Legacy media are shedding readers, viewers, and subscribers in record numbers, but still not as fast as they deserve. Operation Epic Fury is a case study in why.
Well said. I was 17 in '79, and have been treated to the same long view of Iran as a constant problem as the rest of us of a certain age, but the "Iran clock" probably starts in '53 with our complicity through the totally out of control CIA regime change addiction. Having said that, I'm with you on Trump's positive outcomes, mostly because he took out Maduro but left the remnants of his regime intact (on the theory they'll be stable but pliable?). I hope that works. I also hope we leave it up to the Iranians to solve their leadership problems for themselves, not least because we need the administration to move the entire navy and all our related forces out of the middle east asap and stage them in the Potomac River equidistant between Capitol Hill and Langley, like under Key Bridge or something.
I was just reading a WSJ article, written by an Iranian expat, "Why are my peers silent about Iran's atrocities"; but while she discussed the mistaken mindset of going along 100% with the whole program by the original Iranian revolutionaries (her mother et al), or by a segment of the midwest Bible churches, and her now disappointment with her fellow liberal progressive peers in following the hive mind on condemning the killing of Khameini and war with Iran; on the other hand she seems to accept unquestioningly her received wisdom on Gaza "public figures like Greta Thunberg who openly support a free Palestine... are still silent on Iran" or "we are rightfully outraged by the brutality of ICE. But Iran's morality police..." for a couple examples. then she concludes: "It takes intellectual humility, curiosity and bravery to correct those mistakes, and to stray from the herd toward a messy and complicated truth." She may be pretty clear-eyed about Iran, but otherwise apparently still isn't straying far from the herd to question the accuracy of the prevailing narrative in her circles. Heaven forbid she gets to see another viewpoint on any of those other topics: "When I started posting videos on Instagram supporting the latest uprisings in Iran, my feed began to veer right on a range of unrelated issues. Why would the algorithm think I'd agree with much of this nonsense...?"
Based on my detailed experience with specific world and domestic events the media is always wrong. I think because of vanity and stupidity. He described the state of media affairs extremely well.
Our current Iran adventure is another matter entirely. While I'm very supportive of our Iran actions I'm fearful of President Trump's exit plan. I clearly recall being elated at President Trump's demand for Iran's "unconditional surrender" in June 2025 and then accepting yet another ceasefire while bragging about success. And here we are again. I can hope this attack will producer a sustainable solution to Iran's terrorism of their people and the world.
I'll take some issue with your recollection of Bush II's invasion of Iraq. I think we had faulty intel regarding WoMD. That's different from deliberately lying about it. And I saw that because the U.N., the E.U., even the Intl. Atomic Agency ALL assumed Iraq had WoMD. Maybe not nukes, but chemical weapons for sure. In fact, we KNOW they had them - because they used them - against the Iranians, and against their own people (the so-called "swamp Arabs" of southern Iraq). Mustard gas, nerve gas, all kinds of banned weapons. I worked with an Iranian a few jobs back, and he once took off his tie, and opened and collar to show me the grotesque purple scarring from where the mustard gas landed on him below his gas mask. It's why he always wore long sleeve shirts.
On the eve of the invasion, the head of the IAA even publicly asked Bush to hold off on the invasion - said his team of inspectors could find the weapons without military force.
And once the Ba'athist regime, with its neo-Nazi party symbols, was removed, the IAA spent the next six months, along with the U.S. Army, looking for the weapons everyone thought they had.
Turns out they'd used them all up putting down internal rebellions.
But even as we invaded, the Germans, the French, the other nations arguing against invasion didn't say there were no WMDs: They said the WMDs could be found and disposed of without invasion.
The legacy media forgot to note that Khamene’i was also an “austere religious scholar” like the late saintly Kalifah al Baghdadi.
Well said. I was 17 in '79, and have been treated to the same long view of Iran as a constant problem as the rest of us of a certain age, but the "Iran clock" probably starts in '53 with our complicity through the totally out of control CIA regime change addiction. Having said that, I'm with you on Trump's positive outcomes, mostly because he took out Maduro but left the remnants of his regime intact (on the theory they'll be stable but pliable?). I hope that works. I also hope we leave it up to the Iranians to solve their leadership problems for themselves, not least because we need the administration to move the entire navy and all our related forces out of the middle east asap and stage them in the Potomac River equidistant between Capitol Hill and Langley, like under Key Bridge or something.
I was just reading a WSJ article, written by an Iranian expat, "Why are my peers silent about Iran's atrocities"; but while she discussed the mistaken mindset of going along 100% with the whole program by the original Iranian revolutionaries (her mother et al), or by a segment of the midwest Bible churches, and her now disappointment with her fellow liberal progressive peers in following the hive mind on condemning the killing of Khameini and war with Iran; on the other hand she seems to accept unquestioningly her received wisdom on Gaza "public figures like Greta Thunberg who openly support a free Palestine... are still silent on Iran" or "we are rightfully outraged by the brutality of ICE. But Iran's morality police..." for a couple examples. then she concludes: "It takes intellectual humility, curiosity and bravery to correct those mistakes, and to stray from the herd toward a messy and complicated truth." She may be pretty clear-eyed about Iran, but otherwise apparently still isn't straying far from the herd to question the accuracy of the prevailing narrative in her circles. Heaven forbid she gets to see another viewpoint on any of those other topics: "When I started posting videos on Instagram supporting the latest uprisings in Iran, my feed began to veer right on a range of unrelated issues. Why would the algorithm think I'd agree with much of this nonsense...?"
Based on my detailed experience with specific world and domestic events the media is always wrong. I think because of vanity and stupidity. He described the state of media affairs extremely well.
Our current Iran adventure is another matter entirely. While I'm very supportive of our Iran actions I'm fearful of President Trump's exit plan. I clearly recall being elated at President Trump's demand for Iran's "unconditional surrender" in June 2025 and then accepting yet another ceasefire while bragging about success. And here we are again. I can hope this attack will producer a sustainable solution to Iran's terrorism of their people and the world.
I'll take some issue with your recollection of Bush II's invasion of Iraq. I think we had faulty intel regarding WoMD. That's different from deliberately lying about it. And I saw that because the U.N., the E.U., even the Intl. Atomic Agency ALL assumed Iraq had WoMD. Maybe not nukes, but chemical weapons for sure. In fact, we KNOW they had them - because they used them - against the Iranians, and against their own people (the so-called "swamp Arabs" of southern Iraq). Mustard gas, nerve gas, all kinds of banned weapons. I worked with an Iranian a few jobs back, and he once took off his tie, and opened and collar to show me the grotesque purple scarring from where the mustard gas landed on him below his gas mask. It's why he always wore long sleeve shirts.
On the eve of the invasion, the head of the IAA even publicly asked Bush to hold off on the invasion - said his team of inspectors could find the weapons without military force.
And once the Ba'athist regime, with its neo-Nazi party symbols, was removed, the IAA spent the next six months, along with the U.S. Army, looking for the weapons everyone thought they had.
Turns out they'd used them all up putting down internal rebellions.
But even as we invaded, the Germans, the French, the other nations arguing against invasion didn't say there were no WMDs: They said the WMDs could be found and disposed of without invasion.
That's a bit different ...