hypochondriac

Even if it doesn't happen it's obviously not bollocks and is a valid perspective. From Iran who have few options, looking to deplete very expensive resources with cheaper strikes seems fairly rational.

Personally I'd trust a New York Times article (or the Times where I read it originally) over some randomer on an internet forum.

Having money doesn't mean you're particularly keen on spaffing billions up the wall on a few missiles defending against drones that cost a few thousand to produce for an extended period.

Call me mad but I really don't care about shit like this. People do cringe shit in their workplace all the time and it doesn't have an impact on their ability to do their job.

Hold on @badgerx16. Let's see where he's going with this. His dot connecting seems on point.

I read in a few places that their strategy appears to be to keep forcing neighbouring countries to expend lots of money defending themselves with expensive weapons whilst they keep lobbing cheap drones with the idea being that it will encourage those countries to ask for peace because they can't afford it to continue. Will be interesting to see if they can achieve that or not. I expect anyone they appoint as supreme leader will be target number one to just be killed again.

I'm always a fan of when one of the lads brings up something I've been harping on about on here. The narcissist in me likes to think that I've had a slight influence on the editorial line of the podcast

Thanks for these lads. Always worth a listen, particularly when we win.

Makes me shudder how close Corbyn got to power for his stance on military action alone.

Looks like the Iranian supreme leader is dead. Good.

My father in laws parents were killed by Saddam. He would have taken what came after him 100%. The country is not great now but much much better than it was under Saddam.

Edit: double post.

What way should the regime be changed? Bearing in mind the context that thousands were recently slaughtered for attempting to protest against the regime.

That may well be true.

It was very clear what he meant. No need for the gaslighting.

We know why

Again I never disputed thst as a potential outcome. In fact I said the opposite mate.

I didn't comment on what 'this' has anything to do with. I said that if there is an outcome that means they can get anywhere close to how things used to be then that could be a good thing.

I think we can all agree that what happened to Iran from when it was liberal and progressive to what it is like now is absolutely tragic. If there's a way to get back to anything approaching that it would be a very good thing. Could well be the case that things get worse though obviously.

I'm sure they do and never suggested otherwise.

That's because soggy has a history of just meeting people talking about the topic at hand. I have never said anything like that before but thought it was worth mentioning given it had just come up. It could be a load of bollocks I just noticed she had a foreign accent and asked where she was from and I asked if she had family in Iran and that was the extent of the conversation. Believe it or not I'm not overly bothered. If she'd said the Iranian people wanted Trump to leave them alone I'd have posted that too

Spoke to an Iranian work colleague yesterday with family in Iran. She said everyone was waiting for Trump to save them.

That's very disingenuous. No one has suggested that the Green vote is solely comprised of Muslims.

People crave authenticity. I might disagree with everything Karl Turner says but every time I've listened to him speak it's engaging, heartfelt and real. There's other considerations ns of course but that sort of thing will go a long way towards winning someone's vote.