Thread: There is the usual talking point going around the pro-Iran-Regime-Lobby in which Israel is once again presented as somehow doing something wrong by seeking to work with the US on Iran threats...or that Israel could start a "war"...the usual "war" bogeyman myth

The fact is that Israel is the one being threatened. Israel doesn't run proxy groups throughout the Middle East and arm them illegally by giving militias weapons...or have whole days devoted to bashing Iran or soldiers marching on Iran's flag. Only Iran does that.
There is never going to be a "war" with Iran, war is the talking point to claim that those who oppose the Iran regime far-right extremists are "hawks" or "for war"...which is nonsensical. Iran's regime can't afford a war, that is why it arms militias in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon,Yemen
Iran knows how to get the poor to do the fighting for it...recruiting people from Pakistan and Afghanistan, not to defend their own communities, but sending them to Syria while they are attacked at home by extremists. Awful.
So the "war' talking point is always used to claim Israel wants "war"...or "drives wars"...but there is no evidence of this. Israel is totally open about its goals to deter Iran or keep its entrenchment in Syria away from the Golan. Israel found relative calm with hamas-Hezbollah
Look at Hamas and Hezbollah, they don't want "war"...Iran doesn't want "war" and neither does Israel...no one wants "war"...it's just a talking point dragged out in western media to present a "pro-war" and "anti-war" stance.
The most anti-war country is Israel...it wants to build its economy and continue making peace deals...it has zero interest in conflict and all its investment in defense tech, for precision weapons and air defense, is to stop large wars.
The idea that Israel somehow is in the way of US-Iran getting along is nonsense. Israel would like Iran to back off, stop the weapon transfers to Hezbollah and behave peacefully.
Imagine if Iran transferred books and university education to southern Lebanon, as opposed to weapons...imagine Iran building schools in Deir Ezzor, instead of bunkers...imagine Iran investing in music in Iraq, instead of militias.
Iran's regime every day wastes resources on missiles, drones, more missiles, militias, extremism...while Israel is plowing money into a diverse economy. Absolute waste by Iran on its region ambitions.
It's great and all that Iran helped fight ISIS. That was good...but what it has done with its influence after that was not helpful. Iran is not the only negative actor, Ankara also is aggressive. But in the end of the day Israel has zero interest in 'war'..
Israel would like the US administration to listen to its concerns about Iran's munitions transfers and threats. That's the big goal. Listen to concerns about the nuclear program and arming of militias and drone threats, etc. The 'war' narrative is bunk.

More from World

1/10 With respect, multiple straw men here:
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...


2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see

3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result

4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...

5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
Good question: what proofs has BDA provided of his authenticity?

Let's go through some of them.


- BDA predicted the Saudis would assassinate Suleimani. They did.
- He said the dog that got Badghadi's arm deserved a Medal Of Honor. The next day the President posted a joke image showing him giving the dog a MoH.

- He said one of his ops in Syria would severely disrupt a CIA drug trafficking operation. This was proved true within a few days:
https://t.co/Hranupwcxj
- He sent gold to Brazil to help pay for an anti-trafficking operation there. That op became public soon afterwards.

- On May 31 this year, he predicted the President would be giving a speech the next day. June 1, the President gives a surprise address at the Rose Garden.
- He predicted the US would be making diplomatic moves on Greenland. True.

- He said the US would be pulling all troops out of Afghanistan. This was confirmed within the month.
- He claimed earthquakes would be hitting Iran's nuclear facilities in December. Yep.
- There were FOUR facilities hit, not the three made public. Also true.

You May Also Like

1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?