JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Minimal goal: destroy Iran's capacity and will to make trouble for significant time (years, if lucky decades) Maximal goal: IRGC regime falls
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Keep bombing them until the list of primary targets is completed, then see if there's somebody there to take over or just leave it to smolder and come back when they ask for seconds.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Probably not. I mean, if Iran is anything like any other country I am familiar with, most courts are relatively boring and very replaceable government buildings, and most judges are the "banality of evil" kind of functionaries, also entirely replaceable. They do not control the system, they do not influence how the system behaves (there's no independent judiciary with strong tradition of guarding its independence, AFAIK), they are just a cog in the machine. Sure, if you take out enough cogs, the machine may slow down or even break, but I don't think going individually after each one of 10000 judges is an efficient use of resources. If the regime falls, Iranians will take care of them by themselves, but killing some of them is not what would make it fall.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
You are repeating the claims of Iranian prosecution as if it were an established and indisputable facts. Are you sure it's smart to do that?
JarJarJedi
6d ago
They may not be good at a lot of things, but so far they are pretty good at one thing that matters - keeping the power.
JarJarJedi
6d ago
I think Babylon Bee summarized the conversation we've been having much better than I ever could: https://babylonbee.com/news/jew-converts-to-christianity-after-twitter-user-says-christ-is-king-you-filthy-money-grubbin-jew (that's why they are The Prophets and I am just a guy on the internet).
JarJarJedi
9d ago
That's like me saying open borders is "Catholic politics" because Catholic Charities USA spent billions of taxpayer dollars enabling those policies. Would you say blaming every Catholic for the consequences of open borders policies enabled by this is fair?
I am not being obtuse, I am trying to figure out if there's a way for me to explain to you what kind of fundamental error you are making. That, of course, involves understanding the essence of your complaints, and figure out why you erroneously chose to single out Jews as a source of these complaints.
JarJarJedi
13d ago
I don't think I understand what are you talking about. Do you mind speaking plainly? What kind of "hate propaganda" specifically Jews run against you since 1970s? Why do you call it "Jewish politics"?
JarJarJedi
17d ago
Yes, of course, frozen conflicts exist. But Iran had been in no way "frozen" - it was actively seeking to establish long-range strike and nuclear capability. While at the same time engaging in a proxy war with the US.
You can't compare Iran with USSR though - US could not get into a hot war with USSR that it could have any hope of winning (at least if your definition of winning does not include nuclear wasteland). In fact, it can't even do this with Russia, which is much smaller and weaker than USSR. With Iran, there is a possibility of direct kinetic action that can be successful in removing the threat. But that window would be closed forever once Iran gets nukes and long-range strike capabilities. The latter he had already possessed, and reportedly was within months of the former. So the choice was a potentially short hot war now (I mean didn't have to be February 28, but sometime within 2024-2028), or 50-year-long cold war later. And given as US pretty much lost the capability to wage long cold wars anyway (the first Democratic president would immediately roll back any gains made by preceding Republican administrations), I don't think "it will eventually work out" was really a viable option. There are a lot of nations that hate America, and that's fine, as long as their hate is, as you noted, "frozen". But then there is Iran, who does not want to remain frozen. They want to arm themselves for the battle with Great Satan. That's the whole underpinning of their ideology - coexistence with Great Satan is not something that you intend to do long term, it's something that you do while you gather your forces for destroying it. Well, they got their final battle a bit sooner than they expected, hopefully it would be final enough.
JarJarJedi
17d ago
Is there a difference between Democrats and Jewish Democrats?
Not sure what you mean here. Obviously, there are non-Jewish Democrats, in fact, over 90% of them are, so these sets are not identical.
Aren’t they the ones pulling the strings and setting goals.
No, not really. I mean, some of goal-setters, to the extent they can be personally identified, may be of Jewish descent, but not a significant number and not as any identifiable block distinct from an average white woke Democrat in any way.
Like MAGA started winning elections when the Democrats started replacing Jewish house wives with black females.
"When" does a lot of work here. It is true that The Great Awokening turned many Jewish voters away from Democrats, but the replacement you are quoting is the result of the Great Awokening, not its cause. MAGA was born as a reaction to the GA, so yes, there is a link, but you've got the casual relationship all wrong. And the GA is much wider and deeper phenomenon that Jewish Democrats (though of course quite a few of Jewish Democrats participated, they are Democrats after all).
They are willing to strike by means available and convenient to them. I don't think it makes sense to debate the meaning of the word "any" - the point is Iran is at war with the US, and this has been confirmed by many hostile actions, costing lives of many US citizens (as well as many other people). Is it "any" means or only "some" means that Iranians use to murder Americans, is immaterial for the question.
I note besides the case of ADL in 1990s (which is not very political anyway), you didn't really mention anything specifically you're sick of. I mean, I am not happy about a lot of things Jewish Democrats do, I can make a long list, but this is my list. And I don't use terms like "Jewish politics" - beyond somewhat less virulent hate of Israel, the politics of Jewish Democrats is not different from the politics of any other Democrat (which is kinda exactly the problem). So, what is "Jewish politics" you are sick of?
JarJarJedi
17d ago
It's almost as if they have a reason to hate America
That's fine, they have the reason to hate America, and America has the reason to bomb shit out of them. They had a choice - give up acting on their hate, either stop hating or maybe hate without actually murdering Americans (and of course non-Americans, including hundreds of thousands of their own citizens over the years). A lot of countries took that choice. Iran did not. They chose the hate above all (same happens to Hamas and Hezbollah btw - birds of feather) - and that eventually leads to consequences. They had a lot of time to make a different choice. They consistently refused, and the time is up.
Listen, you need to decide what you want. If you want to vent about how ADL hurt you, sure, go ahead. I mean, I don't care but you are free to do it, we're in a free country. I won't debate you about this because frankly out of all shit that is happening what information ADL shared in 1990s with Mossad is pretty low on my ladder of priorities, sorry, there are much more important (for me) things that are going on right now.
If you genuinely want to get smart Jews to join MAGA, then I am just telling you right now, starting with how ADL is bad because it supposedly spied on commies and/or Jihad activists in 1990s (ah the times where there were so few of them you needed to actually seek them out instead of just pointing at a random leftist!) and how all Jews are now tainted because of it - is not going to work very well. Just so when it does not work very well at all, you won't be surprised. I mean, out of all ways to get people to play on your side, you choose pretty bad ones so far. If you really want it (and not just using it as one more item on the list of why Jews totally suck) I'd probably try some other strategy.
JarJarJedi
17d ago
Yes, because Vietnam did not maintain and escalate the level of hostilities since then. They are not building nukes and do not commonly chant "Death to America" in their official meetings. In fact, they have been working for the last three decades on consistently normalizing and improving the relationships. And that's why nobody wants to bomb them - because the war is done there. The war with Iran isn't.
JarJarJedi
17d ago
Denying the ADL after they are no longer useful
Nobody is "denying" anything. You are trying to pre-suppose you are correct and your opponents' arguments are illegitimate, this is not something that you get for free just because you want it. I described you in detail what is the deal with ADL - it was one thing, now it's a different thing. Things change. If you think what I described is not true, please address it on substance, not just resort to name calling.
That’s like the CIA denying a spy after the fucked up
No, it's not like that at all - nobody is "denying" ADL are Jews, and nobody is "denying" they fucked up.
“The best funded Jewish group who were hardcore zionists - wasn’t us”
I am not sure who you are quoting, so I am not sure I need to address that, unless you explain what do you mean.
Whether Israel directly worked with them in messaging is a tough question.
No, it's not tough at all. It didn't. Israel has its own messaging, and the interest in participating in US culture wars in Israel is pretty much none. Israel has its own troubles. It is true that Israel values US as an ally greatly, and will do a lot to help keep US as an ally and keep the positive relations between US and Israel. But there are much better venues for that and ADL does not play a major role in it, especially the woke part of ADL.
But Israel could have shut them down at any time. They are zionists.
No, it could not - Israel does not finance it and has no operational control over it. And, frankly, why would Israel shut down political activities of US citizens on US soil? Yes, they are zionists - but being zionist is not some chip that you install in your head that puts you under control of the Israeli government. Being zionists just means you don't think Israel must be destroyed. It's a pretty low bar - it is absolutely fascinating, to be honest, you even need a word for it. There's no word to call people that think Japan does not need to be destroyed. There's no word for people that think Morocco is a legitimate state that should exist. Pretty much any country on the face of Earth - sure, there might be people that want to destroy this country, haters gonna hate. But only for Israel there's a special word for people that don't think genocide is a good idea. For all other countries, these people are called "normal people". Such is the sad reality to which we are used. So yes, there are zionists. So what?
That’s like a the pope calling me and telling me I can’t do something anymore
No, it's not like that at all. First of all, Jews don't have a pope and never did. Even within Judaism, even within the most Orthodox of the Ortodox Judaism (which in the minority of Jews) there's no such concept - if you bother to study about it, Judaism had always been a pluralistic religion, and propagation of the religious law could not be more dissimilar to what Catholics have. There literally can not be an analogue to Pope in Judaism (except for Moses once and the Messiah when he comes, of course, but beyond that, none). I am not saying this to say Catholics are wrong, just in Judaism things work very differently, that's a fact.
Second, of course, not all Jews are religious or Israeli or agree to what any particular Israeli government is doing (that's an understatement like saying when the bomb explodes not all the parts stay perfectly still in the same place). ADL has neither religious nor any other obligation to listen to anything anybody in Israel says, whether in power or not. Sure, they could cooperate with Israel when they think it makes sense for them - and they do. But voluntary cooperation and total control that you are implying are very different thing. They don't have to listen to anything. They may decide to listen, or may decide to ignore.
Now, the important part here - if you are still reading - going back to what started the conversation. If you want to get more Jews to be part of the MAGA movement - which I think is a good goal, as there is a lot of intersection between what most of the American Jews want and what most of the MAGA people want - then picking up how ADL hurt you and how much Israel is at fault for that is a useless activity. I mean, it may be attractive for you, but it is useless for reaching that goal. If you want to get more Jews voting for MAGA, then chanting "you are shit because ADL is shit and you are responsible for it!" is not going to do that. We can agree ADL has become shit. You can convince more and more Jews to stop listening to ADL on this basis - because nobody likes listening to shit, so if you can convince people ADL is a shitty organization now, you can get them to stop. But if you insist that ADL is the same as Jews and Israel, and forever has been, and forever will be - they you don't leave any common platform to stand on. How then would you enable the future cooperation?
JarJarJedi
18d ago
The problem is the Jews did do a lot of the things the right accuses them of.
Like what specifically? I mean, of course there are Jews that did any particular shit. There are Jewish thieves, Jewish rapists, Jewish murderers, Jewish terrorists, Jewish gangsters, Jewish anything you like. There are a lot of Jews, a lot of them are very smart, and if one also happens also to be a psychopath, you'll get yourself a very prominent criminal or a communist leader or something like that. But I'd like to figure out, what exactly is the problem about which we're talking here.
Israel and their backers did run a blood libel against white identity using the holocausts as justification.
That's not true. Israel had never been an active participant in US culture wars. Especially not in the Great Awokening, which had been thoroughly infested with violent hate for Israel. It is true that some of the Jewish organizations - like ADL - shamefully, used the Holocaust as justification for their left-wing propaganda, but Israel had nothing to do with it, and most of the Jews neither endorsed it nor had any influence on the matter. ADL is not some kind of Jewish representative, it is just a bunch of grifters whose grift happens to be in being Jews and serving Democrats. Other Jews can't really do much about it.
The ADL was the primary Jewish interest group
No it wasn't, and it certainly isn't. They were a bunch of loudmouths who were somewhat listened to because they weren't obviously corrupt, and now that it's obvious they are, they are about as representative as Naturei Karta. One can say they are "a" Jewish group, that's true, but nowhere even near "the primary" Jewish group, especially once they sold their soul to the woke. That is not exclusively Jewish phenomenon - organizations like ACLU, EFF, Greenpeece, and many others suffered the same fate, once they were maybe a left-leaning, but fundamentally sound organizations with a cause, which can be agreed or disagreed, but there was a proper cause, one which people could talk about without buying into the whole woke package. Now they are just skinsuits that the woke left wears when it's tactically convenient. ADL now happens to be a Jewish woke skinsuit, but that's where its connection with the Jewishness ends.
And if you want to make practical gains in luring Jews into MAGA, you message should not be "ADL are Jews, therefore all Jews are the same and as bad as the worst of ADL". That's just doing the same shit the left is doing to you. And I mean it can feel good, but does it work? Did it work on you when they called you a Nazi? Did you think "oh gosh, the Left called me a Nazi, I must rethink everything and change!" or did you think "fuck that noise, I am not listening to them anymore!"? If you want to do better, your message should be "ADL are Jews, but they are bad and lost the right to represent Jews in any way. Come here, my fellow Jews, let's unite under our umbrella of common sense and reject the bullshit ADL is peddling you!".
JarJarJedi
18d ago
Nothing in history has ever appeared out of nowhere. There are always historical reasons. We can go to 1970s, or 1940s, or to Cain murdering Abel, if you want. All that does not change the fact that Iran, as a state, had always been in war with the US, and never considered US anything but the Great Satan. And they hadn't been quiet and theoretical about it - for them, the war is real, and violent, and if they are too weak to strike the US directly, they certainly are very willing to strike at the US by any means accessible to them. Iran (as the Islamic Republic) has always been aggressive and violent. So pretending there was no war and everything had been fine is just ignorant. The causes why there was a war is a separate business, but it does not change the fact of the existence of the war.
JarJarJedi
18d ago
I'm not singling out Iran specifically here, I am talking about the mindset that "if there's no shooting/bombing right now, right this second, then there's no war". It doesn't work this way, and it had been proven over and over that you can't just ignore things like aggressive death cults because they aren't bothering you right now, because they will bother you later. When it's quiet for a while, people start thinking "oh, it's ok, it's not happening anymore" and they get complacent and relax - and then it starts happening again, because the underlying reason is still there. And yes, Iran is not the only reason, but it's a very major one.
JarJarJedi
18d ago
I would dispute whether it is inherently glorious to bomb shit and topple governments.
It is inherently glorious to bomb shit and topple the government whose official slogan is "Death to America", who started its existence with taking 66 Americans as hostages, and which had murdered over a thousand of US citizens since, and is operating the largest and strongest terrorist network on the planet. Oh and which also has a very strong ballistic missile and drone programs (strong enough that Russia is basically has them as their major supplier for their war) and are within arms reach of getting the nukes, after which the opportunity for bombing shit is gone because nobody would dare to bomb a country that is capable of nuclear response.
I don’t see what the United States is getting out of this.
Rubio literally told you. "if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties." If US did not use the opportunity to go together with Israel, but instead did their own thing, at different time, more US people would die as the result. With Israel - less American deaths. Without Israel - more American death. How do I explain it in more simple terms? Do you understand "less casualties" is better than "higher casualties"?
JarJarJedi
18d ago
If you want to talk in practical terms, now is the unique moment that this can happen. American Jews had been traditionally Democrat voters. And when Democrats were just the socialist-curious wing of Uniparty, that worked pretty well for them. Once the woke left declared their alliance with Islam and went full-in on their program of destroying the Western civilization, that stopped working. American Jews, of course, as any multi-million population, are not homogenous. But most of them would be fine with a little socialism here and there, and maybe a little social progressivism, and with what Democratic party offered in 1980s-1990s. But a lot of them are not OK with the cult of Hamas and the antisemitic frenzy embraced by the woke left. Harris lost almost a million of Jewish votes compared to previous elections. There's certainly some potential for more gains here.
So what some of the geniuses on the right do now? Of course they hastily organize their own antisemitic wing so that the left antisemites do not have a corner on that market. They blame Israel for everything that goes wrong in the foreign policy, and blame Jews for everything that goes wrong in the domestic policy. They unearth every blood libel that can be discovered, and invent some new ones just for fun. They say radical Islam is not so bad, because see, they hate Jews and gays, just like we do. They declare every Jew in US politics their enemy, no matter how many common goals there could be between them. Is this a smart way to build a coalition? Is this the way to convince the Jews who never thought about voting anything but Democrat, but now thinking maybe it's worth considering, to switch? Is this how you build the team?
I think it'd be very smart and very beneficial for America to build a team like that. But there are a lot of people right now on the right that work very hard to make it impossible. I hope they fail, but I can not be sure of that, unfortunately.
If you want MAGA support then I want to see Jewish money going 80% to MAGA and the Jewish vote being 80% MAGA. I feel like these are reasonable terms.
That could happen. I'd like to see that happen. But for this to happen, Qatarlson, Owens and their ilk can not be part of the deal. Right now, the towering stature of Trump makes them tiny and irrelevant. But Trump will be gone from power, at least officially, in 2028, and it is not at all clear he would be able to exert any power on the movement, and have enough clout to say who's in and who's out. And Vance, who is the presumed heir, still sitting on the fence there. And if the groypers remain in, and have the influence on the movement, the Jews will not be voting for MAGA, not 80% and not even the majority. Some committed conservatives could pinch their nose and still go with it, but it won't even get to Trump numbers, let alone exceed them. Why would one vote for a movement that literally considers you a demonic entity that must be eliminated?
JarJarJedi
18d ago
The straightforward interpretation of the above quote is that Israel started a war that killed American troops.
That's nonsense. That war started in 1970s. The official slogan of Iran is "Death to America" and you still don't believe there's a war? The fact that you are not getting action in a specific moment of time does not mean the war disappeared. As Israel itself learned very well on October 7, and US learned before it on September 11, and on many other occasions where Iran or Iran's proxies murdered Americans. You can choose when the war turns hot, or you can let the enemy choose it for you.
Yes, Israel has its own war with Iran, and it is not going to surrender because some miserable assholes in America hate the Jews. It is an independent state, with its own independent goals. It is a very close ally of the US, but still US has its own priorities and Israel has its own. US can afford waiting for Iran to build up (though it's not smart, but US is so powerful even built-up Iran is no existential threat for the US), Israel can not. So the US can use the opportunity Israel's actions provide, or can waste it. Trump smartly decided not to waste it. Describing taking this excellent opportunity to wage war (and, with luck, end this war with a resounding victory) efficiently and coordinating with US's strongest and most motivated ally as "mitigating damage from Israel" is either stupid, or strongly motivated by finding Israel's fault in any situation, no matter what happens. It is natural that Tucker Qatarlson is doing it, that's what he's being paid for, but for any person whose brain is not replaced by Qatar's money it is just stupid.
And describing American casualties as Israel's fault is completely insane. There are casualties in every war, and in US's war in Iran there had been many and will be more, until Iran's insane government, whose official slogan is "Death to America", is destroyed. Saying it's Israel's fault because Israel is US ally is just bizarre.
JarJarJedi
20d ago
I can't help but think none of what we're seeing now would have happened if not for October 7 attacks. If that didn't happen, Hamas would still be in full force and capacity in Gaza, and so would be Hezbollah. If that were the case, Israel might not dare to attack Iran and destroy their nuclear facilities, fearing retribution from Hamas and Hezbollah - which now are sunk costs, as Israel already was forced to wage the war, endure the consequences and emerge victorious. It would also not stimulate the huge wave of antisemitism in the West, exposing the antisemitic nature of the woke left. That cost Democrats up to a million Jewish votes. Who knows, maybe other votes too - enough that without that happening, Harris might have even won. And then of course the possibility of any US action against Iran would be out of the question. But even if Harris did not win, for Trump would be much harder to justify attacking Iran without clear evidence of any "hot" action from their side - if Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, etc. were quiet, how could the "peacemaker" Trump initiate the war? Without Israel & US strikes, the protestors probably would not feel as emboldened as they did recently, and would not initiate the wave of protests that triggered the current situation. Thus, Iranians would be quietly and secretly building the bomb, and Trump would conduct endless "talks" - like he is doing now with Russia - without and result. Instead, a lot of their government are now dead, and those who alive may soon face the wrath of the revolutionary mobs.
It doesn't matter, it will be feedback-trained and aligned afterwards by the model builders, almost all of them being woke (with maybe exception of Grok).
As a general note, it kind of makes me sad to see how strange the thinking patterns had become, I think maybe because to incessant electoral campaigning. Everybody should have an ultimate plan to solve everything, forever, perfectly, or it's even not worth talking about. And if the solution takes more than a week, we don't have enough attention span to comprehend what is going on.
The saddest part is everybody knows literally 100% of people who propose these nice rounded-up solutions are liars - we know it is not going to work this way, they know it is not going to work this way, and it never ever worked this way. It will always be more complicated, more chaotic, things will change and go to off directions, unexpected things will arise and all plans will have to be changed or abandoned altogether. But somehow still everybody demands A Man With A Plan - even fully knowing (though frequently not realizing) that any such plan must be bullshit, no one can have a perfect plan for decades forward for 90 millions of people, especially those same people submerged in an ocean of 9 billion other people. If we can do something that will make the picture a little more predictable and less dangerous for a little forward, if we cut off some of the ugliest branches on the possibility tree (such as "Iran gets nukes and uses them to initiate the coming of the Twelfth Imam") that's already a huge achievement. But imagining you can control the whole tree and shape it to your will - isn't it a bit too much to expect? And yet, though we know it's impossible, we routinely demand our leaders to pretend they can do it easily and routinely.
I guess that's what attracts people to socialism - they promise there would be a Plan. Maybe some people will starve, and some will have to be killed, but look - we have a Plan! Nobody has a better Plan than we do! No matter this plan is never achieved - having it is enough, somehow.
More options
Context Copy link