repete1970.bsky.social
290 posts
62 followers
91 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
The question wasn't "Should the U.S. have bombed Iran?" You're equating two largely separate questions as if they were the same thing, and they're not.
comment in response to
post
Of course Iran has a nuclear weapons program, and nothing about the current situation is similar to Iraq. There's no credible peaceful use for 60% enriched uranium, being enriched in fortified bunkers a half mile underground. Embarrassing.
comment in response to
post
And how's that strategy working out for Iran right now? Also what would it look like if Iran had given up its obsession with destroying Israel for the last 50 years and instead focused on bettering the lives of everyday Iranians?
comment in response to
post
What non-military use is there for 60% enriched uranium?
comment in response to
post
The Iran collateral human casualties are many orders of magnitude lower than the 500K number you brought up with a nonsensical and irrelevant historical comparison from decades ago...
...because it's easier to argue that number rather than the actual total. Definitionally a strawman.
comment in response to
post
Do we have 500K dead Iranians? Again, you like arguing against strawmen, presumably because arguing against reality is less persuasive.
comment in response to
post
Unless said argument is which city has the larger population.
comment in response to
post
"People" are not being bombed, with strategic exceptions. Weapons and infrastructure are being bombed, obviously with collateral human causalities.
My question--and my only question--was why Wajahat views it as a blunder.
Also, the population of Tehran vs NYC is immaterial to any argument.
comment in response to
post
Why do you believe it to be a blunder?
comment in response to
post
0% chance it was an allergic reaction.
comment in response to
post
Other than being occupied by brown-skinned muslims and residing in the Middle East, what do Iraq and Iran have in common such that you feel so (very) confident comparing U.S. interests in regime change in one country to regime change in the other?
comment in response to
post
Don't understand...why is that "the quiet part"? It's a worthwhile goal and I see no problem with it being explicitly stated.
comment in response to
post
I 100% blame Biden for not passing reforms, and have said repeatedly since the 2020 election that ALL I wanted from a Biden presidency was for him to preserve democracy and Trump-proof America, and he was an abject failure at it. Horrible strategic error, that I think was largely due to his vanity.
comment in response to
post
wait wait wait you can't possibly be that credulous
comment in response to
post
does not have the ring of truth
comment in response to
post
He very obviously does not know what that phrase means. He heard it somewhere and has co-opted it without having any idea how it's used in real life.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
*judgment
comment in response to
post
The WNBA very much does rise and fall with Caitlin Clark.
comment in response to
post
Yeah the tone (and honestly, content) of the article is at odds with reality. The WNBA has never been profitable, and lost $50M last year. That's fine, newer ventures often aren't, but it will be 30 years old next year. If it weren't subsized heavily by the NBA, it would have been bankrupt long ago.
comment in response to
post
I couldn't agree more. I just don't like misportrayals.
comment in response to
post
If you'd replied to any of the actual things that I'd said, I'd reply to this, but you didn't, so I won't.
comment in response to
post
Agree. But people who are in denial about Biden's mental state, and who continue to try to excuse it with "he was sick, etc" are hurting, not helping. It was what it was; agree much more pressing things to focus on. But don't lie to me that it's "because he was ill/jetlagged etc, because it wasn't.
comment in response to
post
He showed he was irrefutably not qualified to be president due to diminished mental capacity. You can say Trump is worse, and of course that's true. However Biden was not mentally competent enough for a second term, and everyone around him knew it, and they hid it from the public. Not defensible.
comment in response to
post
100%
comment in response to
post
You've absolutely lost me. I hope you think it was worth it, you fucking sellout.
comment in response to
post
Charles Kushner
comment in response to
post
Charles Kushner
comment in response to
post
Charles Kushner
comment in response to
post
Charles Kushner
comment in response to
post
No one gives a shit what you have to say when you're voting to approve rightly convicted felon Charles Kushner as ambassador to France. Please just shut the fuck up if you have no moral compass. No one wants to hear from you anymore, you sellout.
comment in response to
post
Democratic party seems rife with cowards and profiteers. If you're in public service for fame and enrichment, you're in the wrong line of work. Voting to approve Kushner is indefensible.
comment in response to
post
anything and anyone
comment in response to
post
Fuck off with your vote for felon Kushner. I just wrote you off. I'm sorry you don't get it, but you clearly never will.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
I don't know of any public figure who has lost so much credibility with me, so quickly, as Jake Tapper has.
comment in response to
post
Can't. So cringe.
comment in response to
post
It's embarrassing.
comment in response to
post
The "Dr. Jill" post was gross. This one is pretty accurate, medically. The odds are incredibly small that Biden and family didn't know he had prostate cancer when he decided to run for re-election. I'm sure there are anecdotal exceptions, but odds are he knew, with very little doubt.
comment in response to
post
The outcome was interesting, the fight was unwatchable. I remember thinking around round 4 that every round thereafter was going to be the complete same as the first four (they were).
comment in response to
post
Not weighing in on the veracity of your premise, but will weigh in that I disagree completely with your reading of the proverbial Democratic room. I don't know many Democrats who feel his support was zealous, nor do I feel that there was significant damage to the party as a result of his decisions.
comment in response to
post
not a good movie *despite* very well done cinematography and acting, imo
comment in response to
post
Good for them, more of this please.
comment in response to
post
please choose severe recession
comment in response to
post
🤡
comment in response to
post
Sounds about right.
comment in response to
post
That is 100% correct.
comment in response to
post
agree, how do you get the archive links?
comment in response to
post
Are you a masochist? Serious question. Get the fuck out of here and retire so that someone with integrity and fight can replace you.
comment in response to
post
This is the opposite of what is going to happen.