YubNub Social YubNub Social
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 h

BREAKING: DOJ to start sending Epstein files to House Oversight Committee
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

BREAKING: DOJ to start sending Epstein files to House Oversight Committee

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 h

Iran’s Hezbollah Support Could Snarl U.S. Diplomacy
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Iran’s Hezbollah Support Could Snarl U.S. Diplomacy

Foreign Affairs Iran’s Hezbollah Support Could Snarl U.S. Diplomacy Regional partners’ hardline stance on the Lebanese group is endangering American negotiations with the Islamic Republic. Credit: image via Shutterstock Recent developments draw attention to the “special relationship” that exists between Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah. Despite—or perhaps because of—the heavy blows that have been dealt to the Iranian-led “axis of resistance,” Tehran appears firmly committed to this relationship. This is bound to cause tensions with the Trump administration, not least given its “extra-special relationship” with Israel and its close ties with Saudi Arabia, both of which are staunch enemies of Hezbollah.  Notwithstanding these American alliances, however, escalation with Iran over Hezbollah makes little sense in terms of American interests.   The latest developments related to the Iran–Hezbollah special relationship trace back to the Lebanese cabinet’s recent approval of a plan to disarm the Lebanese Shiite movement by the end of this year. Iran came out strongly against the Lebanese government’s decision, with opposition to the move being voiced from the highest echelons of power in the Islamic Republic. Ali Akbar Velayati, who serves as advisor to the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told Tasnim News Agency that “the Islamic Republic of Iran absolutely opposes the disarmament of Hezbollah.” Following these statements, Iran’s newly appointed Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani made a visit to Beirut.  During the visit, Larijani took direct aim at the U.S.-sponsored plan to disarm Hezbollah.  “We don’t support foreign orders through which a certain timetable is specified” he stated in reference to the plan. The senior Iranian official’s agenda in Lebanon included a rare meeting with the Lebanese Shiite movement’s leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem.  Following Larijani’s visit, Qassem delivered a fiery speech, declaring that Hezbollah will not hand over its weapons so long as Israel continues its military operations against Lebanon and its occupation of Lebanese territory.  That Lebanon was Larijani’s second trip abroad since taking up his new post—after neighbouring Iraq—speaks volumes to the importance Tehran attaches to its alliance with Hezbollah. This firm show of support is noteworthy in that it reflects the failure of the Israeli-initiated “12-Day War” to force Iran to rethink its special relationship with the Lebanese Shiite movement, notwithstanding the heavy losses it incurred during that war. This should come as little surprise, given the strong ideological and strategic foundations of Iran-Hezbollah ties.  Ideologically, the roots of these ties can be traced back to a region called Jabal Amil in modern southern Lebanon. After proclaiming Shia Islam the official religion of Iran, the Shiite scholars of Jabal Amil were instrumental to Shah Ismael I’s efforts to spread the Shiite faith under Safavid rule at the dawn of the 16th century. These historical religious bonds are believed to be reflected today in the Islamic Republic’s special relationship with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Shiite movement is also the first party outside Iran to have adopted the concept of Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist). Introduced by the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, this concept states that the Waliy Faqih (Guardian Jurist) is the highest Muslim authority, represented by the Iranian Supreme Leader. Since the death of Khomeini, this title has been held by Khamenei.  Notwithstanding the close ideological ties between Tehran and certain Iraqi factions, Hezbollah is also regarded as the only Shiite movement in the Middle East that fully commits to the ideals of the Iranian Islamic Revolution.  Despite being badly battered following the two-month-long full-scale war with Israel late last year, Hezbollah remains an important strategic ally for Iran. This owes largely to the fact that the two main regional players that pose the greatest threat to the Islamic Republic are Israel and Salafi-jihadi terrorists.  Having Hezbollah completely out of the picture by stripping it of its weapons would likely further increase Israel’s appetite for another round of full-scale conflict with Iran. Hezbollah also appears to be seen by Iran as the only thing standing between a further expansion of Salafi-jihadism from Syria into Lebanon. This was evident in Velayati’s remarks regarding the disarmament of the Lebanese Shiite movement.  “The US and Israel believe they can bring another al-Jolani (aka Ahmad al-Sharaa—Syria’s interim president) to Lebanon, as they did in Syria,” said Velayati in his interview with Tasnim.  “But there is no chance that someone like al-Jolani will succeed in taking control of Lebanon, because most Lebanese know that Hezbollah is the protector of their security against terrorists such as ISIS, al-Jolani, and Israel,” he added. Importantly, this comes as Iran released an intelligence assessment warning of the threat posed by Syrian-based jihadis to the Iranian homeland.  Given these realities, taking a more forceful approach towards the disarmament of Hezbollah is likely to jeopardize any chances of a potential deal between Iran and the United States while increasing the likelihood of war.  It would therefore be prudent for the Trump administration to ease its pressure on the Lebanese Shiite group, not least given that the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons is of minimal importance to American interests. Unlike Salafi-jihadi groups that led the United States to wage its Global War on Terror following the Al Qaeda attacks on 9/11, the Lebanese Shiite movement has never targeted the U.S. homeland. Nor is there ample evidence to suggest that Hezbollah is actively plotting such attacks. An American intelligence assessment released earlier this year made a passing reference to the group, merely stating that it “has continued to pursue limiting targeting of primarily Israeli and Jewish individuals in and outside of the Middle East.” By contrast, the assessment devotes relatively large sections to Salafi-jihadi groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda, warning that both organisations have the U.S. in their crosshairs. Nevertheless, the prospects of Washington adjusting its policies accordingly appear dim. This owes to the enormous influence exerted not only by Israel but also Saudi Arabia over the Trump administration’s policies in the Middle East.   This was evident when Trump announced during his visit to Saudi Arabia earlier this year that he would remove the sanctions that had been imposed on Syria.  The announcement came at the behest of the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, who also arranged and attended the meeting between Trump and al-Sharaa during the US president’s Saudi visit. Saudi Arabia harbors an outright hostility towards Hezbollah that arguably rivals that of Israel’s. A Wikileaks cable revealed that Saudi Arabia presented the U.S. with a plan in 2008 to form an Arab force backed by NATO to destroy Hezbollah, only to be rebuffed by American officials. In 2017 the Kingdom summoned Lebanon’s then–Prime Minister Saad Hariri to Riyadh, where it forced him to announce his resignation. According to various sources, Saudi Arabia took this measure because Hariri was reluctant to pursue confrontation with Hezbollah. All indications are that Saudi Arabia is now hardening its stance against Hezbollah even further. This has been most noticeable in the media coverage of Saudi-affiliated outlets. In July the Al-Arabiya and Al-Hadath channels quoted anonymous sources as saying that the Lebanese Shiite movement was ready to confront the Lebanese state. Hezbollah firmly denied these reports, accusing the media outlets of spreading fake news with the aim of destabilizing Lebanon. Meanwhile, Al-Hadath reported in April that Hezbollah was smuggling weapons through the Beirut port. Lebanon’s Minister of Transportation and Public Works flatly rejected these claims, citing lack of evidence. There is every reason to believe that Riyadh enjoys an outsized influence over Washington’s Lebanon policy through U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack. The Saudis may even have played a role in the U.S. envoy’s plan to disarm Hezbollah by the year’s end.  A close personal friend of Trump’s, Barrack is known for his close ties with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states. In 2019 he openly defended the Kingdom against accusations regarding the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.  A hardline stance on Hezbollah is likely to constrain American diplomacy in the Middle East for the benefit of Israel and Saudi Arabia. Policymakers in the U.S. would do well to tread with caution—irrespective of what our regional partners may want. The post Iran’s Hezbollah Support Could Snarl U.S. Diplomacy appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 h

The Future of the GOP: Level-Headed and Anti-Genocidal
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

The Future of the GOP: Level-Headed and Anti-Genocidal

Politics The Future of the GOP: Level-Headed and Anti-Genocidal I am running for Congress from Florida’s Sixth District to bring realism back to our foreign policy.  Courtesy of Aaron Baker for Congress Our nation has been entangled in costly interventions, open-ended commitments, and globalist agendas that erode our sovereignty and drain our resources for a quarter century. That is unsustainable. I am running for Congress from Florida’s Sixth District with a vision for an America First foreign policy: prioritizing the interests of American citizens, safeguarding our national security, and promoting economic prosperity without compromising our values or independence. My primary opponent, Rep. Randy Fine, has an approach to foreign policy that fails to align with the core principles of an America First agenda, making him an unsuitable candidate for voters who prioritize America.  An America First foreign policy entails focusing on policies that strengthen our nation rather than entangling us in foreign conflicts or alliances that do not directly serve our interests. My approach rests on three pillars: strategic restraint, economic nationalism, and diplomatic pragmatism. The job of a congressman is in part to ensure that the United States avoids unnecessary military interventions and nation-building abroad. Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere have cost trillions of dollars, thousands of American lives, and untold economic opportunities at home. Our military should only focus on defending our homeland and deterring existential threats.  I advocate for a powerful defense force that prioritizes advanced technology, border security, and cyber defense over prolonged occupations in distant lands. That is prioritization, not isolationism. Diplomacy should be a tool to advance American interests, not to promote ideological crusades. I favor engaging with nations, even those with differing ideologies and political systems, to secure deals that benefit American workers, secure our borders, and maintain global stability. This includes negotiating with both allies and adversaries to reduce tensions, prevent conflicts, and secure trade advantages. Our alliances, such as NATO, should be reevaluated to ensure they are mutually beneficial, not one-sided obligations that burden American taxpayers.  Our foreign policy also must protect American industries. Trade agreements accordingly should prioritize fair terms that prevent outsourcing and protect our manufacturing base. I support tariffs and incentives to bring critical industries—like semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and energy—back to American soil. This reduces reliance on foreign powers, particularly adversaries like China, and strengthens our economic resilience. Foreign aid should be scrutinized and redirected to domestic needs unless it directly advances U.S. interests, such as countering strategic rivals. Randy Fine has consistently advocated for robust U.S. support for specific foreign nations, particularly in the Middle East, often emphasizing ideological alignment over strategic necessity. His vocal support for expansive military and financial aid to allies in the region risks entangling the U.S. in conflicts that do not directly threaten our homeland. An America First policy would demand that any foreign aid or military commitment be justified by clear, tangible benefits to American citizens—not emotional or ideological affinities. Fine’s positions suggest a willingness to prioritize foreign interests over domestic needs, which conflicts with the goal of redirecting resources to rebuild American infrastructure, healthcare, and education. Additionally, Fine’s rhetoric on international engagement leans toward bizarre genocidal rants, often wishing for millions of people to “starve away.” This approach risks perpetuating the cycle of costly interventions that have drained our nation for decades. I reject the notion that the U.S. must act as the world’s policeman or bankroll international projects that offer little return. My policies would redirect billions in foreign aid to domestic priorities, such as securing our southern border and improving the lives of middle-class Americans. Diplomatically, I will prioritize pragmatic engagement over ideological crusades. While Fine’s approach often emphasizes moral posturing, I believe in negotiating with adversaries to secure outcomes that benefit American workers and consumers—whether through trade deals, energy agreements, or non-proliferation pacts.  The America First agenda demands a foreign policy that is disciplined, pragmatic, and relentlessly focused on the well-being of American citizens. My vision for Congress offers a clear path to a stronger, more prosperous United States. In contrast, Fine’s approach, with its emphasis on ideological commitments and interventionism, risks entangling our nation in costly and unnecessary foreign obligations. As a candidate, I am dedicated to putting America first in every decision, ensuring that our resources, military, and diplomacy serve the American people above all else. Voters seeking a true America First champion will find in me a leader committed to these principles, ready to restore our nation’s strength and sovereignty on the global stage.  There is room in the Republican Party for a level-headed, anti-starvation, anti-genocidal candidate.   The post The Future of the GOP: Level-Headed and Anti-Genocidal appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Classic Rock Lovers
Classic Rock Lovers  
1 h

How Billy Corgan’s love of Rush blew Geddy Lee’s mind
Favicon 
faroutmagazine.co.uk

How Billy Corgan’s love of Rush blew Geddy Lee’s mind

Never knowing his outreach. The post How Billy Corgan’s love of Rush blew Geddy Lee’s mind first appeared on Far Out Magazine.
Like
Comment
Share
Classic Rock Lovers
Classic Rock Lovers  
1 h

Why weren’t The Beatles on iTunes until 2010?
Favicon 
faroutmagazine.co.uk

Why weren’t The Beatles on iTunes until 2010?

Apple's biggest catch. The post Why weren’t The Beatles on iTunes until 2010? first appeared on Far Out Magazine.
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 h

The Idols are no longer Mute – They Talk Back through AI and Tell us What we Want to Hear
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

The Idols are no longer Mute – They Talk Back through AI and Tell us What we Want to Hear

by Brian Shilhavy, Health Impact News: You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. (1 Corinthians 12:2) by Brian Shilhavy Editor, Health Impact News When the apostle Paul wrote his first letter to the believers in the Greek city of Corinth, which is contained in […]
Like
Comment
Share
Classic Rock Lovers
Classic Rock Lovers  
1 h

“Was air-drumming even a thing before Tom Sawyer?”: Neil Peart’s greatest moments with Rush
Favicon 
www.loudersound.com

“Was air-drumming even a thing before Tom Sawyer?”: Neil Peart’s greatest moments with Rush

It wasn’t easy, but we’ve boiled the professor of prog’s most powerful percussive performances down to 10 key tracks
Like
Comment
Share
BlabberBuzz Feed
BlabberBuzz Feed
1 h

Trump Promises To Crush Mail-In Voting In His Next Big Battle For America!
Favicon 
www.blabber.buzz

Trump Promises To Crush Mail-In Voting In His Next Big Battle For America!

Like
Comment
Share
Living In Faith
Living In Faith
1 h

Gentle Parenting in a Culture of Overcorrection
Favicon 
www.christianity.com

Gentle Parenting in a Culture of Overcorrection

This clear-eyed look at discipline compares today’s trends to God's own model, and shows how truth and love must walk together.
Like
Comment
Share
Living In Faith
Living In Faith
1 h

A Prayer to Remember Who God Says I Am - Your Daily Prayer - August 19
Favicon 
www.ibelieve.com

A Prayer to Remember Who God Says I Am - Your Daily Prayer - August 19

There’s something about reminding ourselves that we are children of God that will change our attitude. When our attitude lifts, so does our confidence.
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 1 out of 90480
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund