USA Goes to War Against Iran
Time for a dedicated thread to the war.
How long will it last and what will be the probable outcome?
Well... the AIPCA does seemingly have an unimaginable amount of influence over our government through direct funding of both sides and we have inexplicably tied ourselves to the hip of Israel.There is also a viable somewhat academic conspiracy theory that the Republican party has been fully co-opted by religious zealots who believe that Trump is a vehicle to the raptureSo I du
Hence, Pat Buchanan's (in)famous observation in the early 1990's that Congress was "Israeli-occupied territory."
Well... the AIPCA does seemingly have an unimaginable amount of influence over our government through direct funding of both sides and we have inexplicably tied ourselves to the hip of Israel.There is also a viable somewhat academic conspiracy theory that the Republican party has been fully co-opted by religious zealots who believe that Trump is a vehicle to the raptureSo I du
Wow. It's making a lot more sense.
Since reasoning is out the window on here, I'm going to call in AI.
Prompt:
Would you consider this statement antisemitic - I know what you mean but it's not manufacturing consent. There is no consent. There is no approval. No one wants this. They are just doing it anyway and no one is going to stop them because anyone who could is also controlled by Zionists or is a Zionist. These people have literally taken over our government and are wielding our military, not to mention a mind virus that makes people think opposing the use of our blood to advance their ethnic cleansing project is antisemitic.
Response:
I’m going to answer this carefully and directly.
Yes — that statement contains classic antisemitic tropes.
Let’s separate policy criticism from prejudice, because that distinction matters.
What is legitimate political criticism?
It is completely legitimate to:
Criticize the Israeli government.
Oppose a specific war.
Argue that U.S. foreign policy is influenced by lobbying groups.
Condemn actions you view as ethnic cleansing or human rights violations.
Criticize any administration’s Middle East policy.
None of that is inherently antisemitic.
What crosses the line in the statement you quoted?
The problem is not the criticism of war.
The problem is this claim:
“Anyone who could is also controlled by Zionists or is a Zionist. These people have literally taken over our government and are wielding our military…”
That language mirrors long-standing antisemitic conspiracy narratives, including:
The idea that Jews secretly control governments.
The idea that Jews control military power.
The idea of a hidden ethnic cabal directing world events.
The idea that opposition is suppressed by a coordinated ethnic “mind virus.”
Those themes go back centuries. They are core components of classical antisemitism, regardless of whether the speaker intends it that way.
Even substituting “Zionists” for “Jews” does not automatically remove the problem if it functions as an ethnic collective accusation.
Why this matters
There is a difference between:
“AIPAC and certain lobbying groups have disproportionate influence.”
“The Israeli government is committing human rights violations.”
“The U.S. government is aligning too closely with Israel.”
Versus:
“Zionists control the government.”
“They have taken over.”
“They are wielding our military.”
“Opposition is silenced by their mind virus.”
The latter assigns collective power and malign intent to a broad ethnic/political group. That is conspiratorial and historically tied to antisemitic narratives.
The “mind virus” framing
The claim that criticism is labeled antisemitic as a coordinated manipulation tactic can be discussed in a nuanced way.
But saying:
“They’ve created a mind virus so we can’t oppose them”
again shifts into collective conspiratorial framing.
It implies centralized ethnic control over discourse.
That is where rhetoric stops being policy critique and becomes group demonization.
A skeptical lens
It’s healthy to question:
Foreign policy influence.
Lobbying power.
Media framing.
Military entanglements.
But once the explanation becomes:
“A unified ethnic group has taken over the government”
that is no longer policy analysis. It’s conspiracy ideology.
And conspiracy ideology aimed at an ethnic group has historically led to violence.
So yes
The quoted statement would reasonably be considered antisemitic by most scholars of antisemitism, not because it criticizes Israel, but because it asserts:
Collective ethnic control.
Government takeover narratives.
Coordinated suppression of dissent.
Those are defining features of antisemitic tropes.
But the Zionists are in full control of AI, dummy!
I just said they were racist tropes. I agree with you
Just because tropes exist doesn't mean the topic is off limits.
I've often talked about the republicans having a jewish problem after stoking conspiracy for the last decade because conspiracy is tied to Judaism and the Republicans are deeply in bed with Israel
I also think its fairly objective that Israel wants to be a global powerhouse
I just said they were racist tropes. I agree with youJust because tropes exist doesn't mean the topic is off limits. I've often talked about the republicans having a jewish problem after stoking conspiracy for the last decade because conspiracy is tied to Judaism and the Republicans are deeply in bed with Israel
This is a little hyperbolic I think. Israel is a small county the size of New Jersey, surrounded by enemies; whose ambitions seem to be to force its enemies to either sue for peace or destroy them and be replaced by more amenable people willing to sue for peace.
If the current Israeli govt completely got its wishes, it would relocate (or "genocide" if that is the term you prefer) a few million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, annex a little bit of land that would still make it smaller than New Jersey, and force all its neighbors to sue for peace. And that is the most ambitious scenario.
I think all the narrative about "Greater Israel" and "Israeli dominating the region" is over the top hyperbole that isn't really supported by any reality. Ireland has a higher GDP than Israel. What are we even talking about.
Without any proper justification, this really looks like a war that was launched purely because Israel and some war hawks in the White House have wanted to “get” Iran for a while. There wasn’t even a pretext of proof that Iran was close to a nuclear weapon, and the threat wasn’t anymore imminent than it ever has been.
It’s just way easier for me to believe that the neocons are in control rather than Israel having anything more than the power of persuasion with the administration.
I also don’t doubt that Trump wants to make his mark on history in a way, and that’s why he’s starting all these wars and incursions.
Without any proper justification, this really looks like a war that was launched purely because Israel and some war hawks in the White House have wanted to “get” Iran for a while. There wasn’t even a pretext of proof that Iran was close to a nuclear weapon, and the threat wasn’t anymore imminent than it ever has been.It’s just way easier for me to believe that the neocons are i
Think there is a decent case to be made that this is more for Israel's safety than America's. Everyone focuses on the nuclear thing but another big point in the negotiations was to stop funding proxies. People saying Iran is the largest state funding terrorism globally. Look at the wiki of terrorist attacks linked to Iran. The vast, vast majority of them are targeting Israelis or Jewish centers. That with also Hezbollah and Hamas and it looks like they're hyper focused on Israel. Israel assassinates their scientists at will within Iran so why not?
Israel is an ally of America. What if some country was targeting Canadian diplomats across the world and arming resistance groups on their borders? The US would try diplomacy but if the other side's stance is Canada needs to cease to exist what other options are there? So are you an ally or not? You going to let your friend keep getting beaten up?
Israel has a US president now that seems to be willing to go much farther than his predecessors in ending this cycle, can't blame them for using whatever tactics they have to push him as far as he'll go.
So it can be argued it's Israeli influence or it's just the US stepping up for their ally.
I'm not crazy about it but sick of hearing about nuclear this and icbm to America that.
It's a situation where if the Israelis really do have a video of Trump doing something illicit with an underage girl, and he actually does have to do everything they say, then everything makes perfect sense. If not, there are a lot of questions, the main ones being...Why does Trump, a guy who is famously unprincipled, amoral, and non-ideological, a guy who believes in nothing s
its because isreal is a us puppet. The united states is not an Israel puppet. thats what the local antisemites can't figure out . Isreal serves you not the other way around
Why is he so unconcerned about the terrible polling numbers he's getting for the attack?
Because he doesn't expect to run in another election. The possibility of having to run for reelection was the only constraint on Trump's behavior.
Why is he content to nuke the Republican party, the MAGA movement, and his legacy?
Trump doesn't care about these things, especially the Republican party.
Well... the AIPCA does seemingly have an unimaginable amount of influence over our government through direct funding of both sides and we have inexplicably tied ourselves to the hip of Israel.There is also a viable somewhat academic conspiracy theory that the Republican party has been fully co-opted by religious zealots who believe that Trump is a vehicle to the raptureSo I du
Your outrage at how Israel has treated the Palestinians and your dismay at the U.S. participating in a war with Israel against Iran are both perfectly reasonable. I share your concerns. But those beliefs don't change the fact that Deuces McCracken is pretty openly antisemitic. I don't think you want to encourage people here to talk about how the "Zionists" control everything or make references to "fatsos from Brooklyn."
And I certainly don't think you want to hint that you are sympathetic to his rhetoric. Just my two cents.
Just popping in to thank dear leader for bringing peace to the middle east.
Your outrage at how Israel has treated the Palestinians and your dismay at the U.S. participating in a war with Israel against Iran are both perfectly reasonable. I share your concerns. But those beliefs don't change the fact that Deuces McCracken is pretty openly antisemitic. I don't think you want to encourage people here to talk about how the "Zionists" control everything
the NYT just opened their article by blaming the Zionists for dragging the USA into this war. Rubio just explicitly blamed Israel as well.
the NYT just opened their article by blaming the Zionists for dragging the USA into this war. Rubio just explicitly blamed Israel as well.
Can you post the article in which the NYT blamed "Zionists?"
Rubio seems to be trying out every possible explanation to see which one plays best with the public. The argument that the U.S. had to get involved because Israel was going to start a major war with Iran with or without the participation of the United States seems highly implausible to me. For better or worse, I think the U.S. has to own its involvement.
Fatsos in Brooklyn stealing homes from Palestinians seems a perfectly fine reference.
The Zionists completely own it.
Can you post the article in which the NYT blamed "Zionists?"Rubio seems to be trying out every possible explanation to see which one plays best with the public. The argument that the U.S. had to get involved because Israel was going to start a major war with Iran with or without the participation of the United States seems highly implausible to me. For better or worse, I thin
I already posted a screenshot above
Spoiler
This article isn't nearly as provocative as your statement implies. The article suggests that Netanyahu was urging Trump to support military action against Iran, which I'm 100% certain is true, but it doesn't say anything about "Zionists" and it certainly doesn't absolve the Trump administration of responsibility.
Trump says we have enough munitions to fight forever wars. Oh joy.
but it doesn't say anything about "Zionists"
huh? Israel and Bibi are the Zionists, literally.
The article suggests that Netanyahu was urging Trump to support military action against Iran, which I'm 100% certain is true
right and then Trump attacked. the article literally says he was "spurred by an Israeli leader (aka Bibi aka the Zionists) to end diplomatic negotiations".
"But behind the scenes, his move toward war grew inexorably, fueled by allies like Mr. Netanyahu who pushed the president to strike a decisive blow against Iran’s theocratic government"
I mean, it doesnt get any clearer than this what they are trying to convey.
The White House insisted that its diplomatic talks with Iran were not mere theater. But it became clear over the past month that there was never the space for a deal that could satisfy Mr. Trump, Mr. Netanyahu and Iranian leaders at once — or one that could put off a war more than a few months.
why would a deal need to satisfy Netanyahu? why does he have so much influence over the USA? like, this is exactly what Deuces has been saying for years.
There were few voices lobbying against military action. One exception was Tucker Carlson, the right-wing podcaster and close ally of the president, who has met with him in the Oval Office three times in the past month to argue against an attack.
He outlined the risks to U.S. military personnel, energy prices and Arab partners in the region if the United States went to war with Iran. He told the president that he should not be boxed in by Israel, arguing that its desire to attack Iran was the only reason the United States was even considering a strike. He encouraged Mr. Trump to restrain Mr. Netanyahu.
The president said he understood the risks of an attack, but he conveyed to Mr. Carlson that he had no choice but to join a strike that Israel would launch.
like really NYT?
and it certainly doesn't absolve the Trump administration of responsibility.
I never said it did. nor did I myself try to absolve Trump, you can even my analysis of the situation if you scroll up.
I heard that and thought oh great. Also I also heard military experts say the USA will run out of Interceptor missiles in days.
Iran has tons of these drones that are cheap if they go after middle east infrastructure like desalination plants that is big trouble add in full control of the strait can the USA even win without boots on the ground
Also I also heard military experts say the USA will run out of Interceptor missiles in days.
I read the same thing, and if this is accurate, then the timing was particularly idiotic.
Insufficient interceptors means more Iranian missiles get through, which increases the risk that the conflict will escalate and broaden.
I’m starting to think the FIFA Peace Prize was not a serious award
Trump says it's too late for talks. So how can this end? We just drop nukes on them?
