The Germans have been ordered to stock up on sausages and cheese. This is called the Wurst Käse scenario.
The sausage part of that joke is truly offal.
Cumberland along! These sterotypes you can't let Lincolnshire. At breakfast tomorrow you'll be planning Merguez or Calabrian holiday. Take your pork and beef elsewhere!
Are you telling me that after making a sausage joke I should get my coat?
To immediately withdraw any technical or trade supplies to Israel relevant to military hardware.
To ban Israeli aircraft from landing on any RAF airfield globally.
We cannot condone this unlawful act of aggression to a Country we supply Arms to.
On the case of Us who are a NATO member, to request as a founding Member of NATO an immediate General Meeting of all Members to formulate a NATO response to unlawful American aggression.
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Not quite a perfect formulation. We were sort of fine with Israel killing circa 70,000 of *not* their own people.
Everyone seems to want the regime gone but no one wants to do the dirty work except the US and Israel. Starmer is absolutely pathetic hiding behind mythical "international law" that Iran certainly gives zero fucks about.
Putting that on a pedestal above everything else is all Starmer seems to genuinely believe in.
Starmer will have the support of the vast majority of the British public in NOT joining the US and certainly not Israel in an illegal war
If Badenoch and Farage want an emergency debate to explain why they do, they are welcome to do so.
They will incur the wrath of the vast majority of us and be damned for a generation.
Come on if you're hard enough
Starmer has the backbone, those who want war are gutless keyboard warriors or zionists who support state sponsored mass murder.
We are - in effect - joining in, by shooting down Iranian missiles.
"Smoke me a Mullah, Donald. I'll be back for breakfast!"
Interesting article about likely outcomes for Iran, which I think is consensus for American FP experts.
This will be airstrikes only. The US has made no preparations for ground invasion and it goes against Trump's principles such as they are.
Four scenarios:
1. Democracy - no means of directing this. Not going to happen. 2. Alternative America friendly autocrat, most plausibly the Shah. You can't impose a ruler unless you send an army to take them there. Not going to happen. 3. Failed state 4. Embedding of current regime
Lynch reckons Israel would prefer failed state and Trump the stability option, ie Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps/more ayatollahs, as he did in Venezuela.
To immediately withdraw any technical or trade supplies to Israel relevant to military hardware.
To ban Israeli aircraft from landing on any RAF airfield globally.
We cannot condone this unlawful act of aggression to a Country we supply Arms to.
On the case of Us who are a NATO member, to request as a founding Member of NATO an immediate General Meeting of all Members to formulate a NATO response to unlawful American aggression.
We cannot support illegal acts.
All that will have to be left until he returns to work at 9.00 am on Monday.
Interesting article about likely outcomes for Iran, which I think is consensus for American FP experts.
This will be airstrikes only. The US has made no preparations for ground invasion and it goes against Trump's principles such as they are.
Four scenarios:
1. Democracy - no means of directing this. Not going to happen. 2. Alternative America friendly autocrat, most plausibly the Shah. You can't impose a ruler unless you send an army to take them there. Not going to happen. 3. Failed state 4. Embedding of current regime
Lynch reckons Israel would prefer failed state and Trump the stability option, ie Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps/more ayatollahs, as he did in Venezuela.
Yes I think the Venezuelan option seems most likely.
An Islamic Revolutionary Guard leader who is willing to accede to most American demands yet retain domestic control. The people of Iran see no improvement, but Israel and the US see a weakened regional actor.
The other options only happen if the replacement is more hardline against the US and persists with antagonism. Then you could end up in any scenario after a protracted war.
The Germans have been ordered to stock up on sausages and cheese. This is called the Wurst Käse scenario.
The sausage part of that joke is truly offal.
Cumberland along! These sterotypes you can't let Lincolnshire. At breakfast tomorrow you'll be planning Merguez or Calabrian holiday. Take your pork and beef elsewhere!
Are you telling me that after making a sausage joke I should get my coat?
I think we'll leave that meaty argument to youtube.
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Who is the 'we' you are talking about? You don't sound fine with it, Eddie Izzard doesn't seem happy either, and nor am I. Who is this 'we' that is OK with it? I have never met them.
I think it's this new PB stricture - debuted today - that if you don't loudly and unequivocally support doing "whatever it takes" to unseat a wicked tyrant, regardless of consequences or chances of success, you are an enthusiastic fan of said wicked tyrant and all their wicked tyranny.
That's a significant part of the Iranian populace written off, then.
I suspect this is not an isolated position:
An Iranian man left this comment on my YouTube channel. This is without a doubt the single best explanation of the reality facing Iranian people today👇
"As an Iranian, I can tell you the situation is no longer just political—it's existential. We are trapped between two collapsing structures: one internal, one external. On one hand, we face a deeply dysfunctional government, led by the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s unelected institutions.
Decades of economic mismanagement, suppression of dissent, and brutal ideological control have alienated multiple generations. No one believes in reform anymore—because every attempt has either been co-opted or crushed. But here's the paradox: We are also terrified of regime collapse—because we've watched the aftermath of Western intervention in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Each was promised freedom; each descended into chaos, civil war, or foreign occupation.
So no, we don't trust the U.S. or Israel. Not because we support our regime—but because we know how imperial powers treat ‘liberated’ nations in the Middle East.
Freedom, in their language, often means vacuum, fire, and permanent instability. Right now, many Iranians live with three truths at once: The Islamic Republic is morally and politically bankrupt. The alternatives offered by foreign actors are not liberation—they’re collapse.
A bad government is survivable. No government is not. We are not silent because we agree. We are cautious because we’ve learned—too well—what happens when superpowers decide to "help." In a sentence: Iran is a nation held hostage by its own regime, but haunted by the fate of its neighbors. We are stuck in a house we hate, surrounded by fires we fear more." https://x.com/thecyrusjanssen/status/2027758825101791405
Oppressed at home, now grist to the mill of Trump's ego and Netanyahu's self-serving machinations. An awful place to be.
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Who is the 'we' you are talking about? You don't sound fine with it, Eddie Izzard doesn't seem happy either, and nor am I. Who is this 'we' that is OK with it? I have never met them.
I think it's this new PB stricture - debuted today - that if you don't loudly and unequivocally support doing "whatever it takes" to unseat a wicked tyrant, regardless of consequences or chances of success, you are an enthusiastic fan of said wicked tyrant and all their wicked tyranny.
That's a significant part of the Iranian populace written off, then.
I suspect this is not an isolated position:
An Iranian man left this comment on my YouTube channel. This is without a doubt the single best explanation of the reality facing Iranian people today👇
"As an Iranian, I can tell you the situation is no longer just political—it's existential. We are trapped between two collapsing structures: one internal, one external. On one hand, we face a deeply dysfunctional government, led by the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s unelected institutions.
Decades of economic mismanagement, suppression of dissent, and brutal ideological control have alienated multiple generations. No one believes in reform anymore—because every attempt has either been co-opted or crushed. But here's the paradox: We are also terrified of regime collapse—because we've watched the aftermath of Western intervention in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Each was promised freedom; each descended into chaos, civil war, or foreign occupation.
So no, we don't trust the U.S. or Israel. Not because we support our regime—but because we know how imperial powers treat ‘liberated’ nations in the Middle East.
Freedom, in their language, often means vacuum, fire, and permanent instability. Right now, many Iranians live with three truths at once: The Islamic Republic is morally and politically bankrupt. The alternatives offered by foreign actors are not liberation—they’re collapse.
A bad government is survivable. No government is not. We are not silent because we agree. We are cautious because we’ve learned—too well—what happens when superpowers decide to "help." In a sentence: Iran is a nation held hostage by its own regime, but haunted by the fate of its neighbors. We are stuck in a house we hate, surrounded by fires we fear more." https://x.com/thecyrusjanssen/status/2027758825101791405
Interesting article about likely outcomes for Iran, which I think is consensus for American FP experts.
This will be airstrikes only. The US has made no preparations for ground invasion and it goes against Trump's principles such as they are.
Four scenarios:
1. Democracy - no means of directing this. Not going to happen. 2. Alternative America friendly autocrat, most plausibly the Shah. You can't impose a ruler unless you send an army to take them there. Not going to happen. 3. Failed state 4. Embedding of current regime
Lynch reckons Israel would prefer failed state and Trump the stability option, ie Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps/more ayatollahs, as he did in Venezuela.
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Who is the 'we' you are talking about? You don't sound fine with it, Eddie Izzard doesn't seem happy either, and nor am I. Who is this 'we' that is OK with it? I have never met them.
I think it's this new PB stricture - debuted today - that if you don't loudly and unequivocally support doing "whatever it takes" to unseat a wicked tyrant, regardless of consequences or chances of success, you are an enthusiastic fan of said wicked tyrant and all their wicked tyranny.
That's a significant part of the Iranian populace written off, then.
I suspect this is not an isolated position:
An Iranian man left this comment on my YouTube channel. This is without a doubt the single best explanation of the reality facing Iranian people today👇
"As an Iranian, I can tell you the situation is no longer just political—it's existential. We are trapped between two collapsing structures: one internal, one external. On one hand, we face a deeply dysfunctional government, led by the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s unelected institutions.
Decades of economic mismanagement, suppression of dissent, and brutal ideological control have alienated multiple generations. No one believes in reform anymore—because every attempt has either been co-opted or crushed. But here's the paradox: We are also terrified of regime collapse—because we've watched the aftermath of Western intervention in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Each was promised freedom; each descended into chaos, civil war, or foreign occupation.
So no, we don't trust the U.S. or Israel. Not because we support our regime—but because we know how imperial powers treat ‘liberated’ nations in the Middle East.
Freedom, in their language, often means vacuum, fire, and permanent instability. Right now, many Iranians live with three truths at once: The Islamic Republic is morally and politically bankrupt. The alternatives offered by foreign actors are not liberation—they’re collapse.
A bad government is survivable. No government is not. We are not silent because we agree. We are cautious because we’ve learned—too well—what happens when superpowers decide to "help." In a sentence: Iran is a nation held hostage by its own regime, but haunted by the fate of its neighbors. We are stuck in a house we hate, surrounded by fires we fear more." https://x.com/thecyrusjanssen/status/2027758825101791405
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Who is the 'we' you are talking about? You don't sound fine with it, Eddie Izzard doesn't seem happy either, and nor am I. Who is this 'we' that is OK with it? I have never met them.
I think it's this new PB stricture - debuted today - that if you don't loudly and unequivocally support doing "whatever it takes" to unseat a wicked tyrant, regardless of consequences or chances of success, you are an enthusiastic fan of said wicked tyrant and all their wicked tyranny.
That's a significant part of the Iranian populace written off, then.
I suspect this is not an isolated position:
An Iranian man left this comment on my YouTube channel. This is without a doubt the single best explanation of the reality facing Iranian people today👇
"As an Iranian, I can tell you the situation is no longer just political—it's existential. We are trapped between two collapsing structures: one internal, one external. On one hand, we face a deeply dysfunctional government, led by the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s unelected institutions.
Decades of economic mismanagement, suppression of dissent, and brutal ideological control have alienated multiple generations. No one believes in reform anymore—because every attempt has either been co-opted or crushed. But here's the paradox: We are also terrified of regime collapse—because we've watched the aftermath of Western intervention in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Each was promised freedom; each descended into chaos, civil war, or foreign occupation.
So no, we don't trust the U.S. or Israel. Not because we support our regime—but because we know how imperial powers treat ‘liberated’ nations in the Middle East.
Freedom, in their language, often means vacuum, fire, and permanent instability. Right now, many Iranians live with three truths at once: The Islamic Republic is morally and politically bankrupt. The alternatives offered by foreign actors are not liberation—they’re collapse.
A bad government is survivable. No government is not. We are not silent because we agree. We are cautious because we’ve learned—too well—what happens when superpowers decide to "help." In a sentence: Iran is a nation held hostage by its own regime, but haunted by the fate of its neighbors. We are stuck in a house we hate, surrounded by fires we fear more." https://x.com/thecyrusjanssen/status/2027758825101791405
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest, well done there. Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed... And the reason we let them get away with it is they killed their own people. And we're sort of fine with that.
Who is the 'we' you are talking about? You don't sound fine with it, Eddie Izzard doesn't seem happy either, and nor am I. Who is this 'we' that is OK with it? I have never met them.
I think it's this new PB stricture - debuted today - that if you don't loudly and unequivocally support doing "whatever it takes" to unseat a wicked tyrant, regardless of consequences or chances of success, you are an enthusiastic fan of said wicked tyrant and all their wicked tyranny.
That's a significant part of the Iranian populace written off, then.
I suspect this is not an isolated position:
An Iranian man left this comment on my YouTube channel. This is without a doubt the single best explanation of the reality facing Iranian people today👇
"As an Iranian, I can tell you the situation is no longer just political—it's existential. We are trapped between two collapsing structures: one internal, one external. On one hand, we face a deeply dysfunctional government, led by the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s unelected institutions.
Decades of economic mismanagement, suppression of dissent, and brutal ideological control have alienated multiple generations. No one believes in reform anymore—because every attempt has either been co-opted or crushed. But here's the paradox: We are also terrified of regime collapse—because we've watched the aftermath of Western intervention in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Each was promised freedom; each descended into chaos, civil war, or foreign occupation.
So no, we don't trust the U.S. or Israel. Not because we support our regime—but because we know how imperial powers treat ‘liberated’ nations in the Middle East.
Freedom, in their language, often means vacuum, fire, and permanent instability. Right now, many Iranians live with three truths at once: The Islamic Republic is morally and politically bankrupt. The alternatives offered by foreign actors are not liberation—they’re collapse.
A bad government is survivable. No government is not. We are not silent because we agree. We are cautious because we’ve learned—too well—what happens when superpowers decide to "help." In a sentence: Iran is a nation held hostage by its own regime, but haunted by the fate of its neighbors. We are stuck in a house we hate, surrounded by fires we fear more." https://x.com/thecyrusjanssen/status/2027758825101791405
I’m in a bit of a minority - not only in general public opinion but also strongly-held Lib Dem opinion - that if the Islamic Republic collapses, the result will not be another Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya.
Yes yes, “everyone says this time it’s different” etc etc. but Iran has a very different history and culture to those, and importantly it’s a Shia state which means no Libya style proxy warfare between Turkey and Qatar, and few of the sectarian divides of Iraq. And it doesn’t have the warlord history of Afghanistan.
Iran / Persia has been an imperial power. It has a strong, buried ethnic-nationalist core and identity. Like Russia, Turkey, Britain, France and others. Its post-revolution experience won’t be like Iraq. It’ll either be like Russia: Wild West corruption followed by strongman nationalism, or like Turkey post the Ottomans: straight into the strongman nationalism, but with its geostrategic focus being more localised.
The people to fear this new Persia are not Israel, the “West”, Trump or the Saudis. They’re the Kurds, and possibly the Iraqis.
Comments
"Ace Starmer - what a guy!"
I'm shocked.
An Islamic Revolutionary Guard leader who is willing to accede to most American demands yet retain domestic control. The people of Iran see no improvement, but Israel and the US see a weakened regional actor.
The other options only happen if the replacement is more hardline against the US and persists with antagonism. Then you could end up in any scenario after a protracted war.
NEW THREAD
https://x.com/simon_schama/status/2027777131237842995?s=46&t=fJymV-V84rexmlQMLXHHJQ
Chip O'Lata.
All Iran's neighbours are better off than Iran.
Better freedom than oppression.
Iraqis today are considerably freer than Iranians are.
Less malign abroad than Iran though.
# grammar police
Yes yes, “everyone says this time it’s different” etc etc. but Iran has a very different history and culture to those, and importantly it’s a Shia state which means no Libya style proxy warfare between Turkey and Qatar, and few of the sectarian divides of Iraq. And it doesn’t have the warlord history of Afghanistan.
Iran / Persia has been an imperial power. It has a strong, buried ethnic-nationalist core and identity. Like Russia, Turkey, Britain, France and others. Its post-revolution experience won’t be like Iraq. It’ll either be like Russia: Wild West corruption followed by strongman nationalism, or like Turkey post the Ottomans: straight into the strongman nationalism, but with its geostrategic focus being more localised.
The people to fear this new Persia are not Israel, the “West”, Trump or the Saudis. They’re the Kurds, and possibly the Iraqis.