2 hours ago, Negat0ry said:

You’re confusing criticism of Israel with antisemitism. These are not the same, although AIPAC has tried to say they are. Turns out studies show both sides are basically dead even when it comes to being anti-semites. The left does seem more concerned and upset than the right with this, though, I’ll give that to you:

Also, I forgot, was it the college democrats or the college republicans that just sued 3 days ago to preserve their god given right to do Nazi salutes?

https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/local/education/article315076912.html

This is confusing, let’s ask Grok

Why throw the picture of Gaza in while arguing you’re not anti Jew? That landscape is all on islam, and their adherents (Iran supported hamas in this case). The “fringe” isn’t so fringe, as we clearly see by the actions and words of islamists and their supporters throughout the West.

Without strong secular domination in Islamic countries, the mass always falls back to their terroristic and authoritarian foundation. Islam is not compatible with free Western civilization and is a deadly threat to the whole world.

F-35 hit?

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Shocked how antisemitic the left has become, the AI explanation is interesting:

The rise of antisemitism within elements of the political left is a complex phenomenon driven by the intersection of anti-Israel activism, anti-colonial ideology, and the adoption of traditional conspiracy tropes, often masked as progressive critique. While often associated with the Israel-Palestine conflict, this trend has broader roots, including a tendency to view global issues through a strict "oppressor vs. oppressed"

My pea brain has distilled it down to the squad type lunatics the far left has elected.

I didn't reference an AI (not chucking spears), but on the right I feel the anti-semetism has more to do with Jesus being "killed by jews," which enables it as an effective wedge. It's also right in line with the conspiracy-addled right which thinks everything is under the control of some ultra-powerful cabal of jews.

5 hours ago, Negat0ry said:

You’re confusing criticism of Israel with antisemitism. These are not the same, although AIPAC has tried to say they are. Turns out studies show both sides are basically dead even when it comes to being anti-semites. The left does seem more concerned and upset than the right with this, though, I’ll give that to you:

You can absolutely be critical of Israel without being an anti-semite. That's not what anyone is saying.

But, to your point. October 7th gave Israel (not the Jews) the right to displace every single Palestinian from Gaza forever. That action, supported and enabled by Iran, and undertaken by Hamas foreclosed a two-state solution permanently. And I said as much shortly after October 7th. It also gives them the right to overthrow the government of Iran.

2 hours ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

F-35 hit?

Seems real: https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/us-f35-fighter-jet-hit-iran-war-b2942023.html

But this footage on Reddit seems suspect. I've never seen engine exhaust under IR so static. Usually it's flickering and moving around...so I'm betting the shoot down footage is fake.

19 minutes ago, StoleIt said:

But this footage on Reddit seems suspect. I've never seen engine exhaust under IR so static. Usually it's flickering and moving around...so I'm betting the shoot down footage is fake.

"Sorry, this post has been removed by the moderators of r/CombatFootage."

USAF pilot, was hurt

5 hours ago, StoleIt said:

Seems real: https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/us-f35-fighter-jet-hit-iran-war-b2942023.html

But this footage on Reddit seems suspect. I've never seen engine exhaust under IR so static. Usually it's flickering and moving around...so I'm betting the shoot down footage is fake.

Sadly, incorrect.

Source:

The War Zone

USAF F-35 Makes Emergency Landing After Allegedly Being H...

The F-35 was flying a combat mission over Iran when it was forced to divert to a U.S. airbase. The F-35 was flying a combat mission over Iran when it was forced to divert to a U.S. airbase.

US removes sanctions on 140 million barrels of Iranian oil

Just like we planned it...

Random internet comparison:

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by StoleIt

The Obama administration gave Iran roughly $1.7 billion in 2016. We're now allowing 140 million barrels of Iranian oil to be sold. If that oil only sold for $90/barrel it would be $12.6 billion. Does anyone know if there is some financial intricacy I'm missing here that prevents Iran from making that money?

4D chess from an army major and a business genius that bankrupted a casino

This forum still needs a TDS button.........

42 minutes ago, Blue said:

This forum still needs a TDS button.........

100% and what these nutbags above fail to mention is the U.S. is blocking Iran from receiving the funds for the sale. The move helps stabilize the price of oil, specifically blocks the sale to China, North Korea and Cuba, deprives Iran of the revenue...sounds like 3D chess to me.

4 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

100% and what these nutbags above fail to mention is the U.S. is blocking Iran from receiving the funds for the sale. The move helps stabilize the price of oil, specifically blocks the sale to China, North Korea and Cuba, deprives Iran of the revenue...sounds like 3D chess to me.

So, Iranian oil can be sold, but Iran can’t receive revenue from any of the sales of their oil? Is that what you’re saying? Then why would Iran not continue to attack oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz until they were literally Winchester just out of spite?

2 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

So, Iranian oil can be sold, but Iran can’t receive revenue from any of the sales of their oil? Is that what you’re saying? Then why would Iran not continue to attack oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz until they were literally Winchester just out of spite?

Huh? When did I say they would stop attacking?

I believe we fully expect them to continue to attack, which is why we have destroyed their big Navy and are currently waging a campaign against their swift boats...You might have heard A-10, Apaches and other assets are now in that fight. We have also shifted the air campaign to attacking launch sites and storage for anti-ship capabilities.

The price of oil is just as much perception as it is supply. Selling 140 Million barrels will have a small part on both factors. The real issue as BOTH sides know is getting ships flowing through the straight. Killing the swift boats and launchers is part two, a coalition (which it appears is now forming), to sweep the mines is the final stage.

4 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Huh? When did I say they would stop attacking?

I believe we fully expect them to continue to attack, which is why we have destroyed their big Navy and are currently waging a campaign against their swift boats...You might have heard A-10, Apaches and other assets are now in that fight. We have also shifted the air campaign to attacking launch sites and storage for anti-ship capabilities.

The price of oil is just as much perception as it is supply. Selling 140 Million barrels will have a small part on both factors. The real issue as BOTH sides know is getting ships flowing through the straight. Killing the swift boats and launchers is part two, a coalition (which it appears is now forming), to sweep the mines is the final stage.

I’m not saying you said that. I’m saying if the US allows sales of Iranian oil, then blocks Iran from profiting from said sale of their oil, why wouldn’t Iran lash out as they have been? Though one failed in flight and a Navy ship took out the other one, they’ve already launched two missiles at Diego Garcia. The problem is there is pretty much no scenario where the US can have fully control and suppression of Iran’s military capabilities without boots on the ground.