Quote of the Day
You are angry about the present moment, but you are the one who voted for decades of executive overreach that allowed this regime to grow like a cancer.
You do not get to acquiesce to forty years of executive actions and suddenly discover constitutional outrage only when it fits your partisan narrative.
My heart breaks when I see the city I grew up in flames. But what breaks it even more is knowing that this suffering—borne by generations of Iranians, paid for by American blood and treasure—was compounded by years of your denial about what this regime is.
You cannot stabilize a government whose ideology requires bloodshed. And you cannot postpone confrontation forever without multiplying the eventual cost.
The world is not facing this moment because we finally acted.
The world is facing this moment because for decades many refused to acknowledge the true nature of the Islamic Republic regime.
Tahmineh Dehbozorgi @DeTahmineh
Posted on X, March 5, 2026
There are many people who still refuse to acknowledge the true nature of the Islamic Republic regime. Most of them seem to be affected by TDS. Such mental health cases are probably beyond help and there is no point in having a discussion with them.
There are reasons to consider in opposition to the moral necessity case which I think is well proven as in above.
A more principled opposition would be, the US Constitution does not grant our government the power to be the world’s policeman. Or a practical opposition would be our history of regime change for the last 80 years has been very poor. I keep wondering, was there something fundamentally different about how we handled Germany and Japan post WWII? Those were two extremely different bloodthirsty cultures and yet the U.S. helped them reconstruct their societies into productive and comparatively free nations. More recent efforts have been far from anything approaching satisfactory. Is it that we completely eliminated the toxic cultures in Japan and German? If so, then that may mean the eradication of Islam is required to enable the incubation of national neighbors fit for a civilized world.
This would be the most important acknowledgment of all yet to be realized and the reason we will face this moment again and again until we do realize it.
The question is why did the Obama regime try to let Iran have the bomb? It isn’t as if the likely outcome of giving them nuclear fuel wasn’t obvious, and it isn’t as if they ever do something without an ulterior motive.
The bomb was to make the regime untouchable. But why?
I believe that like the Molotov-Ribbentropf pact, the upfront part of the agreement was bad enough; but there was a secret agreement that was much worse. Specifically, I believe that in exchange for getting the bomb, Iran agreed to launch terrorist attacks in the USA proper, specifically mass shootings.
This is consistent with other actions by the Obama regime, specifically Operation Fast and Furious, except that OFF was not aimed at US public opinion–Americans don’t care what happens in Mexico–but rather at the Bush family, who were thick with the ruling party of Mexico at the time, and who back then were the most powerful group in the GOP.
Operation Plutonium Bullet (my name, I don’t know what they called it), in contrast, was aimed directly at popular opinion in the US.
Why do you think Benghazi happened? It was a classic illegal deal gone wrong.
What was different about Germany and Japan is they knew they were utterly defeated. Millions dead, more millions raped, cities in ruins, industry destroyed country occupied, leaders executed, ideology outlawed so they were more willing to cooperate. They both had an ancient and rather admirable civilization up to the episode of madness starting in the 1920s. So there was something to work with. Iraq not so much and Afghanistan, nothing at all. Iran is somewhere between those poles but we should not mess with how they live. It is in our interest to make sure they don’t threaten us but that is it.
There are many people who still refuse to acknowledge the true nature of Islam.
It’s not just Iran.
“A more principled opposition…”
It’s so tiresome to be constantly able to, off the cuff, give more principled opposition to my own principles than the other side ever publicly runs with. Ugh.
“was there something fundamentally different about how we handled Germany and Japan post WWII?”
Yes, WE CRUSHED THEM, and then spent literally decades remaking them.
We have been unwilling to do either of those things since then. The second step might not be absolutely necessary in every instance, but the first is.
Hegseth is the first in a long time to have the right idea about war. It is HORRIBLE, so actually do it right, break the things, kill the necessary people, and **get it over with**, decisively.
Otherwise, it’s not worth doing at all. You dither, faff about, and get MORE people killed over the years, not less, both ours and theirs. See Afghanistan, for instance.