Almost like the senate always sucked and served as a check on the representatives who at least had some popular support.
I love when these freaks praise the specifically bad things about the founding generation. Hamilton brainrot though I know it predates that obvs
Yeah I don't agree with them. I don't know armchair or at least don't remember their prior analysis with Russia, so I didn't have the baggage of knowing they are reactionary till after. I think their view is wishful thinking honestly. We know Mossad got a drone base into Iran (cough Azerbaijan cough) and took out many defenses. Iran could not have predicted what the missile attack was going to hit, not with much certainty in advance. If they did simply turn off defenses in places why let several nuclear facilities get hit as well, along with key scientists in their apartments?
A proper purge or even faking a pager attack just seems like a better way to do something like that. They got defenses online yesterday, they have done great at stopping missiles since then. it all seems consistent with a security failure, taking their time to assess, and then getting things up and running and retaliating once they were sure they had defenses up. Part of why I did not expect them to fire back in the hours following the initial attack.
Even once they seemed to have things running again there were some semi successful hits on missile launch sites. I take it Iran was playing it safe before escalating, making sure they could defend from another barrage. If they had tactically allowed their defenses to fail for certain targets, they wouldn't have needed that wait time.
Good shit comrade
btw since this I have seen a version on the deprogram sub that had "listened to Jewish media/news". Thank god this place is how it is, just a pleasant reminder why this community is great
Really since Qasim was butchered in 1963. Reading on him is so tragic, like everything went downhill from his death and still hasn't gotten close to that hope spot
I stand by my comments that Iran's defenses being taken down like that is a huge problem and something that should never be able to happen. But the people saying Iran would COLLAPSE made me scratch my head. Iran is not Syria, Tehran could be in ashes and it still would not make the material reality of Iranian society anything like Syria after a decade of civil war.
Like I said the other day, they survived the Iraq-Iran war for a decade of grueling trench combat and atrocities, a serious failure of air defense is bad, but it is not going to break what endured THAT hell.
Honestly I should relisten to the Radio War Nerd ep on Iran-Iraq, good a time as any.
https://fountain.fm/episode/0XsubVEkxzxcRgSieBbo
this link was safe, warning don't click around on random sites for war nerd premium eps, always get pop ups, no way they are safe.
To be fair, Barbarossa was devastating. There is a reason the advance started to be halted once there was a serious reconsideration of strategy. Iran got hit by an espionage attack, those were their failings. The USSR had to face rapidly all the mistakes, poor assumptions, and outdated strategies and solve them in mere weeks. They lost so much of their air force without them even taking off, and had to change their air warfare strategy as a result.
For instance the mechanized corps had been scrapped and their armor divided among infantry units in '39, only for that to be reversed in '40, but not in time for them to be prepared from Barbarossa. All existing reformed mechanized corps were destroyed during Barbarossa, and the rebuild was scrapped. Late '42 new corps that are much more balanced are formed with a new design philosophy. These prove effective.
My point being that Iran had a security failed, a bad one at that. But panic over that is less warranted than panic over Barbarossa. Barbarossa was a genuine defeat of huge proportions. The amount of lives lost in the ensuing fighting, the amount of unforced errors, mistakes, and necessary sacrifices to slow the Germans down are horrific.
Like if someone thought the USSR had lost after Barbarossa, that is a lot more reasonable than thinking Iran was joever because they had a huge security breach. Barbarossa was a series of disasters and the reason they overcame it was because Stalin was great at adapting and because the Soviet people had no choice but to endure. Iran had a security failure, fixed it and then went right along with their expected strategy. No need so far to adapt or even continue enduring a new type of conflict than what they expected.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is performing better is what I am saying
You know what's funny? People rightly compared Prigo to Kornilov. Well there is a theory that Kerensky organized or fabricated the extent of the Kornilov affair in order to cement his own power. I don't really buy that, but interesting that the same theory arose in both cases.
People act like admitting security failures will lessen the retaliatory strikes. Very "speak no evil, hear no evil" attitude. Those first two points come across as such wishful thinking, far more presumptuous than those who saw a bombing go largely unstopped and said "well that was bad, something must've happened to their defenses".
Enemy at the Gapes.....is that anything?
Hope that is just catching up on identifications and not the result of further strikes
How do you become a "semi"-official news agency?