source
???

I mean again - there's a whole other half of the world reporting on this, and while I'm not always sure they're telling the absolute straight dope, it's a different set of facts and components you can put towards understanding the conflict

Today in particular, has seen a number of videos showing extensive damage to MULTIPLE MENA countries from Iranian drones and missiles. I do not believe WE dragged IRAN to the table here - I think it was the other way around because we're out of interceptors

Every time leftists talk about escalating against Trump, liberals point out that Trump is looking for an excuse to invoke the insurrection act. This is true. But they don't notice that he's the least popular president in history and the military has largely already made it clear that they won't be used against civilians. That risk assessment completely lacks context.

Trump could not possibly win against an insurgency because the only thing he could possibly offer to end it would be his own resignation. If Trump tried to escalate to civil war he would either lose or be removed.

More importantly, Trump compulsively escalates. He will continue to start wars because he thinks he's doing a good job and he's a hero. When he gets frustrated at some foreign enemy because he's actually completely incompetent and only able to win against incompetent and wildly unpopular opponents, he threatens war crimes.

I am familiar enough with history to fully believe that he ordered a nuclear strike last night and people said "no." Humanity has been saved multiple times by people refusing to follow orders, and you don't find out until years later. (This is also not the first story of a president dangerously deep in mental decline. Reagan lost the nuclear football.)

The longer this goes on, the greater the risk that eventually someone will actually let him do something unthinkable. But that's significantly less likely if he's trying to fight within the US border.

Just looking at things from a risk perspective, "he's going to invoke the insurrection act" is not nearly as big of a threat as democrats think it is, and it's about time they think realistically about this fact.

Again, I can't stress this enough - the fact that he's threatening to do a genocide, and strongly implying he's going to nuke Iran, is in it and of itself the problem.

The standard cannot be "the President nuked somebody" because it's too fucking late once the President has nuked someone. You are being encouraged to adopt an illogical position by bootlicker VERY SERIOUS PEOPLETM. It does not compute that you should wait for Trump to actually nuke s/o before emergency measures are considered.