Iran

#18,176
#18,176
thenationalpulse.com

U.S. Army Raises Enlistment Age to 42 and Relaxes Rules on Recruiting Drug Convicts.

The U.S. Army has introduced a major update to its recruiting policies amid the Iran war, increasing the maximum enlistment age to 42. Alongside the age adjustment, the Army will now permit some applicants with marijuana possession convictions to join without having to obtain a waiver.
thenationalpulse.com thenationalpulse.com

Alright! Middle aged Devil's Lettuce aficionados unite!

Snap, crackle, and puff brigade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and Carl Pickens
#18,178
#18,178
volfanhill said:
It's what happens when people realize the most powerful man on earth is driven by self interest and vanity. He had Bibi and Graham telling him he could do what so many have failed out and bring peace to the Middle East. His vanity latched on. And with his pride I have zero confidence he will swallow his pride and back down
Click to expand...

It’s also what happens when you elect green weenies that destroy a proven energy supply in favor of unreliable renewables.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#18,179
#18,179
Vol8188 said:
If you intentionally misunderstand everything that’s stated, then yes.
Click to expand...
whats the misunderstanding?

you think we are taking out their ability to rearm for the foreseable future. very vague timeline, but lets roll with it.

a few months ago we "OBLITERATED" Irans nuclear capabilities, but here we were again fighting Iran because they were "days away" from having nukes.

seems like Iran has a superhuman ability to replace what we destroy, very rapidly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#18,180
#18,180
NashVol11 said:
Replacing Ayatollah Khamenei with younger and more radical Ayatollah Khamenei. Regime change
Click to expand...
You mean the Cardboard Ayatollah? He can be as radical as he wants on life support or in a cave somewhere. If he was a legitimate problem he would be taken out. Make no mistake the IRGC is in control and we need to wipe them out. Your "I hate America" crowd will disagree with that.
On another note, did you support the U.S. support for Ukraine?
 
#18,181
#18,181
sonofUT62 said:
I wonder what NATO obligations would be if Russian drones attacked US troops in a foreign land.
Click to expand...
none. US arms have been used against Russia in Russia. nothing comes of it.

its not like this is the first time the US and Russia have supported the opponent of the other in a conflict. See Vietnam and Afghanistan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#18,182
#18,182
LouderVol said:
whats the misunderstanding?

you think we are taking out their ability to rearm for the foreseable future. very vague timeline, but lets roll with it.

a few months ago we "OBLITERATED" Irans nuclear capabilities, but here we were again fighting Iran because they were "days away" from having nukes.

seems like Iran has a superhuman ability to replace what we destroy, very rapidly.
Click to expand...

What’s being said and your strawman aren’t the same. When they say Iran could produce a weapon in X days, you’re ignorantly claiming “they said that years ago” and pretending that’s proof they’re misleading you.

You’re intentionally misrepresenting the claim.
 
#18,184
#18,184
Vol8188 said:
What’s being said and your strawman aren’t the same. When they say Iran could produce a weapon in X days, you’re ignorantly claiming “they said that years ago” and pretending that’s proof they’re misleading you.

You’re intentionally misrepresenting the claim.
Click to expand...
what do you mean "years ago"? The attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure was last year.

www.timesofisrael.com

Mossad says Iran 15 days from bomb, US agencies still say up to a year – report

CIA director cited saying Tehran 'very close' to nuclear weapons; US officials tell NY Times assassination of Khamenei, US strike on Fordo could prompt breakout to bomb
www.timesofisrael.com www.timesofisrael.com

and in this situation someone must have been lying.

Either our side was lying back then about Iran being able to make nukes in days, we were lying about taking it out, or they are lying about Iran's capability to make nukes for this latest round.

at least one of those have to be a lie, and thus would be proof of them misleading all of us.

I bet you still buy Bush's WMD argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#18,185
#18,185
LouderVol said:
what do you mean "years ago"? The attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure was last year.

www.timesofisrael.com

Mossad says Iran 15 days from bomb, US agencies still say up to a year – report

CIA director cited saying Tehran 'very close' to nuclear weapons; US officials tell NY Times assassination of Khamenei, US strike on Fordo could prompt breakout to bomb
www.timesofisrael.com www.timesofisrael.com

and in this situation someone must have been lying.

Either our side was lying back then about Iran being able to make nukes in days, we were lying about taking it out, or they are lying about Iran's capability to make nukes for this latest round.
Click to expand...

No they weren’t. It’s only a lie if you intentionally misunderstand what was being said.

LouderVol said:
at least one of those have to be a lie, and thus would be proof of them misleading all of us.

I bet you still buy Bush's WMD argument.
Click to expand...
 
#18,187
#18,187
#18,191
#18,191
LouderVol said:
you have got to get specific. I listed three things they told us, and you answered with a singular.
Click to expand...

I’m not really sure how you’re missing this. The statement was that Iran “could” have a weapon in 15 days. You’re intentionally misrepresenting that as Iran “would”.

It would be like if Trump said “we could take Cuba tonight if we wanted” and then you wake up in the morning and claim “TACO! He lies about everything!”
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top