign affairs while failing to address any number of problems domestically? The citizens of the United States of America deserve a government fundamentally focused on improving life at home, instead of investing resources in countries of political interest.

Imagine if half of the money used to deal with foreign conflicts instead went towards improving the country’s schools, outdated infrastructure, and bolstering federal programs that so many Americans rely on every day.

Think of how much progress America could make if it did not have to deal with the fiscal drain of war and intervention in foreign nations. Reform of foreign policy must be made in coming years and geared towards addressing domestic problems before anything else.

It is not the United States’ job to police the world. It is the responsibility of the American government to first and foremost focus on prosperity for US citizens. Aid to foreign countries is unacceptable when its own citizens could use the resources, finances, and services that the US government sends abroad.

The US must move away from its current interventionist approach to dealing with other nations affairs and instead ensure its own citizens can thrive.

  • Author

weapons degrade when on the shelf so better to use them

Breaking news wait, 13 hours ago, 4 hours ago, 2 hours ago, 1 hour ago

Trump announced the war is, but Iran have not confirmed yet! Maybe signing in Europe, and Rubio will go, I think

14 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

weapons degrade when on the shelf so better to use them

Takes awhile

Tomahawks have a shelf life of 30 years or so,

On 6/11/2026 at 5:38 PM, spidermike007 said:

A bizarre explanation and excuse for the current quagmire.

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war.

Could could you please explain to us what the current situation was, and why they represented an imminent danger of hostilities? Bet you can't.

Also he has said over and over again this is not a war, it's just an excursion.

I always thought an excursion was a trip to the Bahamas. The chief clown feels otherwise.

The Constitution grants the President the title of Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces but stipulates that only Congress can declare war. Since no formal declaration of war has occurred since World War II, this issue seems largely theoretical. The executive branch contends that the War Powers Act is not applicable in this context. Therefore, I suggested that the Democrats should consider suing to seek a court ruling on this matter once and for all. Additionally, I mentioned that Trump could apply the same standards he used regarding the bombing of Libya during Obama's presidency. It seems you are approaching this not from a historical perspective but rather from a biased viewpoint against Trump.

Wrong target - Israel is the enemy of humanity, not Iran.

28 minutes ago, JimHuaHin said:

Wrong target - Israel is the enemy of humanity, not Iran.

Give it a rest. You can put your Israel hatred in another thread. It isn't normal to have such a hatred for an entity you really do not know.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.