19 Comments
User's avatar
Kurt Garascia's avatar

Silly to suggest a 3rd term for Trump is in some way increased by conflict escalation…

…a meaningful part of the strange coalition that won Trump the most votes in presidential history (214,000,000+ across 3 elections) thought they were voting for an anti-war candidate…

…apparently not.

If you tune into the Manosphere (podcasts/Youtube), many of the most prominent (ie. Tucker) are vehemently opposed to the attack.

Expand full comment
Laureen Boll's avatar

This is post-modernism skepticism of anybody's ability to claim to know anything, that knowledge itself is just a political contingency, and everything is an expression of ‘power.’

Expand full comment
Donna Oglesby.'s avatar

The term “accelerationist” just does not work for me. I understand it as “pouring gas on the flames.” Or maybe, “ratcheting-up confrontation.” Substantively, it seems accurate but …

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

How would bombing Irans nuclear program to smithereens accelerate it? What am I missing?

Expand full comment
Adam's avatar
2dEdited

Bombing Iran’s nuclear program might feel like a solution, but it can actually speed things up. Attacks push Iran to rebuild with more secrecy and urgency, often underground. It also kills diplomacy—no inspectors, no limits. Instead of stopping the program, it hardens Iran’s resolve to get a bomb as a deterrent. History shows this kind of move usually backfires. The US effectively shredded the NPT and proves that only having a bomb protects one from these types of strikes.

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

Can you actually cite a historical parallel where this happened?

Expand full comment
Sam Brady's avatar

Iraq '81, arguably Israel '67

Expand full comment
Rexii's avatar

you can’t bomb knowledge to smithreens numbskull, more than likely iran will now do everything within its power to acquire a nuke

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

They were already doing that

Expand full comment
Adam's avatar

No they were not. For over a decade the intelligence community has said Iran keeps stockpiles to use as leverage but had no plans to build a bomb. Intelligence assessments are not fact, but it’s the based on all the intelligence and information the US has at hand.

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

It’s my understanding that they’d managed to enrich Uranium to near weapons grade and were very short of a delivery mechanism

Expand full comment
Hal Davis's avatar

That's been the claim since 1979.

Expand full comment
Rexii's avatar

Nope

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

I don’t know what you’d call their program then.

Expand full comment
Rexii's avatar

Ya know there’s this invention called pens and paper and even computers and servers in which knowledge is stored. 🙄

Also we should take the zios marking their own homework with some skepticism.

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

Not sure where the hostility and sarcasm are coming from, but neither are warranted

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

Oh wait. I just saw your reference to “zios”. Now I know I can ignore you. Thanks for the tell!

Expand full comment
IrishWolfhound13's avatar

And pretty sure Israel bombed the top 15 scientists in Iran too. So you can bomb knowledge.

Expand full comment
Tico's avatar

So the solution is to kill everyone with a Doctorate in nuclear physics in Iran? What a genius plan! Thank you for bestowing this gift upon the world!

But seriously, why can't you psychopaths go play with toys or something when you're bored instead of advocating for mass murder and/or possible nuclear annihilation. It would save everyone else a lot of trouble.

Expand full comment