Political Posts

[cubsfan]

14 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

No matter what degree of success we may achieve, the naysayers will always be....well, naysayers.  Somehow, on this board some are able to put their short-term thinking aside when it comes to investments even though it is so obvious in their politics.  It is no coincidence that two of the most successful countries in the World are also two of the youngest countries that also happen to be best allies.   Each may make mistakes but the trajectory always seems to straighten itself out.  It seems as if some of the rest of the World is coming around to following our example, though not necessarily countries and/or regions that we would have expected.  Maybe in time.  

 

I love how critics dump on Kushner & Witkoff, while the flunky team of John Kerry, Anthony Blinken and Ivy League clown car got totally taken to the cleaners by the Iranians.

 

Boy, does the IRGC wish they had those suckers back:  "Yeah, we'll be good, we promise - no nukes or ICMBs"!

 

Hilarious

[73 Reds]

3 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

I love how critics dump on Kushner & Witkoff, while the flunky team of John Kerry, Anthony Blinken and Ivy League clown car got totally taken to the cleaners by the Iranians.

 

Boy, does the IRGC wish they had those suckers back:  "Yeah, we'll be good, we promise - no nukes or ICMBs"!

 

Hilarious

Its just a vastly different - and wrong ideology.  Even Israel's most ardent enemies from the past recognize that is is utterly feckless to be at war with a Country that doesn't want to be at war with them.  They finally understand that superior strength, will and a single objective of survival at all costs cannot be defeated; vastly better intelligence doesn't hurt either.  The US and Israel make ideal allies and the rest of the World will be the ultimate beneficiaries if dumb politics doesn't get in the way.   

[cubsfan]

6 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

As I said above the real test here on this Iran boondoggle.........is does Trump emerge from this conflict with a deal and a status quo in Middle East that is superior to the deal and status quo on offer in Geneva and before he decided to go to war. Right? thats the test @cubsfan, the real test. hope we can agree on that at least?

 

Right now, objectivably, across most metrics things are worse than what was available to be signed on Feb 26th in Geneva at $0.

 

- Tehran regime has been changed alright to be more hardline than it was before

- Iran has demonstrated irrefutably that it can toggle on and off shipping in the SOH at will

- 13 American air bases in the region are destroyed or inoperable

- Iran has demonstrated and confirmed its ability to destroy neighbouring energy and water infrastructure in the gulf

 

And most damningly, right now, the Iranian nuclear deal being discussed openly right now and offered in negotiations has disimproved relative to Geneva.

 

The 'wins' right now are short term tactical military ones....not long term strategic one....sure the Iran navy/airforce is gone....but who was worried about the Iranian navy and airforce in early Feb exactly   

 

You probably should let Israel and the USA conduct the war to its conclusion instead of trying to micromanage every date and event like Mershiemer.

 

- No military capabilities- success

- No manufacturing of military capabilities- success

- Destroyed nuclear capabilities- success

- Regime change - would be icing on the cake

- SOH opening - US will force it open

 

Keep trying to force the dates with something as unpredictable as war.   

 

My bet: it's solved earlier rather than later.

 

If you're so sure - maybe short the market

[changegonnacome]

8 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

oy, does the IRGC wish they had those suckers back:  "Yeah, we'll be good, we promise - no nukes

 

Promises? You do realize that Donald is asking Iran to "promise" not to enrich uranium, promise not to get a bomb.

 

I love the way that when a Democratic regime asks a country to promise to do something enshrined in a deal they are jokers.....but when Donald asks that same regime to make a promise in a deal its genius. The bar is so high for the DNC and the bar so low for the GOP and vice versa. Which I guess is the definition of bipartinship

 

You do realize that there are going to be a bunch of promises and implicit trust inherent in any deal Donald signs. Indeed isnt signing a deal with Iran fundamentally an exercise in trust?

[cubsfan]

Just now, 73 Reds said:

Its just a vastly different - and wrong ideology.  Even Israel's most ardent enemies from the past recognize that is is utterly feckless to be at war with a Country that doesn't want to be at war with them.  They finally understand that superior strength, will and a single objective of survival at all costs cannot be defeated; vastly better intelligence doesn't hurt either.  The US and Israel make ideal allies and the rest of the World will be the ultimate beneficiaries if dumb politics doesn't get in the way.   

 

If Israel ended up to be our only ally, that's just fine by me.

 

Imagine, a country of 10M with more courage and fight than an entire continent of 550M, with a GDP larger than the USA that won't fight for Ukraine.

 

Like many of the Arab nations, Israel makes Europe looks sick.  I feel for Europe and hope they get their act together.

[changegonnacome]

29 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

My bet: it's solved earlier rather than later.

 

If you're so sure - maybe short the market

 

Said nothing about the market.

 

My point is simple....and the test basic....Trump's decision to go to war with Iran will be judged a success/failure as measured by the INCREMENTALLY of any concessions achieved in a future US-Iran nuclear deal (if any) relative to the status quo available on Feb 26th all measured against the costs incurred to achieve that incrementality.

 

Right now......there is ZERO incrementally in any US-Iran nuclear deal I've seen muted and clearly significant economic costs have been incurred by the US, the region and the global economy to say nothing about the US service members lives lost.

 

Trump's inability to TACO right now is because the terms of exit and the Iran-US nuclear deal on offer today are materially worse than what was available in Geneva in Feb all while huge costs have been incurred

 

Trump is one of the greatest salesmen on earth but even he cant sell this turd (as is)....and his ability to escalate from here to change the facts on the ground are hampered by a simple reality.....whatever he does from here is very unlikely to get Tehran to capitulate to his liking to get him a sellable turd  or lets call it an improved deal and all those same escalation options like Project Freedom (paused after 24 short hours due to UAE attacks) come at significant cost to the region's infrastructure and Global Economy.

 

Trump is stuck here precisely because the status quo in the Middle East with an Iranian regime that is even more hardline, that is blockading the SOH and an Iran-US nuclear deal on table today which is materially WORSE than what was on offer in Geneva a few weeks is kind of the definition of stuck  - i dont think this is a controversial position except for those that exclusively get their information from General Jack Keane, Jesse Water and Mark Levin. I could link out to a bunch of experts who dont have a partisan dog in this fight....Michael Clarke on Sky News, Former MI6 chief its endless, because Trump's dilemma and LACK of a true strategic victory here or even as I said true incrementality relative to Feb 26th status quo and deal on the table is so obvious.

 

 

 

Edited May 6 by changegonnacome

[73 Reds]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

 

If Israel ended up to be our only ally, that's just fine by me.

 

Imagine, a country of 10M with more courage and fight than an entire continent of 550M, with a GDP larger than the USA that won't fight for Ukraine.

 

Like many of the Arab nations, Israel makes Europe looks sick.  I feel for Europe and hope they get their act together.

Oh, I think Europe will come around (kicking and screaming, maybe...)  Eastern Europe seems more inclined now to see the light but ultimately they'll all do what is in their best interest.  In many ways this 2nd Presidential term has been highly valuable in terms of recognizing who we can depend on and who (for the time being) we can't, and who wants to remain a dependent on the US and who doesn't.

[changegonnacome]

36 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

this 2nd Presidential term has been highly valuable in terms of recognizing who we can depend on and who (for the time being) we can't

The US’s ‘allies’ in Europe and Asia in particular would likely say the exact same thing!

[73 Reds]

2 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

The US’s ‘allies’ in Europe and Asia in particular would likely say the exact same thing!

You're right.  Its all in the reasoning.

[cwericb]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

 

Why in the world would you leak your battle plans to countries that are deathly afraid of their radical Islamic populations?

Shit - in the US, we can't even trust our Democrats or RINOS.  Can you imagine giving Congress a preview into your direct actions, only to have Ilhan Omar or Rashida Talib call their buddies in HAMAS.

 

That's why the POTUS issued threat after threat since he was elected to Iran and Proxies. They certainly did not got the message.

 

That's why the US entrusts POTUS with the military and not Congress.

 

If Europe was dense enough to NOT understand what was possible, then they surely are being led by a bunch of losers.

 

Not here in the USA fortunately.

 

Oh for crying out loud, Trump had been telling the whole world that he was going to attack Iran for how long?

 

Consulting with the allies first and asking for their support in advance wouldn't not cross a narcissist's mind as he believed this would be over in 4 days, a month, etc and he would be able to have all the glory to himself.

 

Instead, "Donald the Conqueror" owns what he started and as of yet he hasn't conquered anything.

 

No regime change, no win. 

[changegonnacome]

21 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

You're right.  Its all in the reasoning.

You bet if your in Europe/Asia right now your US ‘partner’ in the last 18 months has started a trade war with you, tariffed you and then started a war of choice in the Middle East that has led exploding energy costs and outright fuel shortages in your region.

 

What did Kissinger say….”the only thing worse than being the United States enemy is being its allies.”

 

If you were a strategist sitting in Beijing in the mid-2010’s wondering how in the hell China was ever going to put a dent in the ‘Great Wall of America’ that spanned the globe with all its deep strategic economic and military alliances and Nostradamus whispered in your ear that Trump was going to be elected not once but twice and do what he’s done……well you would have wet your pants with joy.

 

That’s the big picture for those who care to zoom out and think about such things.

 

 

Edited May 6 by changegonnacome

[cwericb]

53 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

 In many ways this 2nd Presidential term has been highly valuable in terms of recognizing who we can depend on and who (for the time being) we can't, and who wants to remain a dependent on the US and who doesn't.

 

Certainly true for Canada. Always good to know who your friends and adversaries are and who is prepared to stab you in the back. 

[73 Reds]

Just now, changegonnacome said:

You bet if your in Europe/Asia right now your US ‘partner’ in the last 18 months has started a trade war with you, tariffed you and then started a war of choice in the Middle East that has led exploding energy costs and outright fuel shortages in your region.

 

What did Kissinger say….”the only thing worse than being the United States enemy is being its allies.”

 

If you were a strategist sitting in Beijing in the mid-2010’s wondering how in the hell China was ever going to put a dent in the ‘Great Wall of America’ that spanned the globe with all its deep strategic economic and military alliances and Nostradamus whispered in your ear that Trump was going to be elected not once but twice and do what he’s done……well you would have wet your pants with your joy. 

Mostly true (don't agree that we started any war) but anyone looking at this objectively will recognize that Trump is a one-off President (well, two-off to be precise) and that even if Republicans retain the White House in 2028 with someone like Vance or Rubio, a return to diplomacy will be forthcoming in lieu of Trump's antics.  I think Trump was exactly what we needed at precisely the time when we needed him.  I don't think that this is what we will need once the immediate issues upon which he was elected have been resolved.   Statesmen have a place in US politics.  Unfortunately, I don't see any on the Left.

[changegonnacome]

29 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

I think Trump was exactly what we needed at precisely the time when we needed him

 

Well he is agent of change we both agree on that.............and is ramming a colossal amount of change down the US's and Global Systems throat in a very short period of time (ironic given he's nominally supposed to be a conservative, the central tenet of which is that change has unpredictable and not always good outcomes).

 

So I think we should be both humble enough to realize that the final verdict on Trump's radical T2 Presidency is yet to come in - he has 2.5yrs left and has already set in motion a number of events that are deeply unpredictable in how they turn out in the medium to long term.

 

He is a consequential President that's for sure.......consequential good or bad is the question.....the answer or verdict on his Presidency is post dated in envelope somewhere a few years out. My view is that verdict is tracking poorly chiefly because of the Iran war - he had substantive wins on immigration, deregulation and the OBBB before this and my gut (but its too early to say for sure) is he has overshadowed those achievements with his decision not sign what was on offer in Geneva and instead pivot to outright war with Iran.

 

 

Edited May 6 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Promises? You do realize that Donald is asking Iran to "promise" not to enrich uranium, promise not to get a bomb.

 

I love the way that when a Democratic regime asks a country to promise to do something enshrined in a deal they are jokers.....but when Donald asks that same regime to make a promise in a deal its genius. The bar is so high for the DNC and the bar so low for the GOP and vice versa. Which I guess is the definition of bipartinship

 

You do realize that there are going to be a bunch of promises and implicit trust inherent in any deal Donald signs. Indeed isnt signing a deal with Iran fundamentally an exercise in trust?

 

You are too smart for this. You know the difference, which is enforcement.

 

It's obvious what Iran thought of Obama when they saw him deliver "red lines" to Russia in Crimea and then do nothing.  'Oh great, another agreement by our friend Obama that we can violate any time we like - he doesn't have the guts to enforce JCPOA'

 

Pretty simple: Actions, not talk are meaningful to Iran.

 

Same with Biden: He cuts & runs on Afghanistan like a scared dog, lots of people killed, and leaving them with $80B in the finest military equipment around - along with Bagram AFB.

 

Why in the world would Iran be scared of Biden or Obama?  They were laughing their asses off.

 

Trump has always been totally different, which Iran has found out sadly.

[cubsfan]

27 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Oh for crying out loud, Trump had been telling the whole world that he was going to attack Iran for how long?

 

You're hilarious. Yeah, the entire Iranian leadership knew until Trump & Israel smoked them on Feb 28th.

 

You kill me!     They knew!

[cubsfan]

21 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Certainly true for Canada. Always good to know who your friends and adversaries are and who is prepared to stab you in the back. 

 

No need to worry about useless allies, like China Carney.  He's your problem.

[changegonnacome]

10 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

You are too smart for this. You know the difference, which is enforcement.

 

Trump has 2.5yrs left in office. Your acting like he's there forever to enforce.

 

Is Trump going to do enforcement from his retirement wheelchair in Mar-e-Lago in 2032?

 

There is no guaranteed enforcement durability across US Presidencies. End of story.

 

10 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Trump has always been totally different, which Iran has found out sadly.

 

Trump has turned out I would argue to be depressingly similar to other President's who decided to go on adventures in the Middle East - once stuck in the mud there they become short term minded, catering to a domestic political and party audience, hemmed in strategically by 24 month election cycles and the US public's low tolerance for pain.

 

Trump looks alot like his predecessors to me.

 

Edited May 6 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

5 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Trump has 2.5yrs left in office. Your acting like he's there forever to enforce.

 

Is Trump going to do enforcement from his retirement wheelchair in Mar-e-Lago in 2032?

 

There is no guaranteed enforcement durability across US Presidencies. End of story.

 

 

Trump has turned out I would argue to be depressingly similar to other President's who decided to go on adventures in the Middle East - short term, catering to a domestic political and party audience, hemmed in strategically by 24 month election cycles and the US public's low tolerance for pain.

 

 

Of course you are right about enforcement.

 

We know a Democratic President never will enforce it. Neither will Europe or the UN. They would NEVER risk enforcement because they are not capable of making hugely difficult decisions. Just look at Ukraine.

 

True leaders with courage are rare. Tell that to Mershiemer!

 

IF it turns out to be Iraq or Afghanistan - I'll be happy to buy you dinner at your favorite spot and you can trash me all night!

 

Peace Change!

Edited May 6 by cubsfan

[cwericb]

5 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

No need to worry about useless allies, like China Carney.  He's your problem.

 

And damned proud of him so far.

 

Gotta laugh at the "China" Carney remarks when the US does far, far more trade with China than does Canada.

And it was Donald Trump exchanging love letters with Putin, Xi Jinping, and his bestie of all, Kim Jong Un.

As the saying goes "People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks".

 

Useless allies?

 

Canada has had your country's back more times then not, and lost many good men and women in Korea, Afghanistan and Iraq and also supported the U.S secretly during the Vietnam war, and this is the bullshit thanks we get. 

 

Oh well, guess that is just the way the US is now.

 

 

 

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

Of course you are right about enforcement.

 

We know a Democratic President never will enforce it. Neither will Europe or the UN.

 

Which makes Trump's desire to reach for some kind of gold plated forever deal with Iran on a nuclear deal so illogical if you really think about it . Its functionally meaningless to get Iran to sign a deal with no enrichment forever clause.

 

I know the conditioning around the JCPOA's sunsetting clause was one of the great sticks used to beat up that deal.....but I've always viewed the JCPOA as a bad deal just way better than any of the other options I could think off.

 

Critics loved beating up the sunsetting clause....but as we've just discussed.... there is no forever with this stuff. its just not how the world works.

 

Which confirms something that I think @73 Reds and I have agreed on before.......Israel & Bibi's strategic assessment is correct here re:Iran and I completely understand it from their point of view and I would want the same if I lived in Israel - which is to say if you want to guarantee a no nuclear Iran over the medium-long term you need to destroy the current Iranian regime in entirety (plain and simple) and replace it totally with a Western aligned one AND if that option isn't available to you go for Door 2 which is the Syria option and you effectively attempt to dismantle Iran as a functioning  nation state.....the most obvious way to do that given there is no coherent opposition movement there is to tip it into Civil War. Given the US seemingly won't comply with boots on the ground required to topple and replace the regime, I suspect strategist in Tel Aviv are already working on ways to potentially send Iran into a chaotic civil war.

 

Donald Trump is about is about to discover the hard way, as Obama did - there is no plausible US-Iran nuclear deal good enough to satisfy Bibi/Israel. That is simply the reality. Because Bibi gets what we just agreed. Enforceability variability across US Presidential administrations just cant be trusted. You have to destroy this Iranian regime. There is no other answer for Bibi/Israel.

 

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

IF it turns out to be Iraq or Afghanistan - I'll be happy to buy you dinner at your favorite spot and you can trash me all night!

 

The chances of boots, in great numbers, landing on the ground in Iran is very low. So not like those two.

 

What will potentially mark this out as failure that exceeds those two boondoggles......is (a) how voluntary it was in nature but (b) just the level of direct and indirect US and Global economic costs and damage that we're incurred with so little to show for it.....as I said the success/failure equation for this war is quite simple when you get down to it:

 

Feb 26 nuclear terms available in Geneva VERSUS Final deal terms....against.........the total costs incurred and status quo in the region when those final deal terms are signed (for example will Iran have SOH Toll booth!).

 

All the evidence today is pointing to final deal terms that are inferior to Geneva......and Trump's threat to bail on the SOH points to a post-war Status Quo is meaningfully worse.

 

You go to war to meaningfully improve a political outcome......if that outcome is worse than what was available pre-war....well I wont use words like won or lost as they trigger people....but I think its fair to say that things didn't play out as one would have hoped before you hit go on Epic Fury, you certainly didn't go into it to end up back where you started or worse?!?!

 

 

 

Edited May 6 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

40 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Which makes Trump's desire to reach for some kind of gold plated forever deal with Iran on a nuclear deal so illogical if you really think about it . Its functionally meaningless to get Iran to sign a deal with no enrichment forever clause.

 

I know the conditioning around the JCPOA's sunsetting clause was one of the great sticks used to beat up that deal.....but I've always viewed the JCPOA as a bad deal just way better than any of the other options I could think off.

 

Critics loved beating up the sunsetting clause....but as we've just discussed.... there is no forever with this stuff. its just not how the world works.

 

Which confirms something that I think @73 Reds and I have agreed on before.......Israel & Bibi's strategic assessment is correct here re:Iran and I completely understand it from their point of view and I would want the same if I lived in Israel - which is to say if you want to guarantee a no nuclear Iran over the medium-long term you need to destroy the current Iranian regime in entirety (plain and simple) and replace it totally with a Western aligned one AND if that option isn't available to you go for Door 2 which is the Syria option and you effectively attempt to dismantle Iran as a functioning  nation state.....the most obvious way to do that given there is no coherent opposition movement there is to tip it into Civil War. Given the US seemingly won't comply with boots on the ground required to topple and replace the regime, I suspect strategist in Tel Aviv are already working on ways to potentially send Iran into a chaotic civil war.

 

Donald Trump is about is about to discover the hard way, as Obama did - there is no plausible US-Iran nuclear deal good enough to satisfy Bibi/Israel. That is simply the reality. Because Bibi gets what we just agreed. Enforceability variability across US Presidential administrations just cant be trusted. You have to destroy this Iranian regime. There is no other answer for Bibi/Israel.

 

 

The chances of boots, in great numbers, landing on the ground in Iran is very low. So not like those two.

 

What will potentially mark this out as failure that exceeds those two boondoggles......is (a) how voluntary it was in nature but (b) just the level of direct and indirect US and Global economic costs and damage that we're incurred with so little to show for it.....as I said the success/failure equation for this war is quite simple when you get down to it:

 

Feb 26 nuclear terms available in Geneva VERSUS Final deal terms....against.........the total costs incurred and status quo in the region when those final deal terms are signed (for example will Iran have SOH Toll booth!).

 

All the evidence today is pointing to final deal terms that are inferior to Geneva......and Trump's threat to bail on the SOH points to a post-war Status Quo is meaningfully worse.

 

 

The great conundrum- ANY written & agreed deal with the Iranian regime is useless. Unless someone, US or others, enforce it. Thank goodness for Israel given Europe is useless and afraid.

 

The regime can't ever be trusted, and must be overthrown. They know if they are overthrown, it's a death sentence, therefore they will fight to the end.  

 

IF they fight to the end, the IRGC will be killed anyway and much of Iran will be destroyed. The question is how long will this take?

 

America has NO stomach for another Iraq or Afghanistan and if it requires boots on the ground, it's not going to happen. Trump/Hegseth/MAGA, etc value excessive loss of life too much.

 

There is never any "gold plated" deal with changing administrations and ANY Iranian government.

 

So yes, it's a conundrum. 

 

But the world is miles ahead in regards to the Iran threat, thanks to Israel & the US.

 

 

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, cwericb said:

 

And damned proud of him so far.

 

Gotta laugh at the "China" Carney remarks when the US does far, far more trade with China than does Canada.

And it was Donald Trump exchanging love letters with Putin, Xi Jinping, and his bestie of all, Kim Jong Un.

As the saying goes "People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks".

 

Useless allies?

 

Canada has had your country's back more times then not, and lost many good men and women in Korea, Afghanistan and Iraq and also supported the U.S secretly during the Vietnam war, and this is the bullshit thanks we get. 

 

Oh well, guess that is just the way the US is now.

 

Yes, allies are fleeting and changing unfortunately.

 

The US knows it can count on Israel and certainly not Europe or Canada. 

 

Not a problem - because Commie Carney has to do what he has to do. Given your economic issues, might want to consider the very generous "Belt and Road" to bail you out.

[Castanza]

On 5/4/2026 at 9:03 AM, Blake Hampton said:

 

Imagine investing everything right before the economy has a stroke, and then having to rely on the government to save your ass.

That describes the entire U.S. economy

And what happened in the stock market around Liberation Day was nothing. What really should have scared people was what was happening in the bond market

But you wouldn't know anything about that.

 

The world is financed by treasuries. That ain't changing anytime soon. I fail to see how your USD cash, Treasuries, and Real Estate are any more safe than equities with your doomsday framework in mind? The government will have to save your ass one way or another....otherwise they will inflate the Hell out of your dollars, toss your IOUs in the trash and take your property when you can't afford the taxes....

 

On 5/4/2026 at 8:50 AM, Blake Hampton said:

If you buy the market today, I’m certain it’ll go up quite a lot in nominal terms.

 

In real terms, however, you’re going to get absolutely fucking crushed.

 

And what the f%&^ are you getting by holding cash and bonds lmao?!? 1% in real terms if you're lucky? Someone could buy equities only at market tops historically and they would be better off than you. 

[Parsad]

4 hours ago, cubsfan said:

 

No - it was started by Iran

 

No, it was started by Israel and the U.S.  Hamas started the war with Israel on October 7th, but the Iran war was started by Bibi and Trumpie!  Cheers!