It's not 2,500 years of history that Trump is fighting: it is the last 47 years, when the Islamic thugs, with the acquiesce of the pathetic President Carter, overthrew the Shah.

“This is not to suggest that the Islamic-led government is benevolent and deserves every consideration..”.

That's the biggest understatement in history. The lunatic regime is interested in jihad, not peace or negotiations.

Bombing Iran “back to the Stone Age” might just be Trump bombast, but it might be the only answer.

Trump must “halt hostilities”. What a joke. The author is on the same gormless level as wacky Wong and her de-escalation. Total military defeat is the only answer.

"The government has committed egregious human rights violations, systematically repressing its population. It has killed thousands during recent protests, carried out widespread arbitrary arrests, and imposed severe restrictions on women's rights."

- I think it's dishonest to state this without putting it in its true context.

Firstly, target countries of regime change are forced by these actions against them to become more repressive, and you can't mention those protests honestly and without bias unless you state that Israel and the U.S. engineered the currency collapse that lead to the protests, that they helped ferment civil unrest and support for the Shah, that they co-opted protests using their on intelligence assets on the ground, provided weapons and starlink communications, and engaged in violence and destruction to try to engineer a regime change by the U.S. and Israel,

When you have foreign agents armed and co-ordinating shooting police, beheading police, setting government buildings and people on fire, and the intent is regime change there can be only one response.

Either the government act to stop it or it falls and all of them are the ones killed like Saddam with a bayonet up his ass.
The U.S. and Israel engineered this, and are to blame for it.

And when Trump comes out and says 'If Iran kills anymore protesters I'm going to intervene', then of course the Israeli Mossad assets on the ground in Iran just start killing Iranian protesters randomly at close rage to boost the numbers the 'Iranian regime' can be blamed for later and force stupid Trump to intervene, derrr.

And then they have the same Western NGO's run out of Virginia claiming to be 'Human Rights in Iran' which are just CIA fronts run by National Endowment for Democracy and funded by USAID coming out with hugely inflated numbers of 'peaceful protesters killed by the repressive Iranian regime',
- when really it was a U.S. and Israeli planned, funded and armed violent insurrection to topple the government.

So for starters Alon, be honest about that.
Should I continue?

You mentioned Ukraine 'gave up IT'S nukes'.

Google? 'were ussr nukes ever in ukrainian control'

AI Overview
>>Yes, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991, Ukraine technically POSSESSED the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal on its territory, which it controlled physically BUT NOT operationally.
While thousands of nuclear warheads were stationed in Ukraine, the command, control, and authorization codes necessary to launch them remained with the Russian Federation.<<

Context matters.
They were never Ukrainian nukes and their use remained under Russia's control.

It's good you mentioned the JCPOA.

Because any NORMAL person paying attention might ask:

'Why is Trump whinging about Iran nuclear program when he was the one that tore up the previous deal?'
- What was his EXACT ISSUE with the deal he tore up?
- Did both he and that idiot Netanyahu cause all this as usual?

Google? Why did netanyahu oppose the JCPOA

AI Overview
>>Benjamin Netanyahu opposed the 2015 JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) because he believed it did not permanently prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, arguing that sunset clauses allowed Iran to become a nuclear threshold state. He termed it a "historic mistake" that provided a "cash bonanza" to fund regional aggression, argued it did not address missile programs or terror proxy support, and claimed Iran was "cheating" from the start.<<

* They didn't want Iran getting it's own money back.

But then... later...

Why Israel (Sort of) Misses the Iran Deal
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/why-israel-sort-misses-iran-deal

"Given the nuclear program’s advancement under the U.S. maximum pressure policy, a raft of Israeli officials now say the JCPOA was better than nothing—but rejoining it will be difficult."

* By backing out of the JCPOA and re-imposing sanctions, (While the EU expected Iran to continue to abide by it) Trump himself forced Iran to enrich again, and Iran needed a bargaining chip to try to remove the sanctions.

[From previous article]

>>In March 2015, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Washington in a bid to rally support against a nuclear agreement with Iran that was being negotiated by then-President Barack Obama. In a notorious address to a joint session of Congress, the Israeli leader warned darkly of a repeat Holocaust facilitated by this “very bad deal” that “will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons...it would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons.”

Netanyahu failed to stop the deal from being signed four months later, but ultimately got his wish when President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the deal came to be known, in May 2018. Netanyahu hailed it as a “historic move” that required “courageous leadership,” later taking credit in private conversations for Trump’s decision: “We convinced the U.S. president [to exit the deal] and I had to stand up against the whole world and come out against this agreement.”

Three years later, Iran’s nuclear program is by all estimates at its most advanced stage ever, and a growing chorus of former Israeli officials have decried Netanyahu’s (and Trump’s) strategy as nothing short of calamitous: jettisoning a nonproliferation agreement that, however flawed, was working, in favor of a coercive strategy against Iran that on every parameter has failed to achieve the results confidently predicted by those who cheered on Trump.

The last to see this, however, seems to be the new Israeli government that deposed Netanyahu last summer and that appears to be repeating the same talking points put forward in 2015. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has again come out against U.S. efforts to reengage Iran and return it to compliance under the terms of the JCPOA.

“Iran deserves no rewards, no bargain deals and no sanctions relief in return for their brutality,” Bennett said on Nov. 29. “I call upon our allies around the world: Do not give in to Iran’s nuclear blackmail.”<<

'We don't want the deal!'
'Bring back the deal!'

"the Israeli leader warned darkly of a repeat Holocaust"
He just omitted to state that it is the one being carried out by israel on the Palestinians.

"Iran is not a transient power that can be coerced into submission"

Any power can be forced into submission if sufficiently defeated. Germany wasn't a transient power and yet... Ditto Japan. France. Poland. And that's just WW2. Go back through history and the examples would overflow a month's worth of 350 word posts.

The author's assertion just shows a lack of historic understanding. And it also shows a lack of what the war is about or the aims of each side.

The aim of the US is to so cow Iran that it gives up all hopes and efforts to achieve regional hegemony through a nuclear programme. The only way that can be done is by forcing them to give up their programme AND institute policies that would allow unfettered international access to their facilities to ensure they aren't cheating as they did under JCPOA.

Now its very true that the easiest and surest path to this would be the overthrow of the expansionist regime to be replaced with a regime more interested in the welfare of the Iranian people and less interested in fulfilling Mohamed's edict to spread Islam world-wide. But a popular uprising, though preferrable isn't the only path to forcing Iran stop threatening its neighbours and perceived foes.

The worst part of the essay is that it fails to mention China when in fact the war is as much about China as it is about Iran. But that's another issue.

Alon makes some valid points about the proud history of Persian culture, but oddly I think he has made the same mistake as Trump in his assessment of Iran’s position – the assumption that it is ruled by rational self-interested actors willing to negotiate an agreed resolution of the conflict and abide by the outcome. For the Iranian regime, violence against its enemies is not a means to an end; it is an end in itself. In particular, it is committed to the destruction of Israel and its citizens. “Death to America” is virtually an official slogan.

Likewise, Trump seems to have believed that the threat and reality of military and economic harm would persuade the regime to either concede or at least negotiate.

Only comprehensive and permanent regime change could produce what most people of good faith would like to see in Iran – the end of repression and impoverishment of its citizens; cessation of its violence within and against its neighbours, especially its use of proxies to attack Israel; and the end of its uranium enrichment program. This hasn’t happened. So on this point, I agree with Alon – Iran emerged as the “de facto winner” in this confrontation

And the survey says...

That 3 out of 4 Aussies would deliberately go and stand in dog shite...

- This is what I'm getting from the other responses -

ttbn, mhaze, Rhian.
It seems only ateday decided, 'No, I'm not going to stand in it like the other morons.'

For those who were stupid enough to be convinced into thinking 'regime change' was a good idea...

Fuel crisis leaves councils facing cost blowouts, rate hikes and spending cuts
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-14/fuel-crisis-leaves-sa-councils-facing-cost-blowouts/106552638

Plastic packaging price pain could push up costs for shoppers on everything from milk to make-up
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-29/plastic-price-pain-hits-inflation-woolies-coles-milk-bottles/106615694

Soaring petrol prices force tourism operators to introduce surcharges
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-28/fuel-diesel-shortage-surcharge-tourism-operators/106610974

- You supported something which increased the cost of EVERYTHING, Like a TAX ON EVERYONE!

Inflation jumps to 4.6% in Australia as Iran war fuel shock begins to bite
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/apr/29/inflation-increase-australia-rba-reserve-bank-interest-rates-fuel-iran

Two more rate rises ahead as inflation pain grips Australia
http://www.afr.com/markets/debt-markets/two-more-rate-rises-ahead-as-inflation-pain-grips-australia-20260428-p5zrru

So, when people are losing their jobs, and their homes are being taken by the banks, and when single mums can't afford all their weekly homebrand crap or have to choose between putting fuel in the car or eating decent meals, we can all thank you morons, for being dumb enough to be cheerleaders for something as stupid as shooting both one's feet off.

Moral to the story...

Most Aussies are on 'Team Let's Go Stand in Dog Shite'
They don't even know what's good for them.
And that makes them 'Useful idiots'
Hitlers mate Netanyahu would be proud.

You lot think whatever is going on over there is more important than food on the table over here.
Aren't even capable of putting Aussie interests first.

It seems some are of the view that they are okey-dokey with a bunch of apocalyptic millenarians getting access to a nuclear weapon so long as they can save a few cents on petrol.

"It seems some are of the view that they are okey-dokey with a bunch of apocalyptic millenarians getting access to a nuclear weapon so long as they can save a few cents on petrol."

- I take it you haven't been paying much attention to he U.S. and Israeli government lately mhaze...

You know what the problem with you is mhaze,
- You can never ever be honest because you can never be unbiased.
All you really have is repeating tired false narratives.
... just like an uncontrolled automatic regurgitation.

It's like when someone argues:

'There's too many immigrants'
- And some other idiot auto-responds 'You're just racist!'

Like the only part these brainwashed imbeciles registered and immediately objected to like trained monkeys was 'the connected race aspect of immigration' not the valid issue that we may in fact have brought in too many people too quickly without the housing to accommodate them.

Or if someone questions the efficiency of renewables...
Auto-whinge = 'You're a climate denier!'

Or if someone says 'It's unhealthy to be so overweight'
Auto-whinge = 'You're just fatphobic!'

Or is someone criticises Israel's unrestrained killing of civilians
Auto-whinge = 'You're an anti-Semite!'

Or maybe you think Trump might be mixed up with Epstein pedophilia
Auto-whinge = 'You're a conspiracy theorist!'

Or if you criticise Trumps actions and policies and how they negatively impact others
Auto-whinge = 'You've got Trump Derangement Syndrome'

Criticise or challenge any policy promoting gay agenda
'You're a homophobic, Transphobic bigot and a Xenophobe.

Are you just a trained monkey regurgitating auto-whinges?

Do you understand the more U.S. and Israel act like unhinged warmongering lunatics hell bent on destroying Iran, the more valid Iran's reasoning for considering possessing a nuclear deterrent becomes?

They seem to be doing pretty good without one.

Trumps a halfwit.
He claims complete victory but begs/abuses his allies, all while desperately wanting an off ramp.
Was kicked out of the briefing room during the botched enriched uranium recovery operation, because he was yelling and screaming and they had to figure out how to manage the situation.

They're in trouble if they lose both the house and the senate in the midterms.

Anyway, just like any nation, there are factions for and against things.
Your support for 'regime change' is just helping the hardliners in Iran that argue that they should get a nuclear weapon.

Anyway, back to Australia.

Four charts that paint a worrying picture for global fertiliser prices
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-24/charts-paint-worrying-picture-global-fertiliser-prices/106590152

I'm not wrong about what I've stated.
3 out of 4 of you, my fellow Australians, have deliberately shat the bed.

You hold a position that does untold harm to our country,
Probably none of you cared that there would a price that everyone in the country would have to pay,
Just so you could express an opinion that likely Sky Channel with it's 24/7 anti-semitic hysteria or Murdoch media inserted into your stupid heads.

You three: 'I don't follow that bloody leftist crap media!'
- YOU GULLIBLE FOOLS.

By yourselves just when taken as a sample poll, you're quite capable of sending the nation down the S-bend,
with the same level of idiocy often complained about yourselves.

Are you lot dual Australian / Israeli citizens?
I'm trying to think of a valid reason why you'd support something that had the potential to have a serious adverse affect on other citizens and our nations prosperity.

Why don't you all go smear yourselves with your own excrement?
- If you did that, you'd be the only ones affected by it.
But your positions here affect everyone.

Did you ask your friends, family, neighbours if they were ok with paying more for everything?

I didn't steal from your wallets or take a shite in your beds, but somehow you all thought doing the same to me would be okay.

Just saying, someone has to.

http://youtu.be/dKnjxT5HRJQ

And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?
Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression.
And where once you had the freedom to object, think, and speak as you saw fit,
you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.
How did this happen?
Who's to blame?
Well, certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.
I know why you did it.
I know you were afraid.
Who wouldn't be?
War, terror, disease.
There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense.
Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now High Chancellor Donald Trump.

AC,

When your sole argument against Australians who support the war, or don't actively oppose it, is that they should care about how much extra everything will cost because of the war, you can't really complain that I point out that your sole argument against Australians who support the war, or don't actively oppose it, is that they should care about how much extra everything will cost because of the war.

You won't understand this, but some of us think there are higher concerns here than the cost of petrol.

I seem to have a different view of this.
I don't see Iranian leadership as being peopled by bad men and women.
They are good and honorable men and women who fervently believe their attitude to life is the only correct one.
However, I think they are wrong.
A society which kills its own citizens needlessly is wrong.
A society which prevents citizens expressing truthful ideas is wrong.
A society which prevents citizens from expressing their individuality is wrong.
(Even though there must be sensible universally accepted guidelines in any grouping.)
But their approach is wrong because it doesn't produce a calm and progressive society.
The leadership it trying to live the lives of the citizens for them.
The citizens must live their own lives.
Sadly, I doubt the present leadership will ever change its attitude.
So it must be replaced, if peace is to reign over many distressed people.
They SHOULD initiate this change themselves, but that is easier said than done.
So it will continue as is, unless the world as a whole steps in and says NO to repression.

Say what?

"She sells seashells by the seashore",
"Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers",
"How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

What sort of mealy-mouthed crap is this mhaze?

'uncontrolled auto-whinge from trained monkey'

Ipso Fatso wants to modify the sample and results.
So that's 4 out of 5 people thought 'lets go to war with a nation of 90 million' hoping to shut off access to 20% of the worlds oil and a large share of the worlds fertiliser.

I don't agree the position, but at least he tries to explain his reasoning, which I think is flawed;
Wrong the same way he thinks Iran is wrong.

"But their approach is wrong because it doesn't produce a calm and progressive society."
Me - You can't have a calm and progressive society when it's the target of a U.S. regime change.
- Sorry, Do not pass 'GO', do not collect $200.

He's essentially blaming the country for something beyond their control.
But not to be too harsh, obviously 'It is an Islamic theocracy'

You know what's interesting, nobody ever asked why I never once said 'I supported sanctions and regime change on Israel.'
It's because I stand by my principles, I don't support sanctions or overthrows, end of story.
(Personal boycotts are fine though)

I think many of you are hypocrites, but maybe it's just some kind of subconscious bias, I dunno.
Maybe you think your position is correct, just as I do.

Why is it none of you hold Israel to the same standards you expect Iran to meet?

I've said it before, if we're going to measure based on moral standards, why assume it's okay to hold Iran to those standards if you don't hold Israel to the same standards.
Because if you don't, then it was never about moral standards at all, it was just about winning an argument when your position was poor to begin with.

It's one thing to talk about these moral principles in isolation, but that's not what's happening.
Essentially your bringing this up to support a genocidal nation Israel trying to knock Iran off, and that therefore changes the basis of your claimed moral standards, as well as questions the motive.

What if your 'plan' was never workable?
Never had any hope of success,
Fools errand.

I do not hate or despise the Iranian leadership team.
It saddened me when their supreme leader was killed recently.
Which might surprise many, but an 'I hate him' attitude is stupid.
And such an idea belongs only with the those whose thinking has not progressed beyond an elementary level.
If your world includes arch enemies, it is time for you to make a change.
For you are living in an artificial world.
However, it is true that when groups or people with vastly different ideas about survival meet, conflict is possible.
This can be initiated by either side, discreetly or overtly.
Then the offended party will likely defend himself.
Which all belongs in the realm of survival of the fittest.
A concept which seems to have served us well throughout history?
There is one unfortunate limitation to this basic approach however.
When one side has infinite capacity, the winner is certain.
As Mr Trump so wisely said, 'you cannot fight the world'.
Yes! You truly cannot fight world opinion!
If you try, eventually you will lose.

If I were obliged to comment on Armchair Critic's latest tirade I would say:
I have not read such unadulterated rubbish for a long long time.
However, I was impressed by the vehemence of his writing.
(A strategy which can be very good for emotional release I am told.)
However, to be fair, I think he misunderstood or misinterpreted my words.
Which is unfortunate.
But it is a happy circumstance that I am not obliged to comment, so I will say nothing.
Which is the safest and politest thing to do.
And just a final thought for the record.
Jewish people experienced a holocaust during world war two.
Now they have engineered one of their own.
Which means that eventually they will suffer all over again.
Fortunately, there are cooler heads amongst them.
Which will help lessen the impact of their misdeeds.

Hi Ipso Fatso,

You stated "But their approach is wrong because it doesn't produce a calm and progressive society."
My opinion, based on merit is that you can't have a calm and progressive society when it's the target of a U.S. regime change, because these are the exact weaknesses the U.S. uses to salami slice its way to insurrection and blood on the streets using NGO's and civil society groups.

The West co-opts and weaponises the very things needed to build a better society, and makes them malevalent - its foreign interference with 'regime change' being the 'ends' that 'justifies the means'.

That's why I think your argument is flawed.

... Brought to you by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and paid for by United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

Everyone seems to have all these moral arguments.

Tell me why don't Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?

Boy, 14, shot dead by Israeli settlers in West Bank amid escalation in violence
http://www.nbcnews.com/world/israel/boy-14-shot-dead-israeli-settlers-west-bank-escalation-violence-rcna342543
'Aws al-Nasaan was gunned down in broad daylight last week at his school, as Palestinians in the West Bank report almost daily attacks by settlers.'

This kind of thing by Israelis happen every day.
If we recognise the State of Palestine as an independent and sovereign entity, why don't we support them defending themselves?

Or is this just a elephant in the room everyone ignores while demanding Iran act the way it's 'supposed' to?
It's not a good idea to attack Iran again, but the deranged occupant of the Whitehouse will likely have another crack.
If Iran gets slapped, they WILL punch back.

[Cont.]
You support regime change, is that support unconditional, just time based?
When does the harm caused in the attempt exceed the method used?

Was it when the U.S. helped engineer the currency collapse last year?
Was it when they bombed the Minab elementary girl school?
Was it when millions of Iranians out of work because the US bombed their industries as mhaze was recently gloating about?
Or was it back in 1980 when the U.S. provided chemical weapons to Iraq to use against Iranians?
Maybe it was back in 1953 with the overthrow of Muhammad Mosedeq?

Is there a timeframe on this foreign meddling or 'screwing with another country' or is it just purely outcome based to be continued indefinitely?
- Until satisfactory results are achieved, like Syria run by ISIS headchopper Al-Jalani and Libya with it's slave markets and all the other countries the West has destroyed (and are now trying to do to Lebanon and Iran) so that no-one supports the Palestinians or can challenge Israels regional hegemony.

Netanyahu's War on Terror is a 30+ year War OF Terror.
Do you know this stuff leads to an increase in western suicide terrorist attacks?

I was not talking about Iran in the middle of the present war.
I was talking about Iran's performance over the last fifty or so years.
I was being general in my view.
I thought that much was obvious.
But I take on board your present assessment of conditions there.
And am pleased to note that you give this in a calm and measured way.

Hi Ipso Fatso,
I know you don't particularly like my harsh commenting where I criticise others.
My comments aren't really against the person, but more about the substance of what they say.

I haven't always had an interest in geopolitics.
I chose sides when the war in Syria began over a decade ago.
I'd started to oppose America's endless wars, but I wasn't as harsh on Israel back then before Gaza.

I've slowly fine tuned my opinions on things.
I just don't support sanctions or overthrows.

People might think I'm this hateful 'anti-Semite' but it's not necessary the whole picture.
Nobody ever asked why I'm so harsh as I am.

I support diplomacy, dialogue and compromise over conflict.
I support working out ones differences without making innocent people pay for it.
I don't support the harm of innocents.

Sanctions are collective punishment of citizens.
mhaze was happy about millions of Iranians out of work.
Leaders won't be going hungry no matter what you sanction.

Overthrows are foreign interference for the purposes of installing a ruler subservient to western interests.
That not soverignty, that's a vassal state.

Nobody ever asked how one might 'correct' these 'bad nations' so-called 'bad behaviour' if we don't have leverage to threaten them with.
I don't have all the answers, but I don't support underhanded stuff.
Ultimately the reason we have this situation is because Israel wishes to expand it's territory.

The U.S. is a declining empire, none of them last forever.
Capitalism goes where the money is and China's now the worlds global manufacturer.

I don't support the U.S. lead Unipolar world order where they make all the rules.
I support a multipolar world order.

Think of the difference being the two being a long table like the Italian made one Putin has in the Kremlim as opposed to a round table.

The unipolar world is the long table with the U.S. sitting at the head, making all the rules (and breaking them)
The multipolar world order is a round table, where everyone is equal and all nations interests are given equal treatment.

The world shouldn't be this zero sum game of goodies and baddies
Where you screw over your neighbour for profit.

Look at this deranged fool.
http://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2050588054461489494

The showdown of great powers shouldn't be a world of winners and losers.
Ideally you want win-wins, where all countries on the planet come out better off, not people sent to die in stupid wars so the elites can maintain their wealth and privilege.

Equality?
Some are made to fight the wars while others profit from them.

I'll tell you what else I believe in.

I think democracy is flawed.

What do I support Labor, Team immigrant voting for more immigrants?
Do I support the LNP, Team Israel, shameless defenders of genocide?
The choice sucks.

I don't really care for this endless battle between the left and right.
Both sides talk unity but all they ever do is disagree.
Achieve little except screw things up and argue for the sake of it.
- We're not getting value for money with this system.

Stupid people going 'You're a leftie' or 'You're a rightie'.
Everyone putting eveyone else in a box, it's stupid.

How about we actually support something that actually can unite us as a sovereign nation?
It's called 'Unity in self-sufficiency'.

Not sending Albo off on a high paid begging tour burning jet fuel to secure 1 days worth of fuel - after he supported the illegal war of aggression on Iran that resulted in Iran closing the Strait.

You see where all this 'easy criticism against a nation of fools (us)', from me comes from?
It comes from NOT SUPPORTING SANCTIONS AND OVERTHROWS and all the BS that comes from it in the first place, and idiot leaders Albo that would support poor policies.
And the other side LNP would've cheered on a war with Iran with even more enthusiasm.

A nation of idiots.
Why would you support something that harms us and is not is our best interests?
We have a political system where both sides support actions that harm us.