YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #faith #libtards #racism #communism #crime
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day 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
11 w

Major supermarket CEO threatens to close grocery chain over socialist scheme
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Major supermarket CEO threatens to close grocery chain over socialist scheme

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
11 w

Donald Trump savagely unleashes on AOC and Democrats in brutal Truth Social post
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Donald Trump savagely unleashes on AOC and Democrats in brutal Truth Social post

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
11 w

Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Cuomo Concedes NYC Mayor’s Race to Mamdani

Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani is poised to win the New York City Democratic primary for mayor after a shock result at the ballot box on Tuesday evening. Mamdami, a 33-year-old state assemblyman representing New York’s 36th district in Queens, defeated former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo despite the senior politician’s name recognition throughout the city and $25 million in Super PAC money, the largest bankroll in New York City mayoral campaign history. Mamdani captured 43.5 percent of first-place votes to Cuomo’s 36.3 percent according to the New York City Board of Elections. Final results will be announced on July 1st but Cuomo, who was at times a heavy favorite to win the primary race, quickly congratulated Mamdani in a concession speech after polls closed. “Tonight is his night,” Cuomo admitted. “He deserved it. He won.”  Cuomo: Tonight was assemblyman Mamdani’s night and he put together a great campaign. I called him, I congratulated him, I applaud him sincerely for his efforts. And let's give him a round of applause. pic.twitter.com/NO1kQIgg8h— Acyn (@Acyn) June 25, 2025 Former NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio called Mamdani’s performance “an amazing upset,” noting that 25 percent of all early votes “were people who have never voted in an NYC election.”  Mamdani now advances to the NYC mayoral election in November where he will square off against current Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent, and Republican Curtis Sliwa who failed to crack 30% against Adams in the 2021 mayoral election at the height of the Covid era. The post Cuomo Concedes NYC Mayor’s Race to Mamdani appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
11 w

Will the Iran Cyberattack Panic Usher In a New Patriot Act?
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Will the Iran Cyberattack Panic Usher In a New Patriot Act?

Foreign Affairs Will the Iran Cyberattack Panic Usher In a New Patriot Act? Civil liberties are at risk when security scaremongering takes hold. In a 2007 interview, retired General Wesley Clark revealed that the Pentagon had a plan to “take out seven countries in five years”—Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. Over the following two decades, the first six were bombed, destabilized, or collapsed into civil war. Only Iran remains standing. Now, major media outlets such as Fox News and the Independent warn of a looming cyberwar, and we’re told to brace for a potential Iranian cyberattack on the U.S. or its allies aimed at critical infrastructure such as power and water systems. But rather than ask how to defend against it, we should ask something more: Is Iran really the culprit? Or is it the designated scapegoat for an event designed to advance elite control both abroad and at home? Recent history provides a clear pattern: When crises erupt, state and corporate power rapidly consolidate. After 9/11, the U.S. government ushered in the Patriot Act, warrantless surveillance, and indefinite detention, all in the name of security. The 2008 financial collapse delivered historic bank bailouts and accelerated economic consolidation. In 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic normalized lockdowns, QR-code health passes, and calls for digital identity systems tied to medical records. In the wake of the Capitol riot, proposals exploded for increased censorship, AI-powered surveillance, and the policing of online speech. As the author Naomi Klein outlined in her seminal work, The Shock Doctrine, elites routinely exploit crises to fast-track policies that populations would otherwise reject. The current cyber panic fits the mold. If a catastrophic digital event were to hit—disabling hospitals, banks, or energy systems—the solution being quietly preloaded into public discourse is the rollout of global “Digital ID” infrastructure. The World Economic Forum has explicitly highlighted how global digital IDs for people and objects are essential for trade digitization and establishing a global digital economy. In its Digital Identity Blueprint, the WEF outlines a framework linking online activity, financial services, travel permissions, and even behavioral data to a single identity. But what’s sold as “security” is in fact the foundation of a technocratic control grid. If implemented, Digital ID would function as a master key to everything: your money, health records, online access, and even your ability to travel. In time, it could merge with carbon quotas and social credit scoring systems like those piloted in China. An algorithm, not a constitution, would govern your rights. One wrong opinion, and you risk being shut out of society, not by police, but by code. In a world where social media mobs enforce ideological purity, public humiliation becomes the new policing mechanism. You self-censor, you self-surveil, and eventually, you self-govern—on someone else’s terms. But there’s a core problem with the “Iran did it” cyberattack narrative: Iran lacks the capability. Iran’s cyber warfare infrastructure is far less sophisticated than that of the U.S., Israel, Russia, or China. The Harvard Belfer Center’s National Cyber Power Index places Iran low in its global rankings. While Iran may be able to execute nuisance-level hacks, it is not in a position to disable critical U.S. infrastructure. So if a major cyberattack does occur, blaming Iran may serve a political purpose—not reflect reality. Iran is a convenient villain, but there are deeper reasons why it is a strategic target for regime change. It remains one of the few nations that has long resisted integration into the Western-led financial system. In 1983, Iran converted its entire banking system to comply with Sharia law, meaning interest (riba) is officially banned. Unlike other Muslim-majority countries that broadly follow AAOIFI standards, Iran enforces its own system, diverging significantly from global Islamic banking norms. Like Gaddafi’s Libya, which was invaded after proposing a pan-African currency backed by gold, Iran represents a break from IMF-led global monetary policy. Moreover, its Islamic banking system bans charging interest on loans—a core feature of Western debt finance. A war with Iran would serve two goals simultaneously. On the foreign front, it would install a Western-aligned central bank, crack open Iranian markets, and gain access to cultural and historical treasures. At home, a cyberattack blamed on Iran would be used to justify Digital ID rollouts, tighter control of online spaces, and the erosion of civil liberties—all in the name of “security.” This dual agenda mirrors what happened with Libya, Iraq, and even post-9/11 America: a foreign enemy is defeated, and domestic populations quietly lose more freedom. Iran may not launch a cyberattack. It may not even want to. But if such an attack occurs, and the media rushes to blame Tehran, we should look deeper. Who truly benefits? Who has the capability? Who’s been laying the groundwork for decades? The real question isn’t “Will Iran hack us?” It’s this: Will you surrender your freedom when they say Iran did? The post Will the Iran Cyberattack Panic Usher In a New Patriot Act? appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
11 w

American Workers Will Build the AI Age
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

American Workers Will Build the AI Age

Politics American Workers Will Build the AI Age The demand for AI-savvy engineers is exploding. Palantir’s American Tech Fellowship will unleash the talent hidden in the Heartland. Credit: Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock This week, Palantir launched the American Tech Fellowship to give American workers the tools to compete and win in an AI and software-driven world.This fellowship builds on the momentum of our Meritocracy Fellowship announced earlier this year. That effort unleashed talent trapped in a broken higher-education system. This one will unleash the exceptional American talent that is in the workforce already and that is ready to take their technical skills to the next level.We’re launching the American Tech Fellowship because something extraordinary is happening: America is entering a new golden age of innovation. The AI revolution isn’t just coming; it’s already here. Companies are using AI to automate millions of tasks, transform workflows, and take their workers to the next level. AI represents the greatest opportunity in generations to rebuild American manufacturing, revitalize our communities, and restore our national power.The demand for qualified engineers is exploding. Meeting that demand means expanding beyond typical recruiting pipelines, candidate profiles, and policy approaches. The reflex of many in business and government is to import the solution, when the real solution is staring them in the face. There’s extraordinary talent in every American community, and we’re going to prove it.We’re confident because we’ve seen American ingenuity up close. On factory floors and in workshops across the country, we’ve watched brilliant minds solve complex problems with the kind of practical wisdom that can’t be taught in any classroom. We’ve seen autodidacts without CS degrees build incredible solutions with our software. We’ve seen enlisted soldiers and assembly-line workers translate on-the-ground experience into code that reflects reality and helps their organizations fulfill the mission.These aren’t workers who need to be “retrained” per the way policymakers tend to talk about them. They’re innovators who need to be unleashed. If reindustrialization and renewal are going to be more than righteous rallying cries, it will be because we empowered Americans who understand how things actually work and who can bridge the gap between cutting-edge AI and real-world application.We started the American Tech Fellowship to get these workers in the game.American Tech Fellows will participate in an intensive virtual training run by our partner, Ontologize. Fellows will build on Palantir’s world-class software platform, AIP. A select group from our first cohort will showcase their skills at a one-day, in-person Hackathon in Detroit next month as part of the Reindustrialize Summit. And top-performing fellows will have opportunities for high-paying, high-tempo jobs at Palantir and partner companies, where they’ll drive America’s technological renaissance.American workers aren’t just going to participate in national renewal—they’re going to lead it, just as they led our nation’s most heroic technological achievements.Some 400,000 Americans from all walks of life contributed to the Apollo program. As Tom Wolfe observed, it was “engineers from the supposedly backward and narrow-minded boondocks who [provided] not only the genius but also the passion and the daring that won the space race.” Neil Armstrong from Wapakoneta, Ohio took humanity’s first steps on the Moon. Gene Kranz from Toledo guided him there from mission control. The NASA administrator Tom Paine (from Berkeley, but we won’t hold it against him) celebrated Apollo as “the triumph of the squares.”The pattern repeats throughout American history. Chuck Yeager, a backwoods boy from West Virginia, broke the sound barrier. Bob Noyce brought Midwestern work ethic to Silicon Valley and helped birth the digital age. These weren’t accidents. They were the natural result of American character meeting American opportunity.These stories remind us that the American Heartland built the 20th century. We believe it will build the 21st, too. Across America, in machine shops and maker spaces, in community colleges and coding bootcamps, the next generation of American innovators is tinkering, learning, and rising. They’re not waiting for permission—they’re building the future with their own hands. They’re not content merely with a comfortable job—they aspire to forge a stronger nation and champion their communities.The AI age isn’t something that’s happening to America. It’s something America is going to create. And we’re going to do it the American way: by believing in our people, investing in their potential, and giving them the tools to build something extraordinary.Applications for the American Tech Fellowship are live now and will run until June 27. To all technically minded patriots ready to level up for the AI age: This is your moment. To all companies looking for the skilled workers who will define the next chapter of American innovation: your workforce is waiting.America is in a period of unprecedented possibility. The future belongs to those who seize it. We’re here to make sure that future is built by Americans, for Americans, and in America. The post American Workers Will Build the AI Age appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
11 w

Don’t Make Taiwan the Next Ukraine
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Don’t Make Taiwan the Next Ukraine

Foreign Affairs Don’t Make Taiwan the Next Ukraine The U.S. is rushing, again, into war over a country that few Americans understand. Before Israel’s surprise attack against Iran two weeks ago, Taiwan was the country most widely regarded as a potential flashpoint for the next war. Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary of defense for policy and a longtime China hawk, has made a career out of pushing the United States to center its Pacific strategy around denying the People’s Republic of China the ability to invade Taiwan, which it regards as a renegade province.  Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) wrote a book earlier this year urging Americans to take up the cause of Taiwan. Vivek Ramaswamy, channeling Richard Nixon while running for president a couple of years ago, stood in the Nixon Library and made the Machiavellian proposal that the United States ought to defend Taiwan until the island was no longer useful for providing microchips, at which point it should be abandoned.  President Joe Biden, on multiple occasions, pledged to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion. In 2021, the Biden administration released a strategy document that articulated the reasons for U.S. support for Taiwan. “We will support Taiwan, a leading democracy and a critical economic and security partner, in line with longstanding American commitments,” the document said. There are many Americans talking up, talking about, and talking for Taiwan. But a question remains. Where are the Taiwanese? One reason for the near-total absence of Taiwanese voices in American discourse may be that, when one speaks with Taiwanese people, they tend to have a much more nuanced view of their country than China hawks in DC want to hear. When one speaks directly to the Taiwanese about the state of politics in their homeland, they tend to question the very basis that many China hawks offer for defending Taiwan from the People’s Republic of China, namely, that the small island nation is a robust democracy. Recently, I reached out to Joanna Lei, a former member of the Legislative Yuan—Taiwan’s unicameral legislature—to find out more about the country’s vaunted “democracy.” Dr. Lei, who received her PhD from the University of Pennsylvania, was once affiliated with the Kuomintang (KMT), the Nationalist party that fled from the Chinese mainland to Taiwan under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek in 1949. She is now part of a Christian-aligned political party that has been working to fight the onslaught of LGBT insanity in Taiwan. (The current Taiwanese president, Lai Ching-te, is a full-fledged LGBT maniac, as was his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen.) Dr. Lei paints a portrait of Taiwan very different from the propagandist narrative one hears on American cable news. “The DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] government has been held up as a model democracy and valued partner by both Democratic president Joe Biden and Republican president Donald Trump,” Lei said. “But this gesture of broad support leads to a lot of things getting swept under the rug. “For example, prior to the first anniversary of President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration, we on the ground in Taiwan witnessed a rapid deterioration of Taiwan’s democracy. At the tail end of President Tsai Ing-wen’s time in office, the government passed many laws that can be characterized as bills of attainder targeting opposition parties. When Lai Ching-te took office in May 2024, these laws were implemented to the nth degree, and more recently the DPP has waged something called a general recall. “Typically, one or two senators who really did not perform well would be recalled if a recall were to be held according to our system. Such politicians would be recalled by their own constituents. The DPP’s general recall, however, is an entirely different beast. The DPP, not constituents, carried out a recall of more than thirty-five legislators from opposing parties, including the KMT.” “This sounds more like a purge than a recall,” I interjected. “It is a purge,” Dr. Lei affirmed. “Under normal circumstances,” she continued, “a president can prorogue the parliament and hold a general election, but the DPP has used what it is calling a ‘general recall’ to target legislators. “The KMT mounted a counter-recall, seeking to remove DPP legislators, as a way to fight back against the DPP’s general recall. But the DPP responded by using the judicial branch to investigate those in the KMT leading the counter-recall. About ten KMT leaders were incarcerated and kept incommunicado. “In addition, the DPP has jailed the leader of the opposition People’s Party for more than six months. All of this hurts the balance of power and the separation of powers.” To be sure, one of the targets of Lai’s wrath is Ko Wen-je, a KMT bigwig and former mayor of Taipei who has been dogged by serious corruption allegations. But there are others, too, whom the DPP machine has jailed—political prisoners, by all accounts, in one of Washington’s favorite “democracies.” Many in Taiwan notice what is happening. This April, more than 250,000 people took to the streets in Taiwan to voice their opposition to democratic backsliding. However, almost no major Western media outlets covered this. In May, President Lai Ching-te gave a major speech on the anniversary of his inauguration in which he continued to portray Taiwan as a model democracy. He failed to mention, though, what was happening on the ground. When Washington takes an interest in a foreign “democracy,” it rarely admires it from afar. Washington’s next move, after locating (or grooming) a “democratic partner,” is often to infiltrate that country’s governing structure. I asked Dr. Lei about reports that the Taiwanese government is welcoming American advisors into the halls of power there. “We changed the law so that United States citizens can serve as advisors in the Taiwanese government,” Dr. Lei confirmed. “We also have a lot of American military advisors coming to Taiwan. This is a first since 1979, when the United States severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan. At that time, the United States promised to remove military personnel from Taiwan and to stop operating the joint-defense treaty.” There is much at stake in America’s revision of the status quo and its drive to turn Taiwan into an anti-China proxy. As Dr. Lei pointed out, the last time there was direct combat between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland was in 1958, when Beijing unleashed heavy shelling of the tiny islands of Quemoy and Matsu. While the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) remain, technically, locked in a state of civil war, Dr. Lei said that the two sides have been able to maintain peace. “In 2005,” Dr. Lei told me, “Lien Chan, the then-KMT chairperson, led a delegation to Beijing. I was part of that delegation. The purpose was to start a conversation, to discuss our peaceful co-development going forward. 2005 opened an era, a negotiation, of moving towards an eventual peace. The presidency of Ma Ying-jeou [2008-2016] saw the results of that. There were twenty-two ministry-to-ministry meetings and over thirty agreements between the governments on both sides of the Taiwan Straits. We did this without any foreign intervention. “The president now, however, Lai Ching-te, has an extreme pro-Taiwanese-independence stance. Therefore, he really needs the support of the United States and Japan.” I asked Dr. Lei if Taiwanese people feel that Washington intends to make Taiwan the next Ukraine, using Taiwan as a pawn in a geopolitical game. She confirmed this was the case. “It is now more clear than ever what is going on,” Dr. Lei replied. “Recently, American secretary of state Marco Rubio said that the United States has to get out of Europe and the Middle East so that it can focus its attention on the western Pacific. It’s very, very clear that there is a progression. First it was Ukraine. Then it was Israel. Now it is the western Pacific.” “People in Taiwan are gradually beginning to realize that if a theater for the next confrontation is to be chosen, Taiwan and the Philippines are probably going to be the first and second choices, respectively, or maybe somewhere around Okinawa. More people are now thinking about a real, tangible confrontation happening on Taiwan, which is a very small island. We are now facing a problem getting enough army, navy, and air force recruits. Many people are also refusing to serve their compulsory military service. The United States has pushed us to increase that compulsory service from four months to one year. War used to seem like a very distant scenario, but now it seems to be coming our way.” But there is something else going on in Taiwan, something darker than even American machinations to turn Taiwan into a proxy for its next military adventure. Dr. Lei told me that people in Taiwan who travel to Fujian—the Chinese mainland province directly across the strait from the Taiwanese city of Taichung and the ancestral home of many people now living in Taiwan—are being investigated by the Taiwanese government as possible spies. Even local rituals in Taiwan that have any kind of connection to Chinese culture are being suppressed and dismissed as worship of “Chinese gods.” “President Lai Ching-te may be trying to build a new people, a ‘Taiwanese’ people, drawing on relations with Southeast Asian island language groups, and then use that as a basis for arguing for Taiwan’s participation in the United Nations and closer cooperation with the United States,” Dr. Lei explained. “In a recent address, President Lai singled out 1624 as an important year in Taiwanese history, as this was the year that the Dutch set up a trade office in Tainan, in southern Taiwan. For President Lai, this means that Taiwan has a 400-year history of international trade. “His overall sentiment is that Taiwan is not a part of China,” Dr. Lei said. “Taiwan, for President Lai, is not Han Chinese.” There is an important distinction to be made here. Politically, Taiwan is not a part of China. But President Lai seems to be asserting that it is also not a part of China culturally, ethnically, or even, perhaps, linguistically to some degree. This flies in the face of demographic reality, as the island nation is now overwhelmingly peopled by the descendants of mainlanders, almost all of them Han Chinese. If President Lai is arguing for an ethnically separate Taiwan, then he is, I fear, setting the stage for a self-destructive culture war and assault on Taiwanese identity. “Recently,” Dr. Lei explained, “the Taiwanese government reported that the Taiwanese population is about 2 percent people from Southeast Asia and other places, about 1 percent aboriginal or native Taiwanese, and the rest, some 96 percent or 97 percent of the population, are simply labeled ‘the rest.’ Not Han, not Fujianese, but ‘the rest.’ “President Lai said, after President Trump’s tariff announcement earlier this year, that it was time for Taiwan to ‘leave China and enter the North,’ by which he meant the Global North, especially Europe and North America. But let’s look at what happened when Japan announced it was going to leave Asia and join Europe and America. Japan is part of Washington’s global strategy, but not fully a part of the Global North. President Lai’s aspirations to be part of the Global North have no basis in reality. “What we are doing is allowing a really strong regional hegemon [America]… to come to the western Pacific and use the first island chain as the most important strategic blockade against what that hegemon has called the number one pacing threat, namely the People’s Republic of China. That course would not be the best for Taiwan. It would be, in fact, disastrous for us.” Editor’s note: Quotes from Dr. Joanna Lei have been lightly edited for readability and clarity. The post Don’t Make Taiwan the Next Ukraine appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
11 w

Trump Just Ended a War That Never Should Have Started
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Trump Just Ended a War That Never Should Have Started

Foreign Affairs Trump Just Ended a War That Never Should Have Started The once-promising diplomatic path will be more difficult to walk in the aftermath. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) On June 23, the United States helped to end a war that it helped to start and that never should have happened. Catching almost everyone, including some top officials in the Trump administration, by surprise, Trump suddenly posted, “It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE!” Unheralded, the emir and the prime minister of Qatar reportedly played a key role in getting Iran to agree to the ceasefire. But on the way to the diplomatic success, the U.S. had already bombed both international law and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to smithereens, which is a large price to pay for a war that never needed to happen when a diplomatic solution that was on the table waiting for the details to be finalized. The American bombing of Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities was an act of war that violated international law by attacking a sovereign nation that had neither attacked nor threatened to attack the U.S. without UN Security Council approval. It violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because, as a signatory, Iran was protected by the “inalienable right to a civilian [nuclear] program.” “There are two ways Iran can be handled,” U.S. President Donald Trump had said, “militarily, or you make a deal.” But the undiplomatic language of threats was unnecessary, and the choice of the military way more so. The diplomatic path to a deal was wide open.  Diplomatic talks between the U.S. and Iran on Iran’s civilian nuclear program had surprisingly and encouragingly progressed through five rounds. Both sides evaluated the talks as having been positive. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the fifth round of talks “has strengthened the possibility of achieving progress.” The U.S. called them “constructive” and said that “further progress” was made, although “there is still work to be done.” The retired ambassador and former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian said that he has been told by informed Iranian sources that “the key elements of the deal between [Trump’s special envoy] Witkoff and [Iran’s foreign minister] Araghchi were agreed upon.” The deal had five key points. “Iran would accept maximum nuclear inspections and transparency,” including implementing the International Atomic Energy Agency Additional Protocol. Iran would either convert or export its stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium. Iran would cease high-level enrichment and cap its enrichment at the 3.67 percent needed for a civilian energy program. And, finally, Iran would fully cooperate with the IAEA in resolving any outstanding technical ambiguities. In return, Iran would be permitted to have its civilian nuclear program, and the U.S. would lift all nuclear-related sanctions. Done. But then the U.S. demanded zero enrichment and a full stop to Iran’s peaceful, civilian nuclear program, and Trump demanded “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” Zero enrichment and a full surrender of Iran’s nuclear program was a well-known redline for Iran. American officials knew that Iran could never agree to zero enrichment; that demand could not lead to further negotiations but only to war. And that is what happened. The failure to resolve the conflict with a negotiated deal is more tragic because concern over Iran’s nuclear program was still being successfully managed by the existing negotiated deal.  Despite the fact that in 2018, during his first term, Trump illegally and unilaterally terminated the JCPOA Iran nuclear agreement that had been successfully negotiated by President Barack Obama, Iran was still verifiably not building a nuclear bomb. Consistent with the JCPOA agreement, when the U.S. pulled out, Iran was no longer bound by it. To maintain its leverage, Iran began enriching uranium well beyond levels agreed to by the JCPOA. But that decision could be reversed upon America’s return to their commitment, and Iran continually declined to build a bomb. This is not just an Iranian claim. U.S. intelligence assessed, right up to the moment the bombs fell on Fordow, that Iran had not made a decision to weaponize its enriched uranium. The 2022 Department of Defense Nuclear Posture Review concluded that “Iran does not today possess a nuclear weapon and we currently believe it is not pursuing one.” The 2025 Annual Threat Assessment, which “reflects the collective insights of the Intelligence Community,” clearly states that U.S. intelligence “continue[s] to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” As recently as March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified that the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment was that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized a nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.” On June 17, the New York Times reported that “senior administration officials were unaware of any new intelligence showing that the Iranians were rushing to build a nuclear bomb.” Despite alarmist warnings that Iran was a brief window away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon, CNN reported in June that the actual assessment of the U.S. intelligence community was that, even if Iran were to decide to pursue a nuclear bomb, they were “up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one to a target of its choosing.” And the IAEA agrees that there is no evidence that Iran has activated a nuclear weapons program. Iran has accused the IAEA of “biased” reporting on their nuclear activities that were weaponized and used as part of the case for the military solution to the Iranian nuclear problem. After the complaint, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi clarified that “we did not find in Iran elements to indicate that there is an active, systematic plan to build a nuclear weapon. We have not seen elements to allow us, as inspectors, to affirm that there was a nuclear weapon that was being manufactured or produced somewhere in Iran.” The greatest risk produced by the U.S. strikes on Iran is that they may have been the one thing that could push Iran toward pursuing a bomb. Iran had, for decades, forsworn the bomb on religious and legal grounds. The New York Times has reported that “senior U.S. intelligence officials said that Iranian leaders were likely to shift toward producing a bomb if the American military attacked the Iranian uranium enrichment site Fordo or if Israel killed Iran’s supreme leader.” The former Russian president and deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev listed it as a certainty, saying, “The enrichment of nuclear material—and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons—will continue.” The American bombing tells Iran that, even if they are willing to sign an agreement that is on the table, committing them to capping enrichment at 3.67 percent and agreeing to an unprecedented inspection regime, the U.S. will bomb them with the biggest conventional bombs ever used in war. North Korea built a nuclear bomb as a deterrent to U.S. aggression, and no nuclear power bombed them. Mousavian told CNN that the U.S. is “practically telling Iranians: get the bomb as the best deterrence. And I believe if these policies continue, Iran would go for a nuclear bomb.” “That’s why,” he told Democracy Now, “they are now thinking perhaps having nuclear bomb is much better deterrent compared to being member of NPT.” Sina Toossi, senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy, told The American Conservative that “far from neutralizing Iran’s nuclear capabilities, the war may have pushed Tehran closer to covert weaponization under a hardened doctrine.” The JCPOA Iran nuclear agreement was working. U.S. intelligence and the IAEA continued to consistently assess that Iran has not made the decision to pursue a nuclear weapons program. And a new Trump deal with Iran had nearly been agreed on. The “military way” and the illegal bombing of Iran were not necessary and may, in the long run, make things a lot worse. The post Trump Just Ended a War That Never Should Have Started appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
11 w

Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Trump Threads the Needle on Iran 

Foreign Affairs Trump Threads the Needle on Iran  President Trump brokers a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Will it hold? (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images) The news cycle now moves faster than ever to serve a public that wants answers. But geopolitical outcomes cannot be determined with the speed of a Google search. Even with a hostile news media, the first draft of history on Iran looks good for President Donald Trump. Military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities that could have easily spiraled out of control have instead given way to a fragile ceasefire in a matter of days. In some ways, this is not surprising. It was always obvious that Trump wanted this to be a one-and-done operation, like the similarly risky but ultimately successful Qasem Soleimani in 2020. Yes, his messaging grew confusing — remember “MIGA” and regime change? — and it appeared he was growing more invested in Iranian capitulation. Yet it has long been clear that Trump has little appetite for extended military interventions. Brinkmanship followed by speedy declarations of victory have long been his way of doing things far outside of foreign policy. In the Iranian nuclear program, Trump and the neoconservatives had a common enemy. And Trump has never gone as far as his less interventionist supporters when it comes to projecting American military power. Nevertheless, Trump’s basic instincts are different from those of every major Republican leader with comparable power over the last 25 years. Despite working closely with Benjamin Netanyahu to defang Iran, not since at least George H.W. Bush would an American president — especially a Republican one — have addressed an Israeli prime minister the way Trump is reported to have spoken to Bibi to keep the truce in place. It was just never guaranteed that once Trump decided to get involved directly that the other participants and outside events beyond his control would cooperate with the desire for a more limited mission. Even after both Trump and Tehran decided to take the off ramps available to them, we don’t know how permanent this victory will be. Much remains uncertain. How long will the ceasefire hold? How far was the Iranian nuclear program set back? Did U.S. military involvement do more to delay nuclear weapons than diplomacy would have? Will Israel want this to become the model for future joint undertakings against the ayatollahs? There is a reason the initial reporting, which is often contradictory, is only history’s first draft. The social media certitude about what has transpired over these past few days is premature. Not everyone who was aligned with Trump, whether just on the narrow question of whether to strike the Iranian nuclear or as a more regular part of his political coalition, will want to see the conflict end where he does or will be ready to see the U.S. go back to the negotiating table. There will be a clamor for more pressure and further military action. If the facts on the ground in the Middle East are subject to change, so are the political conditions at home. Different factions around Trump will fight over future escalations as they once did over joining the Israeli airstrikes. Just because the advocates of foreign-policy restraint lost that (figurative, political) battle doesn’t mean future ones are necessarily lost. Nor should the trends in favor of restraint on the Right be discounted as factors reinforcing Trump’s instincts. War-weary conservative influencers overstated their, well, influence in the first debate over Iran. In most cases, their popularity flowed from their support for Trump rather than the other way around. Exceptions to this rule, such as Joe Rogan, often have the most tenuous ties to the conservative base, even if parts of their audience lean right. Many hawks whose ties to Trump are loose to nonexistent except when he is bombing somewhere could easily similarly overstep. But there are important questions about whether there is anything to learn from how the last neoconservatives standing played what looked like a weak hand on Iran. They and their allies have remained more internally cohesive and media-savvy even as their political and cultural influence have waned. What the U.S. and Israel have already done in Iran are the things we have done best in our post-Cold War military interventions. It is clear that the GOP’s wildest hawks have still learned little about why regime change and nation-building have so often failed or why they are so difficult to avoid when pursuing anything but brief, well-defined military missions. Once we have decided who the bad guy is, there is little room for further questions. The more interventionist camp inside the GOP will nevertheless almost certainly see the initial Iran successes as an opportunity to move beyond the failures of Iraq just as they used the Persian Gulf War to turn the page on Vietnam. This revisionist history cannot be allowed to take hold either in the first or subsequent drafts. The post Trump Threads the Needle on Iran  appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
11 w News & Oppinion

rumbleRumble
ANTI-WHITE HATRED: Jews Launch Assault on Stew’s Pro-White Children’s Book
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
11 w

CHRIS SKY - Don't fall for the next round of propaganda or false flag attacks!!
Favicon 
api.bitchute.com

CHRIS SKY - Don't fall for the next round of propaganda or false flag attacks!!

Dont fall for the next round of propaganda or false flag attacks designed to manufacture US Consent for War with Iran THIS is what is Israel will do next THIS is really why Listen and Share
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 10504 out of 90433
  • 10500
  • 10501
  • 10502
  • 10503
  • 10504
  • 10505
  • 10506
  • 10507
  • 10508
  • 10509
  • 10510
  • 10511
  • 10512
  • 10513
  • 10514
  • 10515
  • 10516
  • 10517
  • 10518
  • 10519
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