Search Results
7/19/2025, 10:55:39 AM
>>64003097
Israel's official numbers are between 500 and 550 missiles fired in total, third-party counts are 543. In total, we have confirmation of 60 impacts, but we don't have a solid breadown of failures to intercept, declines to intercept ("that's going into the desert, who gives a shit") and interceptor malfunctions. Of those 60 impacts, 3 hit military facilities and 2 hit energy infrastructure. In total, there were 28 fatalities, one of which was active military.
Israel's official numbers are between 500 and 550 missiles fired in total, third-party counts are 543. In total, we have confirmation of 60 impacts, but we don't have a solid breadown of failures to intercept, declines to intercept ("that's going into the desert, who gives a shit") and interceptor malfunctions. Of those 60 impacts, 3 hit military facilities and 2 hit energy infrastructure. In total, there were 28 fatalities, one of which was active military.
6/24/2025, 8:43:03 PM
>>63891041
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
6/24/2025, 8:43:03 PM
>>508613130
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
6/24/2025, 8:43:03 PM
>>508613130
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
6/24/2025, 8:43:03 PM
>>508613130
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
6/24/2025, 8:43:03 PM
>>508613130
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
>However, would it not be smarter not to be cunty towards them?
That's a lot of bad blood that goes both ways all the back to the Shah. They have also expressed a consistent unwillingness to bury the hatchet, and that greatly complicates any effort to smooth things over.
>How about enforcing a NPT for Israel too?
Israel's position is actually surprisingly similar to Iran's, with a North Korea twist. Israel's official answer to wither or not they are a nuclear state is "fuck around and find out". Similar to Iran, this creates a threat that presenting an imminent existential threat to Israel might just get you nuked. But like North Korea, Israel doesn't have weak point that can curtail it ahead of time like Iran's facilities. "If" they exist, and if you can find them, you have to hit them directly, and again, you've just started a nuclear war. Why things are that way mostly ties into their very precarious geostrategic position, and it would be much better if they formally declared their arsenal, but again, it's not the kind of thing you can force to happen at this point.
>every time after they launched missiles against US bases
Okay, this is a cultural thing, and it mostly comes down to the Western Christian tradition of justice and forgiveness. Trump hit Iran, Iran made a show of hitting back, and the US allowed it to end there. In the West, this is not a sign of weakness, it is taking your backlash on the chin and being done with it. Not holding grudges or being desperate to get the last reply in is a virtue in Western society. It is a good thing that Trump did not respond, because he is choosing to not prolong the conflict. The job was done, so take your pushback and move on. In both cases, if Iran had chosen a more heavy-handed retaliation that had resulted in American fatalities, then things would have gotten ugly fast.
>So since making them stop enrichment is not within your means
I'll wait for the IAEA's opinion on that.
(cont)
6/15/2025, 4:53:22 AM
>>63835860
It's the same fucking impact again, isn't it? I swear we're starting to beat out the Zaporizha clusterfuck at this point.
It's the same fucking impact again, isn't it? I swear we're starting to beat out the Zaporizha clusterfuck at this point.
6/14/2025, 5:32:47 AM
>>63829291
It's very funny to me that they almost got an Iron Dome launcher. Remember to pay attention to your CEP, kids.
It's very funny to me that they almost got an Iron Dome launcher. Remember to pay attention to your CEP, kids.
6/13/2025, 9:41:07 PM
>>63826966
Here ya go you lazy bastard.
Here ya go you lazy bastard.
Page 1