Dennis retweeted
But what was the alternative? Do we wait until Iran has an overwhelming ballistic missile advantage, which it was already on course to achieve? Do we wait until these missiles can reach New York or Los Angeles? Do we wait until Iran is a day from getting a nuclear bomb? A week? A month? A year? How do we determine specifically what "close to getting a bomb" actually means in reality? And how do we really know how close they are? Intelligence reports are inherently uncertain? Even the Israelis don’t get everything right, although they are better at it than anyone else.
And even leaving aside all this if one possibly can, how comfortable are we with the prospect of these IRGC terrorists being able to close the strait and blackmail the global economy whenever they feel like it? If they have this capability even today, they will have it when they are not subject to a naval blockade or under threat of bombing and in the process of re-establishing their ballistic mission advantages and threats.
In any event, the strait is now closed and subject to a US naval blockade. This is now a sunk cost of the war, but worth it if the end result is to remove the threat of nuclear attack and to bring down this regime. Moreover, oil markets will adjust and recover. Markets always adjust. And it might happen much faster than people who don’t understand the oil and gas industry think.
Which brings me to my last point. The real problem is that no one is confident that Trump started this operation for the right moral and geopolitical reasons, much less that he will resolve it in the right way and for the right reasons. This simply isn’t who he is — far from it. I suspect this is where you and I are in 100% agreement. Thus, the unease and even deep concern about where we are today, at least speaking for myself.
Word.
We are at a moment that will define President Trump’s legacy.
His instincts have been to finish the job he started in Iran, but he is being ill advised to pursue a deal that would not be worth the paper it is written on. Our commander-in-chief needs to allow America's skilled armed forces to finish the destruction of Iran's conventional military capabilities and reopen the strait.
Further pursuit of an agreement with Iran's Islamist regime risks a perception of weakness. We must finish what we started. It is past time for action.
Dennis retweeted
🚨 NEW: Fox’s @BritHume says Iran’s stance in the peace talks shows President Trump was CORRECT on their nuclear ambitions: “Here Iran is, badly battered, militarily crushed. They really don’t have any cards here other than the Strait of Hormuz which we are acting on.”
“Yet they came into this negotiation absolutely refusing to give up their nuclear weapon ambitions which was the bottom line for the President and his negotiators.”
“If that doesn’t emphasize that President Trump was correct in assessing in the beginning of this that Iran was still going for a nuclear weapon and it was something the world could not afford, then I don’t know what could.”
Dennis retweeted
Did you know C.S. Lewis predicted the modern obsession with “being nice” would destroy the soul?
In The Abolition of Man, Lewis argues that when a society stops believing in objective virtue, it doesn’t become tolerant… it becomes manipulable.
He calls the result “men without chests.”
People with appetites and intellects, but no courage, no honor, no trained moral instincts. They can calculate everything and defend nothing.
Lewis saw that once we reject inherited moral law, we don’t become free. We become raw material… easily shaped by propaganda, pleasure, and fear.
Modern man prides himself on compassion while quietly surrendering every standard that once gave compassion meaning.
Lewis’s insight is brutal: a civilization that educates clever cowards will eventually be ruled by tyrants or technicians.
Because when nothing is worth dying for, everything becomes negotiable… including human dignity.
Wow. I thought they might have been playing both ends against the middle …
BREAKING: Iran includes "acceptance of enrichment" in the Farsi version of its ceasefire plan, something missing from English versions. apnews.com/live/iran-war-isr…
Dennis retweeted
BREAKING: Iran includes "acceptance of enrichment" in the Farsi version of its ceasefire plan, something missing from English versions. apnews.com/live/iran-war-isr…
US negotiators reported last week that their Iranian counterparts said, in opening negotiations in Geneva on Feb. 26, that Iran controls 460kg (half a US ton) of 60% enriched uranium, enough for 11 nuclear bombs when enriched to 90%.
That meshes very well with IAEA figures (440kg) in its report of Feb. 27, which was "derestricted" on March 4. Per IAEA that stockpile was accumulated before June's strikes, which we may hope at least stopped the growth of the problem.
In a single metallic mass, that uranium would fit in a 12"x12"x12" box. As uranium hexafluoride, with appropriate container, it would easily fit in a single semi trailer.
It's really hard for your spies to be sure under those conditions. At very best, it's sitting inside a mountain under a bunch of rubble.
If you live in Israel or the US, these people have sworn to kill you.
iaea.org/sites/default/files… cbsnews.com/news/iran-11-nuc…
Dennis retweeted
Seeing a plethora of low IQ “Israel FORCED the US into war” takes. Xi thanks you for helping to unwittingly launder CCP propaganda btw.
The US strikes come down to Iran and China having engineered a mathematically unwinnable war of attrition for any purely defensive strategy. In other words, they can replace missiles faster than the US can replace the interceptors needed to stop them.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated this week that Iran is now producing over 100 ballistic missiles per month, while the US can manufacture only 6–7 relevant ballistic-missile interceptors per month (the high-end systems actually capable of reliably knocking down Iran’s advanced threats).
Even the broader Patriot PAC-3 MSE line is only at ~45 per month today and THAAD/SM-3 production is even tighter at under 10 per month before emergency surges. Surely you can see how this is a giant problem.
And what is China doing? China is deliberately supercharging this imbalance. Beijing has been caught shipping dual-use propellant ingredients, planetary mixers, and components that let Iran rebuild its munitions factories at breakneck speed.
Reuters released a report on Feb 24 revealing that Iran was days from sealing a deal with China for CM-302 supersonic anti-ship missiles capable of evading defenses, sinking US carriers / destroyers from a distance of 290 km, which turns the Strait of Hormuz into a lethal kill zone. If this doesn't strike you as a red line that should galvanize action now rather than later, then you are unable to handle the reality of geopolitical survival.
Why is China doing this? Because a cheap, endless Iranian missile barrage that forces the US to expend $4-million interceptors against $20K Shaheds (or $200K ballistic missiles) is Beijing’s perfect trap - keep America’s navy, aircraft and industrial base tied down in the Middle East burning through stockpiles. Basically, keep America busy and out of the West Pacific.
The imminent arrival of a Chinese-backed “gamechanger” would have rendered America’s naval supremacy obsolete and provide an anti-access shield over the Gulf, Iranian nuclear sites, and every proxy from Hezbollah to the Houthis. This is why the Gulf States are also aligned with US action.
The US needed to restore deterrence against a regime racing toward nukes, and send an unmistakable message that the United States will never cede the Gulf to a Sino-Iranian nightmare.
I highly recommend listening to the latest episode of @triggerpod and @havivrettiggur. These guys provide the best analysis of the situation.
Dennis retweeted
It’s more and more clear that October 7 was for Islamic radicals what Pearl Harbor was for the Japanese—a brilliant tactical success that carried within it the seeds of catastrophic strategic failure
Very interesting take ... the 2001 AUMF + Al Qaeda setting up shop in Iran = Congressionally authorized.
You’re unable to view this Post because this account owner limits who can view their Posts. Learn more
Dennis retweeted
In Feb. 1979, the @nytimes ran “Trusting Khomeini,” an op-ed from a @Princeton “expert” who opined: “Having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on nonviolent tactics, Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance.”
Dennis retweeted
.@POTUS @realDonaldTrump: I make a direct appeal to immediately fire @Sec_Noem.
Americans have died.
She is betraying DHS’s core mission and trashing your border security legacy.
DO NOT make the mistake President Biden made for not firing a grossly incompetent DHS Secretary.
Dennis retweeted
The stupidest thing about this whole NATO debate is what it was actually like when we were there. It was always a team effort.
We gave fire support across the Helmand river to the Danish under attack in patrol base Alpha-Xray (see pic for one of the actual guns we used), and we were as gutted as anyone when we saw the Chinook flying in and knew they had casualties.
We handed over our patrol base to an Estonian unit whose commander was on his second tour of Afghanistan - the first having been with the Soviet Army in the 1980s.
I once hitched a lift from Bastion to Gereshk with the Czech Special Operations Group. My platoon were very grateful for the slivovitz they gave me. A small shot went down a treat in a hot chocolate after a long and stressful night patrol.
Visiting the Dutch in Tarin Kowt was always a pleasure. Their nurses were quite the sight for sore eyes after weeks in the field. Likewise the Canadians over in Kandahar, especially the Van Doos, sister unit of my first regiment.
And of course - American dining facility access was highly prized. You can’t argue with steak and crab legs in a war zone. I did six months with the US Army 7th and 1st Groups across Southern Afghanistan. Once I had earned their trust, we were one team with one task.
Everyone played their part. We all got along. We all did our best. Trump and his idiotic fans are all such ignorant blowhards. Part of the reason this is so unpleasant is that it takes something noble and collaborative, and scorns the bravery of everyone who deployed. And, from my experience, every soldier who deployed, from every country, would have gone into harm’s way for the soldier to their left or right, irrespective of which national flag they wore. Trump debases everything he touches.
Dennis retweeted
I find myself deeply puzzled by a certain Western phenomenon: the climate activists, human rights advocates, and self-proclaimed progressives who somehow end up echoing Hamas talking points.
What drives that contradiction? How do people who fight to “save the planet” from harm find moral comfort supporting a movement that glorifies violence, suppresses women, persecutes minorities, and burns its own children’s future?
Let’s look beyond politics and explore the mental model behind it.
1. The Need for a Simple “Good vs. Evil” Story
These activists often think in binary moral categories: victim vs. oppressor, colonized vs. colonizer.
It simplifies a chaotic world into a clear moral map, a comforting illusion of “knowing who the bad guys are.”
In that story, Palestinians automatically play the victim role, and therefore Hamas becomes “the resistance,” not a tyrannical regime.
They don’t need facts, they need moral clarity, even if it’s false.
2. Projection of Guilt and Desire for Redemption
Western societies carry deep historical guilt: colonialism, racism, environmental destruction.
Supporting a cause that appears “anti-imperialist” becomes a psychological cleansing ritual.
They see themselves as allies of the oppressed, but in truth they’re not helping us - they’re washing their own conscience.
3. The Attraction to Emotional Intensity
Movements like Hamas weaponize emotion: pain, rage, sacrifice, “resistance.”
For young activists raised in digital comfort, this intensity feels authentic.
They crave moral struggle the way others crave adventure.
They mistake destruction for depth.
4. Moral Narcissism
It’s not about the truth, it’s about feeling virtuous.
Many Western activists are driven less by compassion and more by the need to be seen as compassionate.
The Palestinian cause becomes a theater stage for their self-image - they cry for Gaza online, but never once ask how Hamas treats Palestinians inside Gaza.
5. Cognitive Dissonance and Selective Empathy
To maintain their worldview, they must filter reality, ignore Hamas executing dissenters, silencing women, stealing aid, or building tunnels under schools.
They can’t hold both truths at once: that Palestinians suffer and that Hamas is their main tormentor.
So they delete one truth to keep the comfort of moral simplicity.
6. The Cult of “Resistance”
Climate activism teaches “act now or we all die.” Hamas propaganda echoes that emotional urgency: “resist or be erased.”
It taps into the same psychological fuel: panic, purpose, identity.
Except one fights to preserve life; the other glorifies death.
When I see these activists marching with slogans that defend Hamas, I don’t see solidarity, I see psychological confusion dressed as morality.
They don’t understand our reality.
They project their fantasies of rebellion onto our tragedy, and in doing so, they become useful tools for the very forces that keep us oppressed.
If they truly cared about Palestinians, they would stand with those of us who reject Hamas, reject the cult of death, and dream of a future built - not burned.
Dennis retweeted
"There are conflict entrepreneurs out there who benefit from radicalizing us.” -- Utah Gov. Spencer Cox
This is the most important sentence from a politician in a very long time.
Dennis retweeted
Trump: "We’re going to be doing very severe tariffs, if you don’t have a deal in 50 days, tariffs at about 100%, they call them secondary tariffs." A secondary tariff is a tariff on whoever TRADES with Russia, not on Russia itself. Hello Russian oil buyers China and India.
