There are reports that the "Supreme Leader" is now dead but not confirmed. Will it be "next man up" from the religious leaders or will something new happen in Iran?
I think it's somewhat irrelevant. There is no head of the snake in Iran. Killing Khamenei doesn't change much of anything on the ground. That's not the way their system was built.
I think that's the most likely outcome, but it would be good if it was something else. It's also not certain he's dead. Reports are mixed.
In fascist ideology, war is viewed as a necessary, rejuvenating, and "redemptive" force that forges national unity, tests strength, and expands the state's territory and influence. It is a central tool for achieving national self-sufficiency, eliminating perceived internal and external threats, and proving the "supremacy" of a particular nation or race.
In fascist ideology, war is viewed as a necessary, rejuvenating, and "redemptive" force that forges national unity, tests strength, and expands the state's territory and influence. It is a central tool for achieving national self-sufficiency, eliminating perceived internal and external threats, and proving the "supremacy" of a particular nation or race.
I am going to give QParker a pitch out over the plate, since 1980 how does the description not fit the US? I am sure his answer and yours may greatly differ.
Looks like we're now focused on finding and destroying launchers in the western part of Iran after all of the missiles they've let loose. Of course, after all those counterstrikes, Iran now wants a timeout to continue negotiations.
Still not sure what I'm hearing. Regime change, but we don't want a power vacuum. That's after targeting every military leader and high level gov officials. That narrative seems counterintuitive to me. How do you change the regime without a power vacuum after wiping out the regime?
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan. POTFB
In fascist ideology, war is viewed as a necessary, rejuvenating, and "redemptive" force that forges national unity, tests strength, and expands the state's territory and influence. It is a central tool for achieving national self-sufficiency, eliminating perceived internal and external threats, and proving the "supremacy" of a particular nation or race.
I am going to give QParker a pitch out over the plate, since 1980 how does the description not fit the US? I am sure his answer and yours may greatly differ.
So Trump's view on foreign policy and the use of force is consistent with US administrations since 1980?
OK.
As to your challenge, name a President since 1980 who has talked about the necessity of war in the abstract, along with the rejuvenating and redemptive power of all war and how the U.S. people need to prove it's supremacy through the forcible domination of another nation or race. I'll hang up and listen.
@bradstevens do you have to openly discuss it as rejuvenating, or just view it that way? I argue the second. But if you want such an idea, the parade last year.
Trump's view given Greenland is more extensive. Threatening force on an ally? Can you name any other president to do that?
I am not criticizing Trump for Iran, I don't know the whys yet. But have attacked them twice, Venezuela once, threatened Greenland and Cuba. It seems more in one year than Biden.
@bradstevens do you have to openly discuss it as rejuvenating, or just view it that way? I argue the second. But if you want such an idea, the parade last year.
Trump's view given Greenland is more extensive. Threatening force on an ally? Can you name any other president to do that?
I am not criticizing Trump for Iran, I don't know the whys yet. But have attacked them twice, Venezuela once, threatened Greenland and Cuba. It seems more in one year than Biden.
Criticize away at Trump. He's a fascist because he held a parade, though? I don't believe you believe that for one second. Shooter might.
There is a monumental difference between criticizing him and repeatedly calling him a Nazi and fascist, though. People do that who are either lazy and/or stupid or are doing so for political motives. Aloha has spent years attacking Trump and I can't recall him beating this drum.
In addition to being ridiculous as applied to Trump, though, as I've argued before, I think it's a bad idea to minimize or muddy the waters on what fascists and Nazis actually did and believed. It also kills all rational discussion about Trump or the wisdom, legality, etc. of his policies.
