Tucker Carlson talked with Col. Douglas Macgregor about the possibility of war with Iran

[Lord Long Rod]

The question on whether the Zionist apartheid regime has nuclear weapons is far from clear.

They will follow America's instructions in any case. If they don't have then then America will use their own on the apartheid regime's behalf and the Zionists will have to take responsibility by suffering the revenge attack that will surely come.

^Jew hater

 

[Lord Long Rod]

This is Israel's extortion. They want the US to invade Iran. It's stupid. Iran is not a threat to the US.

^Jew hater

 

[Lord Long Rod]

There should be no US soldiers involved in that conflict between Israel and Palestine

If we’re going to use special forces to help our kidnapped Americans, it should be without the knowledge of anyone in the region.

This whole thing is, I’ve always said as many people in Israel are saying comes down to how in the world October 7 happened in the first place, did rogue players in the IDF let this happen. It’s astonishing. It makes no sense, considering every square inch of Gaza is monitored.

There is no such place as "Palestine". It does not exist, nor has it ever existed.

The rest of your stupid comment is pure conspiracy bunk, you stupid twat.

 

[surada]

^Jew hater

Remember the USS Liberty.. Israel has been threatening Iran for 20 years. Let Israel fight Iran.

 

[Conservative from Georgia]

We need to rethink our actions in the Middle East. This is the opinion of Col McGregor….. who is a supporter of Israel, and a critic of Hamas.

The USA needs to be careful to not get too involved in The Israelpalestine situation.

Colonel MacGregor talked about the wildcard and the situation, which is a nuclear armed Israel. Are they capable of using one of their nuclear weapons against say Iran? And what would that lead to, in the Colonels mind probably Israel becoming the most hated country in the world along with WW3.

This thing in the Middle East has a chance to turn into a powder keg a World War III Armageddon scenario. As the video brings up, though it is the president of Turkey, who is urging calm and diplomacy among nations. We should heed what he has to say.

Will war with Iran come after Tucker’s predicted indictment of Hillary, or after Tucker’s predictor World War III with Russia

 

[Resnic]

We'll probably never see the day where we wise up and quit the middle east

It's about money. As long as their money to be made or laundered in the middle east we will continue to fuck around over there.

Trump had the right idea. He was putting in place the plan to pull out of Afghanistan, and scale back military operations in the middle east. He did push to stop isis which was a good move. But we were by this time pretty much going to be basically just buying oil from the middle east, which is all we should be doing.

Same thing with Ukraine. It's a giant money laundering scheme and if it weren't for that then we wouldn't give 2 shits about them and Russia.

 

[Augustine_]

It's about money. As long as their money to be made or laundered in the middle east we will continue to fuck around over there.

Trump had the right idea. He was putting in place the plan to pull out of Afghanistan, and scale back military operations in the middle east. He did push to stop isis which was a good move. But we were by this time pretty much going to be basically just buying oil from the middle east, which is all we should be doing.

Same thing with Ukraine. It's a giant money laundering scheme and if it weren't for that then we wouldn't give 2 shits about them and Russia.

I'll tell you what; if Biden gets us stupidly into more middle eastern bullshit and Trump says he'll immediately pull out of it and not look back, he'll have my vote. Getting out of the middle east is probably my top political motivation.

 

[lennypartiv]

You go Tucker! Keep bringing us the truth.

 

[surada]

I'll tell you what; if Biden gets us stupidly into more middle eastern bullshit and Trump says he'll immediately pull out of it and not look back, he'll have my vote. Getting out of the middle east is probably my top political motivation.

Get the big picture.

the time of the Basel congress, Arabs represented 95 percent of the population of Palestine and they owned 99 percent of the land.2 Thus it was obvious from the beginning of Zionism that dispossession of the Palestinian majority, either politically or physically, would be an inevitable requirement for achieving a Jewish state. It was not only land that was needed to reach Zionism's goal, but land without another people in the majority.

Since Palestinian Arabs were by far the majority throughout the period up to Israel's establishment as a Jewish state in 1948, the Zionist state could emerge only by denying the majority its rights or by becoming the majority either through immigration or in reducing the number of Palestinians by ethnic cleansing. There was no other way to create a Jewish, rather than democratic, state.3

That the Jewish state was secured in 1948 by the expulsion of the Palestinians should have come as no surprise. Expulsion as Zionism's logical imperative was clearly seen by Herzl as early as June 12, 1895. At the time he was still formulating his ideas about Zionism and confided to his diary: "We shall try to spirit the penniless population [Palestinians] across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."4 Even if this was perhaps the fanciful imagining of a rather romantic personality, as some sympathizers of Herzl contend, its essential imperative was inescapable. This was recognized by most early Zionists, as evidenced by the fact that the theme of expulsion consistently ran through Zionist thought from the very beginning.5

For instance, as early as 1905, Israel Zangwill, an organizer of Zionism in Britain and one of Zionism's top propagandists, who had coined the slogan "a land without a people for a people without a land," acknowledged in a speech in Manchester that Palestine was not a land without people. In fact, it was filled with Arabs: "[We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us."6 This comment came at a time when there were around 645,000 Muslims and Christians in Palestine and only 55,000 Jews, mainly non-Zionists or anti-Zionists in the Orthodox neighborhoods of Jerusalem and other cities.7

David Ben-Gurion, the man who along with Herzl and Chaim Weizmann was one of the progenitors of Israel, explicitly acknowledged the linkage between Zionism and expulsion: "Zionism is a transfer of the Jews. Regarding the transfer of the Arabs this is much easier than any other transfer."8 Or, as Israeli scholar Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi put it: "While the basic problem confronting Diaspora Jews was to survive as a minority, the basic problem of Zionism in Palestine was to dispossess the natives and become a majority."9

Much attention has been paid to how the early Zionists secured land in Palestine, but relatively little study has focused on the equally essential effort by Zionists to delegitimize and replace the Palestinian majority.10 Without Jewish control, the Zionists concluded they would be no better off than in Europe, where Zionism arose specifically as a way to escape antisemitism, pogroms, the ghetto and minority status.

As former defense minister Ariel Sharon, a leading spokesman of Zionism's right wing, has commented: "Our forefathers did not come here in order to build a democracy but to build a Jewish state."11 A similar view was recently expressed by Labor leader and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin: "I don't believe that for 2,000 years Jews dreamed and prayed about the return to Zion to create a binational state."12 Though the terms are softer, the meaning is the same.

1948

The Palestinians and Zionism: 1897-1948 | Middle East Policy Council

mepc.org

 

[sparky]

More than 3/4 won't even know of the PNAC agenda or what it represents.

I do Don

~S~

 

[surada]

Why? Why look at anything? What's your point.

The US invasion of Iran is fraught with risks, and chiefly the possibility that the Zionist regime will be reduced to rubble.

And don't forget that Bibi's actions that are leading to a wider war, don't have large support among the non-Zionist faction.

It's a tough call for America but the opportunity will never be more favourable.

The only real holdup is in enlisting the sympathies of the rest of the world for the apartheid regime, and hence the recent dredging back up the holocaust again. And again and again.....................

The Palestinians and Zionism: 1897-1948 | Middle East Policy Council

mepc.org

 

[surada]

I do Don

~S~

I do too. The PNAC agenda is based on Clean Break Strategy.

 

[sparky]

I do too. The PNAC agenda is based on Clean Break Strategy.

One of their many pre-post-9/11 strategies Surada

They basically won the trifecta , closed their doors , scrubbed their presence off the 'net since

They knew they had made global influence into reality, and didn't wish to advertise the fact they'd made good

So yanno, when i read people claiming 'deep state' is some conspiracy, i know they're tools to it all

~S~