Trump says he wants to be the president who takes down the Islamic Republic. Democratic leaders see him walking into a political trap of his own making ahead of the midterms.
Schumer, Jeffries and the entrenched Democratic establishment had better do everything and anything in their power to make sure we do NOT attack Iran. This is my red line. I will NEVER vote again - for anything.
No more war on behalf of Israel, no more war for oil, no more war for territory, no more war for the oligarchy.
I'm with you on that, Jon. I believe there was a law passed recently to stop USA bombing of Iran. Invocing the War Powers Act, again, that can stop him "rhinking about it.. Financial and military boycots, against Isreal , should the USA be part of their attacks of any other nations in the area, should be part of the legislation enacted by Congress.
Spineless, amoral idiots. Both parties' leaderships. In their Machievellian calculations, the value they place on the lives of Persian civilians or the lives of the U S troops, is zero. They're absolutely psychotic.
How many Persians and Americans have to die to delay the Epstein files' release? Fucking sick.
What’s most disturbing here isn’t just that Donald Trump reportedly dreams of “regime change glory” in Iran. It’s that key Democrats appear less concerned with preventing a catastrophic war than with calculating who benefits politically from it.
We’ve seen this movie before. The march to Iraq was fueled by ego, ideology, and careerism masquerading as strategy. Now Iran — a far larger, more regionally embedded power — is being discussed like a midterm chess piece. If even a fraction of this reporting is accurate, then some in leadership believe war is both “necessary” and politically useful — so long as Trump owns the fallout. That’s not opposition. That’s complicity by indifference.
If lawmakers truly oppose another Middle East war, they should back binding War Powers action, force a public debate, and make clear that regime change fantasies — whether from the White House or think tanks — are unacceptable. Anything less is moral cowardice.
Thousands of lives, regional stability, and U.S. servicemembers are not campaign strategy variables. They’re human beings.
The last thing we need is a war with Iran and its proxies. But …
Trump would need an off-ramp from which he can claim credit for avoiding war, free from the TACO characterization.
Iran believes it needs to resume its nuclear energy program, without the indignity of being the sole country in the region subject to IAEA oversight inspections.
Perhaps this would be the time to introduce (re-introduce?) the idea of a Middle-East Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone, one that would require Israel, also, to allow IAEA inspections of its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure. Trump would have to pull in Netanyahu, of course - perhaps the toughest part. Chances are slim, but the process could cool the war talk, while educating the public about one key aggregator of tensions.
The Pedo in chief will never be remembered for anything other than the Epstein/Trump files, raping and sex trafficking children, putting Israel first, and his looting of the Treasury and the attempted subjugation of the American people with his private for profit army ICE/IDF and concentration camps. Israel wants this war and has for decades and found the perfect administration to get it done, Israel is trying to complete all their objectives with American cash and weapons and military personnel, before the end of Trumps term. Israel was fucking bombing Lebanon again today.
The Congress passed a law after we last bombed Iran that there was no longer to be air attacks beteen the USA forces and Iran. Do we need to get the word out to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that prosecution for breaking Federal laws will be taken for those who break the law, President included. He might flee prosecution in his other nation of Trumpland, otherwise known as Gaza? What better way to let him see the handiwork of war?
I am against an attack on Iran. While the current leadership is not what looks sustainable to me, the country deserves wise, humane, & compassionate leaders. Trump is hardly the sensible person to choose the new leadership. Iran is also a sovereign power, & the US has no right to interfere in its regime. I am Rev Dr Kenneth D Stephens
Your in-depth reporting, as always, is great. What the ill-informed majority of people need to know, however, is that the U.S./Israel policy is to achieve Mideast (and beyond) regional hegemony. Iran stands in their way. The assault on Iran will continue in one form or another until Iran is destroyed. There is no opposition to this policy except by progressive socialists.
Thank you for abstaining from using "regime" when referring to second tier adversaries. It's condescending, even racist to imply, as most "progressives" and others do, that it's for White West and by extension Israel to judge competence and legitimacy in vulnerable nations.
One correction about a past program, if I may:
I'm a native speaker and I listened to two of Foad Izadi's recent interviews in Farsi 3 -4 weeks ago. When he mentioned 500 US troops in body bags, he presented it as a personal opinion in the context of speculating what cost-benefit analysis could deter a future American attack. Unlike Jeremy, I never got the impression that, according to Izadi, Iranian defense planners had reached something resembling a decision re a threshold corpse count.
Schumer, Jeffries and the entrenched Democratic establishment had better do everything and anything in their power to make sure we do NOT attack Iran. This is my red line. I will NEVER vote again - for anything.
No more war on behalf of Israel, no more war for oil, no more war for territory, no more war for the oligarchy.
Shut it down.
I'm with you on that, Jon. I believe there was a law passed recently to stop USA bombing of Iran. Invocing the War Powers Act, again, that can stop him "rhinking about it.. Financial and military boycots, against Isreal , should the USA be part of their attacks of any other nations in the area, should be part of the legislation enacted by Congress.
Is Israel going to pay for the cost to the US tax payers of this operation.
Does Iran pose an actual physical threat to the US? or just Israel?
Spineless, amoral idiots. Both parties' leaderships. In their Machievellian calculations, the value they place on the lives of Persian civilians or the lives of the U S troops, is zero. They're absolutely psychotic.
How many Persians and Americans have to die to delay the Epstein files' release? Fucking sick.
What’s most disturbing here isn’t just that Donald Trump reportedly dreams of “regime change glory” in Iran. It’s that key Democrats appear less concerned with preventing a catastrophic war than with calculating who benefits politically from it.
We’ve seen this movie before. The march to Iraq was fueled by ego, ideology, and careerism masquerading as strategy. Now Iran — a far larger, more regionally embedded power — is being discussed like a midterm chess piece. If even a fraction of this reporting is accurate, then some in leadership believe war is both “necessary” and politically useful — so long as Trump owns the fallout. That’s not opposition. That’s complicity by indifference.
If lawmakers truly oppose another Middle East war, they should back binding War Powers action, force a public debate, and make clear that regime change fantasies — whether from the White House or think tanks — are unacceptable. Anything less is moral cowardice.
Thousands of lives, regional stability, and U.S. servicemembers are not campaign strategy variables. They’re human beings.
The last thing we need is a war with Iran and its proxies. But …
Trump would need an off-ramp from which he can claim credit for avoiding war, free from the TACO characterization.
Iran believes it needs to resume its nuclear energy program, without the indignity of being the sole country in the region subject to IAEA oversight inspections.
Perhaps this would be the time to introduce (re-introduce?) the idea of a Middle-East Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone, one that would require Israel, also, to allow IAEA inspections of its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure. Trump would have to pull in Netanyahu, of course - perhaps the toughest part. Chances are slim, but the process could cool the war talk, while educating the public about one key aggregator of tensions.
The Pedo in chief will never be remembered for anything other than the Epstein/Trump files, raping and sex trafficking children, putting Israel first, and his looting of the Treasury and the attempted subjugation of the American people with his private for profit army ICE/IDF and concentration camps. Israel wants this war and has for decades and found the perfect administration to get it done, Israel is trying to complete all their objectives with American cash and weapons and military personnel, before the end of Trumps term. Israel was fucking bombing Lebanon again today.
The Congress passed a law after we last bombed Iran that there was no longer to be air attacks beteen the USA forces and Iran. Do we need to get the word out to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that prosecution for breaking Federal laws will be taken for those who break the law, President included. He might flee prosecution in his other nation of Trumpland, otherwise known as Gaza? What better way to let him see the handiwork of war?
I am against an attack on Iran. While the current leadership is not what looks sustainable to me, the country deserves wise, humane, & compassionate leaders. Trump is hardly the sensible person to choose the new leadership. Iran is also a sovereign power, & the US has no right to interfere in its regime. I am Rev Dr Kenneth D Stephens
I’m against the war only because innocent Iranians will die but if Iran can end the terrorist state of Israel then I’m all in!
Sounds like if Trump had half a brain he'd go to Congress for authorization.
Your in-depth reporting, as always, is great. What the ill-informed majority of people need to know, however, is that the U.S./Israel policy is to achieve Mideast (and beyond) regional hegemony. Iran stands in their way. The assault on Iran will continue in one form or another until Iran is destroyed. There is no opposition to this policy except by progressive socialists.
Thank you for abstaining from using "regime" when referring to second tier adversaries. It's condescending, even racist to imply, as most "progressives" and others do, that it's for White West and by extension Israel to judge competence and legitimacy in vulnerable nations.
One correction about a past program, if I may:
I'm a native speaker and I listened to two of Foad Izadi's recent interviews in Farsi 3 -4 weeks ago. When he mentioned 500 US troops in body bags, he presented it as a personal opinion in the context of speculating what cost-benefit analysis could deter a future American attack. Unlike Jeremy, I never got the impression that, according to Izadi, Iranian defense planners had reached something resembling a decision re a threshold corpse count.