Pretty sure all this tough talk comes from the fact that there are 2 US
carrier strike groups in the Mediterranean, and the US is rushing plane
loads of munitions non stop to the JOOS doorstep - All they have to do
in load and shoot, then demand more.
They could not even take on hamas without massive US handouts, not to
mention iran.

I am still in favor of limited support at this time, not in favor of
massive total subsidy of everything, and sure not in favor of being
dragged into wars that really don't concern us.
The Bolsheviks are obviously all on board for a big bang, if only to
take attention away from their criminal puppet. What ever happened to
people keeping their mouths shut about how much aid is given and
contingency plans ?
Seems like these guys just want to ramp things up as much as they can,
and when it comes time to put up or shut up, the USA, as usual, will be
the ones doing the heavy lifting.

```````````````

Israel vows to cut off 'the head of the snake' and launch a military
attack against Iran if Hezbollah joins the war with Hamas

Nir Barkat, Israel's Minister of Economy, gave exclusive Mail on
Sunday interview

Mr Barkat warned that not only would Israel 'eliminate Hezbollah', if it
believes the terror group is opening up a 'northern front', but 'we will
actually target Iran.'

'The plan of Iran is to attack Israel on all fronts. If we find they
intend to target Israel, we will not just retaliate to those fronts, but
we will go to the head of the snake, which is Iran.
If our enemies attack, we will wipe them out

'The Ayatollahs in Iran are not going to sleep good at night, we are
going to make sure they pay a heavy price if, God forbid, they open the
northern front.

'Lebanon and Hezbollah are going to pay a heavy price, similar to what
Hamas is going to pay. But that's not enough.

'The very clear message is that we are going to be going after the heads
of Iran as well. When will we do that? When we decide.

'Israel has a very clear message to our enemies. We are saying to them,
look what's happening in Gaza – you are going to get the same treatment
if you attack us. We are going to wipe you off the face of the Earth.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12657495/Israel-attack-against-Iran-Hezbollah-joins-war-Hamas.html
--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

For many years, Iran is financing and coordinating the Hamas
and Hezbollah, as well as numerous other terror activities.

Thousands die, while they happily cheer from afar.

It's high time that these sick, ugly cockroaches pay a price.
If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes --
starting with Iran's nuclear facilities and largest military
installations.

And we can all thank that stupid cocksucker Jimmy Carter.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 11:37:54 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> For many years, Iran is financing and coordinating the Hamas
> and Hezbollah, as well as numerous other terror activities.

Other propaganda is available.

> If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
> rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes

The good stuff isn't written by rabid nujobs who are fucked in the head.

> And we can all thank that stupid cocksucker Jimmy Carter.

And half-decent propagandists don't resort to childish name-calling.

Loose Cannon wrote:
> For many years, Iran is financing and coordinating the Hamas
> and Hezbollah, as well as numerous other terror activities.
>
> Thousands die, while they happily cheer from afar.
>
> It's high time that these sick, ugly cockroaches pay a price.
> If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
> rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes --
> starting with Iran's nuclear facilities and largest military
> installations.
>
> And we can all thank that stupid cocksucker Jimmy Carter.
>
I think you missed the point - I don't like seeing my tax $$ financing
the Jew states military, and I don't like seeing us automatically
dragged into wars for Israels sake.
I don't like seeing our carrier task forces and statements from US
officials that "we have Israels backs at all costs" emboldening them to
make bellicose, taunting, threatening pronouncements designed to widen
the conflict - But you are just fine with that because of your knee jerk
support of JOOS, which I believe you denied just days ago.

BTW, no need for nukes when we are rushing over plane loads of our best
ammo and backing them up with carriers and even troops [and have been
giving them billions every single year for decades to make sure they
have the best, cutting edge military in the region], though no doubt
that is part of their blackmail strategy behind the scenes.

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

In article <c5aZM.18958$INOa.2910@fx05.iad>, JeSSe <zo@so.org> wrote:

> Loose Cannon wrote:

>> For many years, Iran is financing and coordinating the Hamas
>> and Hezbollah, as well as numerous other terror activities.
>>
>> Thousands die, while they happily cheer from afar.
>>
>> It's high time that these sick, ugly cockroaches pay a price.
>> If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
>> rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes --
>> starting with Iran's nuclear facilities and largest military
>> installations.
>>
>> And we can all thank that stupid cocksucker Jimmy Carter.
> I think you missed the point - I don't like seeing my tax $$ financing
> the Jew states military, and I don't like seeing us automatically
> dragged into wars for Israels sake.

That's why I suggested nukes; they are cheaper.

> I don't like seeing our carrier task forces and statements from US
> officials that "we have Israels backs at all costs" emboldening them to
> make bellicose, taunting, threatening pronouncements designed to widen
> the conflict - But you are just fine with that because of your knee jerk
> support of JOOS, which I believe you denied just days ago.

As noted, I only support the JOOS since they are in the front
line against the enemies of mankind. If they fall, the entire
cockroach kingdom will mark us and Europe as the next target.

I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
long-range solution. They can also start by hitting a target
with relatively few civilians, which is why I suggested
nuclear facilities or military bases.

You fire tens of thousands of large rockets at my cities, I
nuke your ass. Why not?

We nuked the Japanese who were not threatening our cities, the
Brits burned 100,000s of German civilians even when Germany was
no longer a serious threat to British civilians.

At some stage, SOMEONE will have to make it clear to the cockroaches
that their dreams of world conquest will end in a mushroom cloud. It
may as well be the Israelis.

> BTW, no need for nukes when we are rushing over plane loads of our best
> ammo and backing them up with carriers and even troops [and have been
> giving them billions every single year for decades to make sure they
> have the best, cutting edge military in the region], though no doubt
> that is part of their blackmail strategy behind the scenes.

I bet you're right, I bet the threat of a nuclear response has at least
been hinted at - or will be if support wavers.

I can't help but think Israel is doomed if things keep going as they are.
The countries that are enemies of Israel only need the right backer at the
right time. America is now supplying two large wars and trying to keep
both of them from expanding. I'm not sure where the money is coming
from. It doesn't seem to be there to do anything else.

Even if it takes 100 years for the right moment to come along it will come
along eventually if all that's holding them up is US support. Israel is
probably going to want to attack its competition first and right now they
can make a case for it. They're bound to be pushing in that direction.

In article <KibZM.64006$a3p4.30559@fx10.ams1>,
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> BTW, no need for nukes when we are rushing over plane loads of our best
>> ammo and backing them up with carriers and even troops [and have been
>> giving them billions every single year for decades to make sure they
>> have the best, cutting edge military in the region], though no doubt
>> that is part of their blackmail strategy behind the scenes.

> I can't help but think Israel is doomed if things keep going as they are.

It may be doomed, since a huge and powerful nation (Iran) wants to
annihilate it, and will continue to want to annihilate it as long
as it exists. Israel can retreat to the 1967 borders, or the 1948
borders, whatever - it will make no difference; Iran will still
do its best to annihilate it.

The only glimmer of hope is that it used to be worse - it was the
entire Muslim world. Now it's basically just Iran and Gaza/Lebanon (which
Iran is all but happy to sacrifice); even the Saudis began seeking
normalization with Israel. and Iran has become a pariah nation, hated and
feared even by most Muslim nations. The downside is that this may make them
even more crazy than they are now.

Loose Cannon wrote:
> In article <c5aZM.18958$INOa.2910@fx05.iad>, JeSSe <zo@so.org> wrote:
>
>> Loose Cannon wrote:
>
>>> For many years, Iran is financing and coordinating the Hamas
>>> and Hezbollah, as well as numerous other terror activities.
>>>
>>> Thousands die, while they happily cheer from afar.
>>>
>>> It's high time that these sick, ugly cockroaches pay a price.
>>> If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
>>> rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes --
>>> starting with Iran's nuclear facilities and largest military
>>> installations.
>>>
>>> And we can all thank that stupid cocksucker Jimmy Carter.
>
>> I think you missed the point - I don't like seeing my tax $$ financing
>> the Jew states military, and I don't like seeing us automatically
>> dragged into wars for Israels sake.
>
> That's why I suggested nukes; they are cheaper.
>
>> I don't like seeing our carrier task forces and statements from US
>> officials that "we have Israels backs at all costs" emboldening them to
>> make bellicose, taunting, threatening pronouncements designed to widen
>> the conflict - But you are just fine with that because of your knee jerk
>> support of JOOS, which I believe you denied just days ago.
>
> As noted, I only support the JOOS since they are in the front
> line against the enemies of mankind. If they fall, the entire
> cockroach kingdom will mark us and Europe as the next target.
>
> I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
> the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
> this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
> long-range solution. They can also start by hitting a target
> with relatively few civilians, which is why I suggested
> nuclear facilities or military bases.
>
> You fire tens of thousands of large rockets at my cities, I
> nuke your ass. Why not?
>
> We nuked the Japanese who were not threatening our cities, the
> Brits burned 100,000s of German civilians even when Germany was
> no longer a serious threat to British civilians.
>
> At some stage, SOMEONE will have to make it clear to the cockroaches
> that their dreams of world conquest will end in a mushroom cloud. It
> may as well be the Israelis.
>
>
You are nor sounding very rational, tough to tell if you are trolling or
just so worked up that you really want to see anyone opposed to JOOS go
down in sprays of bullets in the streets and mushroom clouds.

JOOS have a valid case to seek retribution and destroy hamas as much as
possible, it ends there as far as I'm concerned and I do not want to be
dragged into their endless, ancient conflict while subsidizing their
existence into eternity.

Would you agree that a state that depends on other states to exist is
not really a state ? Why do you think they are trying to drag the USA
into THEIR conflict ? Why are we so apt to be dragged ?
No, muslims victorious over Israel and pushing all JOOS into the sea is
not in our best interests and to that degree I support limited aid but
don't be ridiculous, we are no where even marginally close to that
point, are they really so fragile that a ragtag terrorist group is going
to threaten their very existence ?

Hell no, what hamas did to them was disgusting and retribution is
expected and needed but they are blowing things way out of proportion,
or at least starting to, as they have historically been prone to do -
And shills like you are marching right along, all in for a final
solution to their little muslim problem

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

In article <b1dZM.8281$8hV9.5372@fx44.iad>, JeSSe <zo@so.org> wrote:

> Loose Cannon wrote:

[...]

> You are nor sounding very rational,

Well we all have our moments, you certainly had some, but never mind
that right now. Anyway I'll explain what I meant.

> tough to tell if you are trolling or
> just so worked up that you really want to see anyone opposed to JOOS go
> down in sprays of bullets in the streets and mushroom clouds.

What you wrote is correct, but the point I'm trying to make here is
that it's much bigger than Israel vs. Hamas, which is what you're
concentrating on: it's the West vs. Islamofascism, led by Iran.
Hamas is just a tool they use, so is the Hezbollah. As I noted, the
Jews are merely the ones in the front line.

Am I over-estimating the danger Iran poses? Maybe, we can all
make mistakes. But the world laughed at Hitler, and we know
what that led to.

I believe that they mean what they say. When they state they want
to rule the world, and dispose of all Jews and Christians, I
believe that this is exactly what they mean.

And again, if they win against Israel, it will give them enormous
confidence. More so since they see the West as weak, naive, and
decadent (and what can I say, for good reason).

Now, we can shrug it away and laugh; "they will never succeed". And
that is probably correct - but, what damage can they do while TRYING?

Lastly, I'm not for nuking all of Iran, but warning them first,
and if that does not work, hit a target with only a small number
of casualties, hopefully non of them civilians. It just doesn't
seem that anything else will work with these rabid dogs, but
putting the nuclear option on the table.

The best thing that can happen now is that the Iranian people - who
despise their leadership - will begin a full-scale rebellion; but that
is unlikely.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 14:50:07 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
> the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
> this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
> long-range solution.

The new name for "final solution".

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 18:49:00 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> I believe that they mean what they say. When they state they want
> to rule the world, and dispose of all Jews and Christians, I
> believe that this is exactly what they mean.

But you believe those who said "the teaching of math in America is racist" said "math is racist" when they patently did not.

You also believe the "Barron Trump may become the first home-schooled shooter" joke marks one down as evil and worse, when that's laughable nonsense.

You also believe innocent people are "sub-human garbage".

You also believe that anyone who disagrees with you is a "nazoid piglet".

I believe you are fucked in the head because you believe absolute shit, deliberately misinterpret what people say, misrepresent what was said, misquote what was said.

You are now justifying nuking innocent people for things said which you have also misinterpreted.

You are fucked in the head, mate.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 16:05:01 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> It may be doomed, since a huge and powerful nation (Iran) wants to
> annihilate it, and will continue to want to annihilate it as long
> as it exists. Israel can retreat to the 1967 borders, or the 1948
> borders, whatever - it will make no difference; Iran will still
> do its best to annihilate it.

Other propaganda is available.

In article <20231022195451.00007623@ntlworld.invalid>,
The Happy Hippy <the.happy.hippy.nntp@ntlworld.invalid> wrote:

> Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

>> I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
>> the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
>> this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
>> long-range solution.

> The new name for "final solution".

No, piggy; that's what you did in Dresden and Hamburg.

And you deleted the part in which I wrote that this should
be used only as a last option, and against hard-core military
targets, with zero or no civilians casualties.

But speaking of the final solution - frankly, I don't think
that even the Nazis wanted to exterminate the pets; but you...

"Are you suggesting that I ought to be out there slaughtering Jews ? I can
slaughter Jews if you want, and I can do it far nearer to home. I can
deliver you a veritable bloodbath of dead Jews if you want; men, women and
children,. Even their pets too, if that's what you want. How about we start
with your wife ?

Or maybe you are hoping that Israel will be your proxy killing machine ?

Well fuck you George. I know you are sick in mind and body and maybe that's
because the God you don't believe in has chosen to lay you low like the
worthless piece of shit you are. You want to see blood flowing ? That can be
arranged. Maybe I should come round and wipe the whole sickening stain of
the Yates family away, and show you and your Zionist war-mongering buddies
exactly what this death and destruction you are cheer-leading for really
means ? What do you think Ron ?"

Oh dearie me! Such a "very principled and respectable person"! What
will the neighbours say? "Hmm, he did look like a rather odd fellow,
but who would have imagined..."

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 19:17:30 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> In article <20231022195451.00007623@ntlworld.invalid>,
> The Happy Hippy <the.happy.hippy.nntp@ntlworld.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:
>
> >> I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
> >> the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
> >> this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
> >> long-range solution.
>
> > The new name for "final solution".
>
> No, piggy; that's what you did in Dresden and Hamburg.

Not me; I have never done anything in either.

And it wasn't. It was wholesale slaughter, something I would class as both war crime and evil, but it was never even intended as a "final solution" or genocide.

That's just more of your propagandising shit.

But, even if it was, it doesn't justify what you are proposing. You are simply dredging for excuses to be evil, to justify evil.

You really are a sick fuck.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 19:17:30 +0000 (UTC)
Loose Cannon <efbregg73@gmx-xx.comm> wrote:

> And you deleted the part in which I wrote that this should
> be used only as a last option, and against hard-core military
> targets, with zero or no civilians casualties.

No you didn't that's another of your outright lies. In fact three lies. What you said was, and anyone can check it -

<quotes>

It's high time that these sick, ugly cockroaches pay a price.
If (again) Israel's cities will be attacked with thousands of
rockets from Lebanon, Israel should retaliate with nukes --
starting with Iran's nuclear facilities and largest military
installations.
I agree that we're giving them too much - let them just nuke
the crazy cockroaches, or at the least, openly declare that
this is what they're going to do. Evidently, that's the only
long-range solution. They can also start by hitting a target
with relatively few civilians, which is why I suggested
nuclear facilities or military bases.

You fire tens of thousands of large rockets at my cities, I
nuke your ass. Why not?

</quotes>

No "only as a last option"

No "against hard-core military targets"

No "with zero or no civilians casualties"

You expressly said civilian casualties were acceptable -

"They can also start by hitting a target with relatively few civilians"

That "relatively few" is not zero nor none.

You really are a lying cunt.

TWP wrote:
>
>> BTW, no need for nukes when we are rushing over plane loads of our best
>> ammo and backing them up with carriers and even troops [and have been
>> giving them billions every single year for decades to make sure they
>> have the best, cutting edge military in the region], though no doubt
>> that is part of their blackmail strategy behind the scenes.
>
> I bet you're right, I bet the threat of a nuclear response has at least
> been hinted at - or will be if support wavers.
>
> I can't help but think Israel is doomed if things keep going as they are.
> The countries that are enemies of Israel only need the right backer at the
> right time. America is now supplying two large wars and trying to keep
> both of them from expanding. I'm not sure where the money is coming
> from. It doesn't seem to be there to do anything else.
>
> Even if it takes 100 years for the right moment to come along it will come
> along eventually if all that's holding them up is US support. Israel is
> probably going to want to attack its competition first and right now they
> can make a case for it. They're bound to be pushing in that direction.

Ukraine has been trying to drag us in since day 1, and from their
perspective, thats perfectly understandable.
We were very cautious at first, I recall that when it was proposed to
give them some old Migs from Poland and then Poland gets new F-16's in
exchange, that idea was shot down as being too provocative.
Now we are giving them planes, tanks, just about every munition
available and likely some we don't even know about.

With Israel, there is no prohibition or restraint in giving them
anything and everything, there is no nuclear power to potentially upset.
{ I also understand why they want to drag us in, the wonder to me is
allowing ourselves to be dragged]
Our transports are flying non stop loading the JOOS up, you can track it
real time here https://globe.adsbexchange.com ,, And of course there are
likely quite a few that fly in without broadcasting their positions -
And all of this before Xidens $100B gift package is approved.

"Power of the purse strings" my ass, they are giving them anything they
want, and probably more, without any approval or debate at all, and in
fact, its tough to even make any predictions since we don't know who is
actually calling the shots here, and its not the senile pervert or his
negro secretary of defense who they trot out all the time to say "I have
ordered carriers here, I have ordered 2,000 Marines there", we have no
clue who is actually ordering this, but it could hardly be better for
the JOOS if they themselves were giving the orders.
A rag tag gang of zealots backed by world superpower Iran, and we are
supposed to believe that Israels very existence is on the line here,
they need every bomb and bullet they can get, and we had better be
prepared to bomb the shit out of Iran if they get their proxies in
Lebanon involved - The sounds to me like they want a reckoning with the
mullahs, and want the USA to do the dirty work for them.

As to your point of the jew state being doomed, thats possible in the
future. If the US taxpayer gravy train was ever cut off in any
meaningful way, they could not even partially make up for the shortfall,
and would have to fall back on nuclear weapons as a last resort.

Presently, it would be impossible [for the muslims] to assemble any
meaningful invasion army, as it would be annihilated out in the open.
That would require control of the air, and thats an impossible scenario,
even if every single muslim nation united for 1 big push.

As it stands, their gifted F-35's aren't going to do them much good if
they need to go into Gaza, other than shaking the rubble ,, They
probably should have thought more about counter-insurgency gear and
tactics than high tech air power against foes that are generations behind.

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Loose Cannon wrote:
> In article <b1dZM.8281$8hV9.5372@fx44.iad>, JeSSe <zo@so.org> wrote:
>
>> Loose Cannon wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> You are nor sounding very rational,
>
> Well we all have our moments, you certainly had some, but never mind
> that right now. Anyway I'll explain what I meant.
>
>> tough to tell if you are trolling or
>> just so worked up that you really want to see anyone opposed to JOOS go
>> down in sprays of bullets in the streets and mushroom clouds.
>
> What you wrote is correct, but the point I'm trying to make here is
> that it's much bigger than Israel vs. Hamas, which is what you're
> concentrating on: it's the West vs. Islamofascism, led by Iran.
> Hamas is just a tool they use, so is the Hezbollah. As I noted, the
> Jews are merely the ones in the front line.
>
> Am I over-estimating the danger Iran poses? Maybe, we can all
> make mistakes. But the world laughed at Hitler, and we know
> what that led to.
>
> I believe that they mean what they say. When they state they want
> to rule the world, and dispose of all Jews and Christians, I
> believe that this is exactly what they mean.
>
> And again, if they win against Israel, it will give them enormous
> confidence. More so since they see the West as weak, naive, and
> decadent (and what can I say, for good reason).
>
> Now, we can shrug it away and laugh; "they will never succeed". And
> that is probably correct - but, what damage can they do while TRYING?
>
> Lastly, I'm not for nuking all of Iran, but warning them first,
> and if that does not work, hit a target with only a small number
> of casualties, hopefully non of them civilians. It just doesn't
> seem that anything else will work with these rabid dogs, but
> putting the nuclear option on the table.
>
> The best thing that can happen now is that the Iranian people - who
> despise their leadership - will begin a full-scale rebellion; but that
> is unlikely.
>
I'm not seeing how the Jew state is in mortal danger - The danger they
face is high casualties bum rushing a fanatical, well prepared enemy in
an urban environment that has been pummeled into rubble ,, History has
taught us that rubble is a great place to make a stand - Monte Cassino,
Stalingrad, Warsaw and Manila come to mind.

Iran is capable of almost nothing except bluster and sponsoring homicide
attacks, the threat is greatly exaggerated - And I grant that all
muslims fantasize about a 1 muslim planet, that goes without saying.

Sure didn't help that we have let 10,000,000's of them infect our
nations, I believe it was raghead Arafat that said [words to the effect]
"The muslim womans womb is the greatest weapon we have against the
west", I have no illusions in that regards.

Use of nukes by Israel presently would not help her position, it would
hurt, and thus will not be used except, as intended, as a last resort
when their existence actually is at stake.

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.