NnnnotSoSmart Posted March 2 Posted March 2 Interesting perspective: The Free Press The Iran Strike Is All About China By Zineb Riboua 03.01.26 — International This piece, which is behind a paywall, is a fascinating analysis of the relationships between Iran and China which are being impacted by this war. I've read nothing similar elsewhere. https://www.thefp.com/p/the-iran-strike-is-all-about-china Operation Epic Fury, this weekend’s joint U.S.-Israel attack on Iran, has been widely described as an extraordinary assault on the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. That is true, but it misses a critical dimension. For years, Beijing has spent billions of dollars building Iran into a structural asset. By striking Iran directly, the Trump administration is dismantling, whether by design or by consequence, a pillar of China’s regional architecture. In other words: This is all about China. Let me explain. In June 2025, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a 12-day campaign of precision strikes that destroyed Iranian enrichment facilities, killed over 30 senior commanders and a dozen nuclear scientists, and drew the United States into direct strikes on three nuclear sites. The Islamic Republic’s deterrent mythology, cultivated over four decades, collapsed within two weeks. Then, in late December, the largest protests since 1979 erupted in Iran, fueled by economic free fall and a population that no longer believed in the regime’s strength. The government responded in January with massacres that killed tens of thousands, prompting the European Union to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist organization and further increasing the isolation of the regime. By any conventional measure, the Islamic Republic was weaker than at any point in its history. Yet China was moving to put it back together. Last week, it was reported that Tehran was close to finalizing a deal for Chinese-made supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, capable of threatening American carriers now massing in the Persian Gulf. Earlier, Chinese suppliers shipped over 1,000 tons of sodium perchlorate, a key missile propellant ingredient, to an Iranian port, enough to rebuild a substantial portion of the ballistic missile stockpile that Israel spent 12 days destroying. Why would Beijing do this? And what does that mean for the United States? Answering those questions requires looking beyond Iran and toward the broader global contest in which Iran plays a role. Iran’s economy now runs on Chinese money, and both capitals know it. Start with oil, because oil is where the entire relationship begins. China buys more than 80 percent of Iran’s crude oil exports at steep discounts. The shipments travel on a ghost fleet of tankers that switch off their transponders and relabel their cargo as Malaysian or Indonesian to circumvent American sanctions. Since 2021, the cumulative value of these purchases has exceeded $140 billion. This makes China the main reason the Islamic Republic has not gone bankrupt. The arrangement works beautifully for Beijing. It gets cheap oil for its industrial base, saving billions annually compared to market-rate suppliers. And in exchange, China acquires influence over a nation of 90 million people sitting astride the world’s most consequential energy corridor. Meanwhile, Tehran, increasingly cut off from every other major economy, has nowhere else to turn. When Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei received Chinese president Xi Jinping in Iran in 2016, he praised the 25-year strategic partnership as “totally correct and endowed with wisdom,” adding pointedly that “Western governments have never been able to win the Iranian nation’s trust.” Khamenei was not merely flattering a guest. He was describing a structural reality: Iran’s economy now runs on Chinese money, and both capitals know it. In 2021, the 25-Year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership committed China to invest an estimated $400 billion across Iran’s energy, banking, telecommunications, and infrastructure sectors, formalizing a relationship that was already underway. The deeper this integration runs, the less leverage anyone else has over Tehran, and the more leverage Beijing accumulates. Next, consider the technology dimension of this compact. Chinese technology companies Huawei and ZTE have built significant portions of Iran’s telecommunications infrastructure. In 2010, ZTE signed a $130 million contract to overlay a surveillance system onto Iran’s state-managed telephone and internet networks. Around that time, Huawei became the country’s largest telecommunications equipment provider, supplying location-tracking services to mobile carriers and pitching Iranian officials on content-censorship tools. Since then, the cooperation has expanded to include AI-enabled facial-recognition cameras from Chinese firms such as Tiandy and Hikvision, deep packet inspection tools, and centralized traffic management systems. Iran’s National Information Network, a state-controlled domestic intranet that progressively severs citizens’ access to the open internet, was modeled on the Great Firewall of China and built with Chinese technical assistance. The practical consequences of this technological integration came into focus during the January 2026 massacres. When the Iranian regime imposed a near-total internet shutdown to prevent footage of the killings from reaching the outside world, it did so on infrastructure that Chinese firms helped to construct for years. The surveillance technology that enables the IRGC to track, identify, and suppress dissidents was supplied by the same companies that perform identical functions for the Chinese Communist Party in Xinjiang. Beijing is providing the Islamic Republic with the tools to survive its own population’s rejection. Why? Because a dependent Iran is a useful Iran. Every year Washington spends focusing on managing Tehran is another year Beijing gets to build control in the Pacific. Iran’s value to China also extends to proxy warfare. When Iran’s Houthis began attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea in late 2023, the consequences rippled across the global economy. Container traffic through the Red Sea fell by 90 percent within three months. Goods worth roughly $1 trillion were disrupted in the first seven months. The rerouting of ships around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope added nearly two weeks and about $1 million in fuel costs to every voyage, driving freight rates between Asia and Europe. The U.S. bore the heaviest burden of response. Carrier strike groups were deployed, air campaigns were sustained for months, and precision munitions costing between $1 million and $4 million per interceptor were expended at a rate that, by mid-2025, had consumed roughly a quarter of America’s high-end missile interceptor inventory. Meanwhile, Chinese-flagged ships sailed through with less interference. Beijing contributed no vessels to the multinational protection force and issued no condemnation of the attacks. In fact, Chinese satellite companies were providing the Houthis with intelligence to enable their targeting of commercial vessels. The logic here is simple. Every dollar the United States spends defending Red Sea shipping lanes is a dollar unavailable for submarine production, Pacific bases, or Taiwan contingency planning. Every carrier group stationed in the Gulf of Aden is a carrier group absent from the Western Pacific. Iran’s proxies, armed with Iranian weapons and supported by Iranian intelligence, function as a mechanism of American strategic attrition, and the costs fall entirely on Washington while Beijing accumulates strategic gains. China benefits from the Iranian threat in another, less obvious way: It uses the anxiety that Iran generates among Gulf Arab states to deepen its own relationships with those states, which happen to be America’s most important regional partners. The Gulf monarchies, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have lived for decades under the shadow of Iranian aggression. Historically, they managed this through close alignment with the U.S. But confidence in American reliability has eroded, a process that began with the Barack Obama administration’s pursuit of a nuclear deal with Tehran, deepened after the muted American response to the 2019 Aramco attacks by the Houthis on Saudi Arabia, and accelerated after the U.S. military’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. Gulf leaders increasingly believe they cannot rely solely on Washington. China has stepped into this uncertainty with commercial patience and diplomatic ambition. Saudi Arabia now sells more oil to China than to any other country. The UAE has woven Huawei technology into its critical tech infrastructure. Chinese firms are building ports, railways, 5G networks, and smart cities across the Gulf region. In March 2023, Beijing brokered the Saudi-Iranian normalization agreement, a diplomatic achievement that announced China’s arrival as a Middle Eastern power broker. That same year, Saudi investment minister Khalid al-Falih declared publicly that a multipolar world had emerged and that cooperation between the Gulf states and China would be “a significant player in it.” The pattern should be legible by now: Iran’s threat pushes Gulf states to diversify their partnerships, and this very diversification increases Chinese leverage. The more leverage China holds over Gulf capitals, the less likely those capitals are to side with Washington on the questions Beijing cares about most: Taiwan, semiconductor export controls, sanctions enforcement, and the future of the dollar-based financial order. All of which brings us to the central problem. President Trump didn’t launch Operation Epic Fury only to punish Khamenei for his massacres. Trump launched it because every year Washington spends focusing on managing Tehran is another year Beijing gets to build control in the Pacific. The orientation of the Middle East will determine whether the U.S. can prevail in the defining confrontation of this century: a Chinese move against Taiwan. Why? First, in a Taiwan contingency, the sea lanes through which China imports roughly 70 percent of its oil become contested. Beijing will need alternative energy sources and will look westward to Iran, Russia, and any Gulf state willing to sell outside the dollar system. If the Middle East has already drifted into Beijing’s economic orbit by the time that crisis arrives, China begins the confrontation with a strategic energy reserve that American planners cannot disrupt. Second, the U.S. cannot fight a two-theater war. A Middle East that demands permanent crisis management bleeds the American military of the ships, aircraft, and munitions it needs for Pacific deterrence. By contrast, a Middle East restructured toward stability, where Iran’s proxy architecture has been degraded and Gulf partners are aligned, can be managed with a lighter footprint, freeing decisive combat power for the Pacific theater. Finally, if a Taiwan crisis comes, the U.S. will need allied nations to impose punishing costs on China through sanctions, financial exclusion, and technology denial. If Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others are so deeply engaged in the Chinese economic system that they refuse to curtail oil sales to Beijing during a Pacific war, the entire sanctions architecture will collapse at the moment it is needed most. For all these reasons, Iran must be understood as the central pillar of a regional order that Beijing has assembled. Operation Epic Fury is now cracking that pillar. But the strikes should not be understood as an end in themselves. They are the opening act in the larger contest against China. Collapse the Islamic Republic, and you remove the single greatest drain on American strategic bandwidth, expose the fragility of every client relationship Beijing has built from Tehran outward, and free the United States to concentrate on the Pacific with a credibility that 20 years of pivot talk never produced. That outcome, however, requires following through. The Trump administration must use the convergence of military pressure, regime fragility, and allied momentum to finish what its opening act this weekend began. The Venezuela playbook offers a template: Recognize a legitimate transitional authority, marshal international support around the transition, and let the regime’s own fragility do most of the work while American pressure forecloses Beijing’s ability to reconstitute what has been broken. No comparable opportunity to inflict this kind of strategic damage on Chinese positioning has presented itself since the end of the Cold War. The nature of the threat makes this course not just preferable but necessary. Tehran’s deterrent has never rested solely on its nuclear program. It also possesses a mobile, survivable, and largely undetectable strike platform that can operate from any port or shipping lane, hitting from vectors no existing defense plan anticipates. A regime that can threaten American carriers from unmarked hulls in any ocean must be totally removed from the board. Crucially, none of this would be possible without the groundwork that has already been laid—not by the U.S., but by Israel. In the past few years, Israel has broken the Iranian-led axis, dismantled Hezbollah’s command structure, and proved that the entire edifice could be shattered by force. Acting largely alone and under relentless international pressure, the Jewish state has conducted the most consequential campaign against Chinese regional infrastructure this century. In this sense, Operation Epic Fury picks up where Israel left off, escalating from proxy destruction to direct confrontation with the hub itself. No comparable opportunity to inflict this kind of strategic damage on Chinese positioning has presented itself since the end of the Cold War. So yes, the Iran question was never about Iran. Remove the Islamic Republic from the equation, and China loses its pawns for a Taiwan contingency. Leave it in place, and the Middle East remains what Beijing designed it to be: a second front that Washington can never afford to leave and can never afford to stay in. Trump’s strikes are the first move by an American president who appears to understand that the road to the Pacific runs through Tehran.
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 35 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: 'So far' doesen't really matter much, Mike [ @cubsfan ], 2.5 days and nights in, It's already spreading, Iran attacking several [three by now!?] neighbours. So who is bearing the pain? What is the plan and the strategy for finishing this? Huh??? Iran's top leadership destroyed, missiles destroyed, entire navy destroyed. What else were you expecting for 3 days? LOL
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 21 minutes ago, dealraker said: Dang Greg I was looking, that is fishing, for cubs who usually responds lightly to an intended-to-be-silly post. And what did I get? The most biased man in politics history! Not ignoring you," just nothing to add" as Charlie would say!
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 18 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: Mike [ @cubsfan ], Adding : Will you, Mike [ @cubsfan ], POTUS and USA pay for this? Pay for what? Keeping your ass in Europe safe? Why don't you try pitching in for once.
John Hjorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) Reuters - Worid, Europe [March 2nd 2026] : France to boost nuclear arsenal, involve European allies in deterrence - - - o 0 o - - - All over the place in Danish Mainstream Media here in tiny Denmark today. Door step with the three ministers running things at 6:30 PM [ 18:30] today here. We Danes are in, all political parties that matter backing up on it. I'm not thrilled at all by experiencing this. I can't see an alternative to this. First time I see some balls from Emanuel Macron, I think. The French nuclear arsenal is working totally independent of USA, contrary to the UK nuclear arsenal. POTUS will gradually loose control over the overall political narrative and sentiment, because when USA is not to pay and contribute, USA will not be to decide. It's that plain simple. [Ref. Charlies [ @dealrakers ] posts above.] Mark Carney has already done it to him, POTUS will likely learn it the hard way, again. Edited March 2 by John Hjorth
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 5 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: Reuters - Worid, Europe [March 2nd 2026] : France to boost nuclear arsenal, involve European allies in deterrence - - - o 0 o - - - All over the place in Danish Mainstream Media here in tiny Denmark today. Door step with the three ministers running things at 6:30 PM [ 18:30] today here. We Danes are in, all political parties that matter backing up on it. I'm not thrilled at all by experiencing this. I can't see an alternative to this. First time I see some balls from Emanuel Macron, I think. The French nuclear arsenal is working totally independent of USA, contrary to the UK nuclear arsenal. POTUS will gradually loose control over the overall political political narrative and sentiment, because when USA is not to pay and contribute, USA will not be to decide. It's that plain simple. [Ref. Charlies [ @dealrakers ] posts above.] Mark Carney has already done it to him, POTUS will likely learn it the hard way, again. It's about time. Europe is going to teach Trump a lesson he won't forget. Of all the losers, Macron will lead the way. LOL
Gregmal Posted March 2 Posted March 2 46 minutes ago, dealraker said: Dang Greg I was looking, that is fishing, for cubs who usually responds lightly to an intended-to-be-silly post. And what did I get? The most biased man in politics history! You fished and immediately after caught a few schnooks whom were appalled Trump was rigging polymarkets lol well done!
73 Reds Posted March 2 Posted March 2 13 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: Reuters - Worid, Europe [March 2nd 2026] : France to boost nuclear arsenal, involve European allies in deterrence - - - o 0 o - - - All over the place in Danish Mainstream Media here in tiny Denmark today. Door step with the three ministers running things at 6:30 PM [ 18:30] today here. We Danes are in, all political parties that matter backing up on it. I'm not thrilled at all by experiencing this. I can't see an alternative to this. First time I see some balls from Emanuel Macron, I think. The French nuclear arsenal is working totally independent of USA, contrary to the UK nuclear arsenal. POTUS will gradually loose control over the overall political narrative and sentiment, because when USA is not to pay and contribute, USA will not be to decide. It's that plain simple. [Ref. Charlies [ @dealrakers ] posts above.] Mark Carney has already done it to him, POTUS will likely learn it the hard way, again. <<POTUS will gradually loose control over the overall political narrative and sentiment, because when USA is not to pay and contribute, USA will not be to decide.>> John, that would be wonderful! Did it occur to anyone that getting Europe and the rest of the World to pay its fair share is, in fact Trump's biggest foreign policy objective? But boy will they be teaching him a lesson, LOL.
John Hjorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 35 minutes ago, cubsfan said: Pay for what? Keeping your ass in Europe safe? Why don't you try pitching in for once. I'm obviously wasting my time here with you, trying to repond to your one liners. <period, end>.
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 3 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: I'm obviously wasting my time here with you, trying to repond to your one liners. <period, end>. You seem to have a problem with the Israeli/USA joint operation to put the largest state sponsor of terrorism to bed once and for all. The courage of these 2 nations is unmatched - and for the good of the free world - it's starting and will take time. Europe, of course, will be a major beneficiary, as always. I'm mystified as to your pissing and moaning about "who pays for what". When Stalin and the Allies crushed Hitler in Berlin - were you concerned about the "mess" they left in Germany? or were you delighted that the regime was gone for good? I find it strange you can't acknowledge a true historical milestone for once - oh, but I forget - it is Trump making the world safer - so that must explain it.
Parsad Posted March 2 Posted March 2 3 hours ago, Viking said: Markets are of the opinion that what is happening in Iran today is a big nothing burger. And that is because these events are typically over quickly - and we all continue merrily on our way. I am not so sure. Now a year ago I was completely wrong about tariffs (too pessimistic) - so I am going to keep a more open mind this time around. I thought the video attached below was interesting. The presenter has an interesting take on why 'regime change' just doesn't work in the middle east. Actually it's worse... it usually results in a worse outcome. What happens in Iran is going to have a major impact on Trump's future. If he gets it right, perhaps he salvages the mid-terms. If he gets it wrong, the midterms get worse (perhaps Dem's get both the house and the senate). Iran is not Iraq. And Iraq turned into a catastrophe. Importantly, the milk has been spilt. So there is no point in debating "if it should have happened" or "why it happened". What I am very interest in knowing is where does it all go from here. Is it really a big nothing burger? Or does it get worse before it gets better. Hmmm...also Iraq was a direct result of 9/11. There has been no real threat here to the U.S. or any other nation...only the possibility that Iraq was working on nuclear material. Again, it was assumed that was "Mission Accomplished" again when Trump "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program a few months ago. This is just distraction and opportunism. Portray strength, get control of the Middle East and oil distribution, take eyes off of domestic issues...none of which have been fixed other than the southern border...and maybe get some votes for the mid-terms. And let's not forget all of the shit he did with Epstein going away for a while! Cheers!
Parsad Posted March 2 Posted March 2 3 hours ago, cubsfan said: So far, this has been a stunning success. It will be worth the pain and took great courage to do so. To bad Nixon didn't do this, eh Cubs? Trump is the best at taking eyes off his problems! Cheers!
Parsad Posted March 2 Posted March 2 53 minutes ago, cubsfan said: I find it strange you can't acknowledge a true historical milestone for once - oh, but I forget - it is Trump making the world safer - so that must explain it. Is he making it safer? Or is he making it more unstable? There are clear arguments for both sides. Only time will tell! Cheers!
dealraker Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Parsad said: To bad Nixon didn't do this, eh Cubs? Trump is the best at taking eyes off his problems! Cheers! Given the "stunning success" which means within ? weeks Trump can claim total victory - problem eliminated... Somebody start a poll on how long before this comes. I say 3 weeks. Then we'll move on to the next crisis that will dominate media and leave Iran - and Venezuala - and tariffs - and Epstein - an ICE void of upkeep. In other words a second poll can be titled: "What one issue, of Trump's discretion, will big orange have us scrambling to conceptualize next (while of course discussing nothing else)?" Edited March 2 by dealraker
Gregmal Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Parsad said: Again, it was assumed that was "Mission Accomplished" again when Trump "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program a few months ago. You’re kidding right? Lest we forget the “thems” whom first yapped about “TACO Trump” and said he wouldn’t bomb Iran and then after he bombed Iran quickly went to “but it barely damaged anything” based on erroneous liberal reporting. And now they think he made a half mil on polymarkets and wanna support Iran when let’s get real, we have turned everyone(except NY and CA liberals), even many Middle East countries totally against Iran and have them on the ropes…at some point we just need to learn to ignore anything, even the grunts, that come out of the mouths of some of these anti American liberal losers. Edited March 2 by Gregmal
Parsad Posted March 2 Posted March 2 3 minutes ago, Gregmal said: You’re kidding right? Lest we forget the “thems” whom first yapped about “TACO Trump” and said he wouldn’t bomb Iran and then after he bombed Iran quickly went to “but it barely damaged anything” based on erroneous liberal reporting. And now they think he made a half mil on polymarkets and wanna support Iran when let’s get real, we have turned everyone(except NY and CA liberals), even many Middle East countries totally against Iran and have them on the ropes…at some point we just need to learn to ignore anything, even the grunts, that come out of the mouths of some of these anti American liberal losers. The polymarket thing is stupid! Probably some one else working in the White House who made the bet! But we do know he's not just doing this to make the world safer...it's to portray strength, get control of oil distribution, and the Middle East is a massive, lucrative piece of the world to do business in...one where the Trump family and associates have very close ties. 10 years from now...when the Trump family has far less direct influence over politics...they will have even more power through their connections and money! And Trump will never see the inside of a prison cell for any of the shit he did. Maybe hell...but not prison! Cheers!
cubsfan Posted March 2 Posted March 2 Yes, of course! Trump belongs in prison. Dirtbag Obama gave Iran 1.7B Dipshit Biden gave Iran 6B Trump destroyed their handiwork for the good of the world, but he would never do it unless there was something in it for the Trump family.
Gregmal Posted March 2 Posted March 2 Sure. But one thing has been made crystal clear and this is that these stupid liberals are good for nothing other than predictably just opposing absolutely anything Trump says or does. You could have a resolution curing cancer on the floor and these pieces of shit would find some procedural technicality as their excuse to have the whole party minus John Fetterman vote against it.
SharperDingaan Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 7 hours ago, Viking said: @73 Reds, I am with you... the regime in Iran is pure evil. But in the middle east, I am not sure 'an innocent population' has ever decided 'their own course' - generally, its political culture/economic structure is completely different from what we have in Liberal democracies in the west. IMHO, what we have here is not normal or the natural way of things - and it takes decades (centuries?) to put in place. My view is how much of the middle east/Russia/China operate today is actually the normal way of things. The West is the abnormal way - the crazy thing is in recent decades we seem to have lost sight of how fragile what we have actually is... (and I am not talking about Trump). Iran was never going to be a 'quick fix'; most would have expected resolution via another coalition Gulf War. When even the usual coalition partners are noticeably absent, and limiting participation (Diego Garcia) .... it's very telling. It's only 3 days in, and everyone is optimistic; unlikely to remain the same after the SOH has been closed for a week, and more oil infrastructure has gone up in flames. While the rise in oil prices is being 'managed', higher prices are just a matter of time. It would seem that it isn't going as planned ... timelines are now being dropped, and troops on the ground proposed. The other reality is that pipelines and facilities cannot be realistically protected from anonymous ground attack. Simple thing to blow pipelines and drop explosives via drone, and there are lots of radicalised warriors .... Ukraine does it every day. There's always a short honeymoon after a major strike ... then reality starts catching up. All that expensive ordinance raining down like water, and high-tech planes burning their operational hours .... is this thing only supposed to last 4-5 weeks, 'cause after that it's used up ??? and a good chunk of the air fleet is now out of service ?? SD Edited March 3 by SharperDingaan
dwy000 Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Gregmal said: Sure. But one thing has been made crystal clear and this is that these stupid liberals are good for nothing other than predictably just opposing absolutely anything Trump says or does. You could have a resolution curing cancer on the floor and these pieces of shit would find some procedural technicality as their excuse to have the whole party minus John Fetterman vote against it. Welcome to politics!! Of course the other party is going to take the other side of arguments! That happens whoever is in charge. Hell, cubs and reds would probably sell their kids before supporting anything Biden ever did. Its whether the broader public supports what they are doing that matters - because thats what will determine if they stay in power or get voted out. Actually, I stand corrected - the last bipartisan vote that was supported.by every member of congress (except 1) was for the release of the unredacted Epstein files. How's that going? Edited March 3 by dwy000
John Hjorth Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 11 minutes ago, dwy000 said: Welcome to politics!! Of course the other party is going to take the other side of arguments! That happens whoever is in charge. He'll, cubs and reds would probably sell their kids before supporting anything Biden ever did. Its whether the broader public supports what they are doing that matters - because thats what will determine if they stay in power or get voted out. Please leave Mikes [ @cubsfans ] and @73 Redss children out this. It's an escalation in this topic, certainly not needed for, by any rational thinking human being here on CofB&F. Edited March 3 by John Hjorth
dwy000 Posted March 3 Posted March 3 25 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: Please leave Mikes [ @cubsfans ] and @73 Redss children out this. It's an escalation in this topic, certainly not needed for, by any rational thinking human being here on CofB&F. Its a turn of phrase here. But fair enough. They would probably sell their soul before supporting anything Biden did.
John Hjorth Posted March 3 Posted March 3 35 minutes ago, dwy000 said: Its a turn of phrase here. But fair enough. They would probably sell their soul before supporting anything Biden did. @dwy000, It's not a turn of prase here. What you posted was insulting, really insulting for somebody here on CofB&F. It was just a no-go. - - - o 0 o - - - I'm likeky personally - considered here on CofB&F, in total perspective, a North European liberal, which I'm not, at all!
dwy000 Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 14 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: @dwy000, It's not a turn of prase here. What you posted was insulting, really insulting for somebody here on CofB&F. It was just a no-go. - - - o 0 o - - - I'm likeky personally - considered here on CofB&F, in total perspective, a North European liberal, which I'm not, at all! Its a turn of phrase here. Its not intended as a literal interpretation its intended to show an extreme level of support (just like to "sell your soul" does). We also have "yo momma is so fat..." jokes that arent really about your mother. Its a turn of phrase. It wasnt intended to offend. Edited March 3 by dwy000
Parsad Posted March 3 Posted March 3 2 hours ago, cubsfan said: Yes, of course! Trump belongs in prison. Dirtbag Obama gave Iran 1.7B Dipshit Biden gave Iran 6B Trump destroyed their handiwork for the good of the world, but he would never do it unless there was something in it for the Trump family. They didn't bypass Congress. I know you don't like "checks and balances", but unfortunately that's what a democracy is built on! Cheers!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now