73 Reds

Yeah, unenforceable "deals" are not worth the paper they are written on. And we paid them to accept this deal so they could arm their terrorist proxies and further supress the lives of their countrymen. Some people never learn. Same people who have to hide in a bomb shelter before they believe there is a threat. As someone who has spent time in bomb shelters, it is never a good idea to wait for the inevitable and pretend everything is just rosy.

LOL, like I said.....

I could post a detailed, comprehensive response but why bother when anonymous investor board posters have more inside intelligence on this issue than the US and Israel combined.

Nah, waiting it out will cause no harm or foul for all who are not short term traders. We've seen this movie before.

+1

What does any of this have to do with real fundamentals? Unless you are trading oil, a month or two from now why won't we be back to square one?

Not so sure. How refreshing it is to have a President whose decisions don't rest on appeasing his base or the next election results.

Yeah but if you listen to all the Trump-haters - every one of them, they have had no viable alternative plan to deal with Iran. Their "strategy" is to negotiate despite 47 years of failed negotiations and to "trust and verify", neither of which anyone can, or should do. They know how to do one thing very well - complain - every day, all day. Their narrative that the present solution is not permanent defies simple logic that nothing is permanent. Used to call these kinds of people "peaceniks". Today they are simply ignorant.

It's not that complicated. You deal with immediate threats now. People looking for "forever" solutions are kidding themselves. If permanent change is somehow achieved its a bonus. And as for midterms, no one reasonably expects any Presidential incumbent to retain power after midterm elections. Hardly a case of first impression though the "narrative" would have you believe otherwise.

Are you serious? Why don't we just wait until they develop and use nukes before we fight back. That's a winning strategy for sure. Sometimes it feels like we are talking about two different Irans on two entirely different planets. And oh-by-the way, Israel wasn't waiting for us or anyone else. As for his agenda, I think he's doing just fine. The narrative that he is bogged down is just that - a narrative.

Hard to foresee too far into the future. Perhaps the Kurds will have some ground success. Maybe there are more embedded fighters and IRGC opponents than we think. We know there is a lot of opposition intelligence there so who knows what capabilities we still have. All I know is we are better off now than we were a week ago.

Huh? The JCPOA didn't ensure anything other than Iran was free to do what it wanted. That's precisely what happened.

LOL, while you guys try to psycho-analyze Trump backwards, forwards, upside-down and sideways, Iran is now much further away from being a nuclear threat and has now antagonized just about everyone on the planet. Seems simple enough to me.

Blake, Trump was elected to be a disruptor. You're complaining about the very thing he was elected to do. Who was it that first said "elections have consequences"?

Is that your response? What you and many can't possibly appreciate with your comfortable lives, secure homes and friendly environments is how the people in Israel have managed to live and prosper with the likes of Iran and its proxies constantly causing fear and destruction.

Could be. But in the grand scheme of things it is a mere spek on the time horizon.

I dunno, hard to argue that in the long run AI won't be a net positive. Short term growing/transitional pains won't change that.

+1 Couldn't agree more. To your credit, the namesakes of this Board should do fine under just about any scenario short of Armageddon. Select whatever valuation metric you like and buy shares whenever prices drop below your desired metric. If/when shares become expensive, that's a dilemma many would like to experience.

John, ironically the fax machine still serves a very useful purpose in my businesses when security is an issue for transfer of certain types of confidential information.

To me this is all much ado about nothing. He is committed to the company and putting his money where his mouth is. Who cares what day he buys the stock? And of course he always has more inside knowledge about the company than just about anyone else. So what? If he complies with applicable restrictions that's all that matters.

Yup. And at the risk of eliciting the usual suspects here out of their holes, even something as basic as a so-called victimless crime is very different than what it used to be. Back in the day, paying girls for sex - even underage girls - was widely considered a victimless crime because both parties presumably acted voluntarily and each received the benefits they bargained for. Fortunately times have changed, as has our recognition of victims.

Well, not to excuse anyone illicitly associated with Epstein in any way, but standards, norms and what constitutes acceptable behavior has changed drastically over the course of my lifetime.

LOL, I never minded the old-school liberals and in fact, frequently agreed with them on certain policy issues. It was always the fringes on both sides that were the issue. Unfortunately, today's "liberals" were yesterdays' fringes.

Not to mention that you don't make deals with bad guys. Other than the Luca Brasi deal we are making with them now.

Sadly, otherwise intelligent people often let emotion and ideology interfere with reason and basic facts. Every "deal" or contract includes an important element: An implied covenant of good faith. When this covenant is violated, it gives rise to an immediate and automatic cause of action for breach of contract. Case closed.