US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the hope is if we bomb them
Enough the Iranians will do regime change for us, I could see it happening, I could also see it turning into a brutal civil war. Honestly both work in the case, I just don’t think bombing alone will do it
Remember, Netanyahu has a 30% approval rating. Does that mean that 70% of Israelis want him deposed and replaced with a pro-Islam Prime Minister?

Of course not, which is why even if it’s true that the Iranians don’t approve of the mullahs (which I doubt because their power base is not the college-educated elite making up online/diaspora Iranians that a Westerner is likely to encounter), that doesn’t mean that they want an Israeli-puppet in charge. They’d most likely want another Islamic leader.
 
Of the many repugnant characteristics by which neoliberals earn the loathing of normal people, perhaps the most annoying is the supercilious condescension they vomit upon anyone who isn’t vile enough to embrace their ideology. Congresskike Sara Jacobs (D-CA) applied it to the esteemed shitlord Pete Hegseth at a recent House Armed Services Committee meeting for wanting to place military readiness ahead of the transsexual agenda:
https://xcancel.com/DefiantLs/status/1935720878333100173
View attachment 7536738View attachment 7536740

Let’s educate Ms. Jacobs, shall we? If a crazy person proclaims himself to be Napoleon, that does not mean he is Napoleon. Likewise, if a crazy person declares himself to be a woman, that does not make him a woman. A man can no more be a woman than a parakeet can be a chihuahua. To believe otherwise is psychotic — as is the belief that imposing Corporal Klinger types on the military for purposes of social engineering will benefit the USA's national security.
She's a literal trust fund kid. Her grandfather was Qualcomm founder Irwin M. Jacobs. And she's a jew. If the nose didn't give it away.
 
What’s the demographic of these pockets why are they unlikely to unite? Are they just too different?
Iran's been hit by waves of protests going back 15-20 years now, and they've been increasing in numbers & intensity over time (as many as 1,500 people were killed each time in the biggest of these, the 2020-21 and 2022-23 protests). There's genuine, non-astroturfed discontent with the Mullahs (if it were a color revolution, it would've been snuffed out long ago, like in 2009) - best way I've heard it put was by a politics prof a decade ago who explained it as 'Saudi Arabia is a nation of Islamist fanatics ruled by a secular-minded elite, Iran is a secular-minded nation ruled by Islamist fanatics, and much of the internal troubles in both countries can be traced back to this dichotomy'. (The House of Saud is infamous for both their historical friendliness to Western interests and being filthy degenerates behind closed doors, to explain the first half - part of OBL's sneeding in the leadup to 9/11 was that the Saudis hosted American bases & would rather take American help vs. Saddam in the Gulf War rather than call for faithful jihadis - but I digress.) The ruling theocracy famously were not the dominant faction in the Iranian Revolution which overthrew the Shah originally and did not actually have majority support at the time, Khomeini had to outmaneuver the commies and the liberals to seize control in the end (there's the future of all the 'Queers 4 Palestine' types who think they can be friends with Islamists, if they were to ever come anywhere near real power).

The Mullahs aren't terribly fond of the Iranian identity and history, which had its glory days in the pre-Islamic period; the Achaemenids and Sassanids blow all of the Islamic Persian empires, from the Safavids to the Pahlavis, out of the water in terms of size, relative power & relevance for their time period, but as far as Khomenei, Khamenei and those who follow them are concerned, the day the Arabs destroyed the Sassanid Empire and subjugated Iran to Islam (it took until the Safavids - a dynasty of originally Azeri-Kurdish origin - 900 years later for Persia proper to regain its status as the core of an imperial civilization, and 1100 years for an actually ethnically Iranic dynasty to rule Iran again with the Zands) was the real greatest day in Persian history, as can be expected of hardcore Islamists. Suffice to say a lot of Iranians disagree, and they also don't much care for the strict religious laws of the Mullahs in general, hence why if you look at videos of daily life in modern Tehran you can find people still flouting rules like the mandatory hijab (and that's just in daily life, outside of a protest/riot).

However! These protests & riots, while increasingly huge, are also hugely disorganized. There's basically no known domestic anti-regime leaders or organized movements of note, hence why they keep getting crushed over and over despite getting tens or even hundreds of thousands of angry people into the streets each time. (This is also why I doubt these are 'color revolutions', those tend to be better planned & organized by CIA/'democratic' NGO/whatever stage managers.) Pretty much the only Iranian opposition leader whose name is even slightly well known is Reza Pahlavi, the exiled Crown Prince and heir of the last Shah. However he hasn't been back to Iran since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, for obvious reasons. There are still monarchists in Iran (they managed to get like 20,000 people in the streets during the Cyrus the Great protest back in 2016) but it's very difficult to gauge how much support they actually have (it's not like the Mullahs would allow pollsters to ask such questions), and it's not terribly likely that they constitute a majority of the opposition in Iran. Out of Iran it's a different story, Pahlavi is massively popular with the Iranian diaspora (anecdotally I went to high school with an Iranian girl who was a fervent Pahlavi partisan like the rest of her family, and an Iranian driving instructor I once had was also a fan) but, you know, those are exiles living outside of Iran or their descendants, so not super relevant to the prospect of a rising inside Iran.

Also, Iran's demographics aren't as much of a clusterfuck as some other Mideastern countries, but there are still some pretty serious ethnic & religious divides there. This is a map of the major ethnic groups inside the country:

Ethnic_Map_of_Iran.webp

The problem groups atm are the Kurds, the Balochs and the Azeris. There are armed Kurdish & Baloch secessionist groups which have been actively fighting against the Iranian government for a long time already, the Kurds claim to want autonomy instead of independence, the Balochs want their own country period and are also fighting Pakistan for the same reason. As for the Azeris, Azerbaijan has a historical claim to NW Iran and as the Nagorno-Karabakh Wars & ethnic cleansing of Armenians there after the final Azeri victory in 2020 show, they take that shit extremely seriously. Iran is also friendly to Armenia while Azerbaijan is friendly to Israel, so there's plenty of room for mutual seething there. Balochs to my understanding are pretty hardcore Sunni Muslims as well, not too different from the durkadurkas in Pakistan and elsewhere, while Kurds and Azeris tend to be secular/irreligious nationalists. (Azeris especially, the Soviets beat the durkadurka-ness out of them so they substituted Islamist zeal with ultranationalist zeal instead, they will literally murder their historical enemies - in their case, Armenians - while on a NATO training mission where they should theoretically have been on their best behavior, only to be celebrated as a national hero, and their gov't will then blatantly lie & break every rule they can to bring them home to a hero's welcome.) The Soviets have previously sponsored rebellions against central Iranian gov'ts in that region in the northwestern region multiple times in the past, it's been restive for a long time.

Tl;dr Iran is both more and less stable than it seems. You probably are not going to see a massive revolution toppling the Mullahs overnight, rolling out the red carpet for the Pahlavis, forming a constitutional convention, etc. any time soon until and unless the IAF/USAF severely degrade the Mullahs' security apparatus (not just the IRGC but also the police and paramilitary Basij), which they haven't even really gotten around to starting yet (the Israelis have been mostly focused on blowing up nuclear sites & scientists and the IRGC only, though I heard they bombed the police HQ more recently). However if shit gets real and TPTB go all in on regime change, the lack of organization among the Iranian opposition on the ground, mixed with the existing ethnic insurgencies and potential Azeri irredentism, can cause things to spiral well out of anyone's control very quickly.
 
If regime change is the goal, then why aren't we sending troops?

Yet.

It took Poppy Bush five days from the start of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (August 2, 1990) to order 200,000 US troops into Saudi Arabia (August 7, 1990), and Trump hasn't ordered any ground troops deployed after over a week, but I think it's incredibly naive to expect such a situation to not escalate to a ground invasion, and from there a full occupation. Bush Jr. didn't start justifying the 2nd invasion if Iraq until September 2002, but the invasion still took place by March 2003. You cannot throw around terms like "Regime Change" and expect anything other than a full, long term occupation of the country. If things keep on course, it may take months instead of weeks, but you will see a gradual buildup of US forces in Iraq once again, though re-creating Desert Storm today would require calling up nearly every National Guard unit around, making the situation even worse.

Tl;dr Iran is both more and less stable than it seems. You probably are not going to see a massive revolution toppling the Mullahs overnight, rolling out the red carpet for the Pahlavis, forming a constitutional convention, etc. any time soon until and unless the IAF/USAF severely degrade the Mullahs' security apparatus (not just the IRGC but also the police and paramilitary Basij), which they haven't even really gotten around to starting yet (the Israelis have been mostly focused on blowing up nuclear sites & scientists and the IRGC only, though I heard they bombed the police HQ more recently). However if shit gets real and TPTB go all in on regime change, the lack of organization among the Iranian opposition on the ground, mixed with the existing ethnic insurgencies and potential Azeri irredentism, can cause things to spiral well out of anyone's control very quickly.

With the exception of multiple nuclear warheads AND the threat of a Soviet Invasion for Imperial Japan, no regime has ever collapsed from a bombing campaign alone. The current war with Israel has all but silenced all opposition in Iran, we've already seen similar things in both Ukraine and Russia when their war started.
 
Last edited:
Excellent post what do you think such a civil war look like in a situation where the Iranian government falls but there isn’t a unified new government


@Chuckwagon
In a word, Syria. You even already have lots of durkadurka types who would love to go further back in time than the Ayatollahs (perhaps not as many as the more urbane liberal sorts, but I don't doubt they're better organized and much more willing to shed blood in case of a civil war) that could become a Shiite version of ISIS in a vacuum, left-wing Kurdish militias that may or may not seek independence, and an unpopular dynasty disdained by the Islamist religious conservatives (the Pahlavis, albeit unlike the Assads, they'd be trying to retake power instead of already having it & trying to hold on to it). Except Azerbaijan would like to take a lot more land than the Israelis have settled for now. Neocon/neolib cheerleaders for war claim that Iranians are too secular-minded, intrinsically liberal, well-educated, etc. to ever possibly go down the same road as Syria did but I think that's way too :optimistic: , the Syrians reputedly had one of the best educated populations in the Mideast in 2010 with IIRC a 90% literacy rate and 98.9% enrollment in primary schools, and look what happened there.

Also I forgot to mention it earlier but even the Taliban could get involved, they're historically enemies of the Mullahs (fanatics of different sects don't get along, tale as old as time) - you might remember the infamous Iranian storming of the US embassy after the 1979 Revolution & taking of hostages, yeah? Well the Taliban didn't just give the Iranians a taste of that very same medicine, they went further & murdered the Iranian diplomats they took captive. And in more recent years, since they retook power the 'Ban have also already engaged in skirmishes with Iran from time to time. So there's more than just Baloch separatists to worry about on the eastern front of a hypothetical Iranian civil war.
 
The US hasn’t even officially attacked Iran yet, or not open enough to a degree that Iran feels confident in responding yet to. A bombing campaign conducted by the US and witnessed by the whole world will absolutely see a response from Iran against US targets and interests in the region, which will only escalate the conflict. That is what those of us opposed to US involvement are saying. You don’t talk about “regime change” and “unconditional surrender” if the only actions you are considering or willing to escalate to are a few aerial bombardments which may or may not even achieve their supposed objective.
I see it as more of a "we are ready if you fuck around and wanna find out," but toe-may-toe tuh-mah-tuh. It's also highly possible that the US military is showing its teeth after 4 years of tapioca-mouthed nonsense from Biden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: poggies123_
if this is real it sounds like we're letting Israel handle it. I doubt Vance is going to say this publicly and risk creating a rift between him and trump without it being Trumps position also. The US will probably help Israel logistically when they send in a team to take out the mountain bunker though
 
Back