Egregoros

Signal feed

Timeline

Post

Remote status

Context

9
I mean they did the exact same in Iraq. They convinced American leadership to start a war, and then left the Republican incumbent holding the bag. Saddam being gone or Iran not being toppled is actually inconsequential to their goal of destabilizing the region.

That's not to say that they wouldn't have preferred to win, just that they probably knew it couldn't be won proper and just didn't care. Even if they possibly underestimated the consequences for themselves (where is that Iranian rocket barrage to overwhelm and destroy their air defense btw? Any day now)
The Iraq war was different in that at least we were able to topple the regime, we also experienced a few months of calm following Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech and although it did cost us dearly in terms of blood and treasure, the conflict was never an existential threat to America and ZOG.

With Iran we can't even make any headway inside the country, the regime seems largely intact and ultimately we'll be left with two options if we keep moving forward with this:

A) Glass the entire country with nukes

B) Restart the draft and prepared for a large scale ground invasion

Both of those options could ultimately lead to the end of ZOGAmerica.
I doubt the US could go nuclear, 'cause it'd kick the door wide open for everyone else. Best Korea nukes Seoul, Russia nukes Kiev, China nukes... Taiwan? Pakistan nukes Dehli.

That's why it's an effective deterrent. israel is just trying to assert it's dominance (with it's illegal nukes) while it still can.
I believe the jews would do it, but I don't think nukes live up to all the hype. Which would explain why they haven't glassed 100 million Iranians yet.

And the jews need a scapegoat 'cause they're surrounded by people who can't stand them, imagine how much worse it'd be if they erased Iran.

So they're left with threatening the goyim (Sampson Option). Go fight our enemies for us or we will kill you. The ultimate press gang.

Replies

1