That's Rich

This guy's writing just gets better.

Aaron Parnas

That little "peace deal" is what most of us thought it was - pure desperate fantasy.

Trump gets his stoopid ass into a huge bind, and he thinks he can just walk away with a few parting shots at people who're trying to help him. Instead of recognizing them as the ones willing to do what he needs done, he treats them like enemies, and so - voilà - they become enemies.

Dumbest fuckin' stable genius anybody's ever seen.

For The Most Part

We can all get suckered. We can all swallow a lie that just seems too good to be anything but the truth.

But if I have car trouble, I'm going to call an auto mechanic, not some average computer nerd who thinks a car is no different from the 10-speed he rides to work.

If I have an issue with some weird trauma left over from my childhood, I'll call a therapist who knows how to help me with that stuff, and not some guru who tells me all I have to do is shove some crystals up my ass, and drink some off-the-wall tea made from a few flowers and insect balls.

If I have a terrible headache that's been going on for 5 or 6 days, I'm going to find me a certified neurologist - not a fuckin' plumber who spends lots of time "researching" on YouTube.

Trump led us all over to a red hot stove and insisted on having us jump up on it. And even though there were a few MAGA fuckwads who - even now - tell us everything's fine, we've got blisters on our butts that won't be healed up for a good long goddamned time.

When you've lost Piers Morgan, the jig is up. Call in the dogs, piss on the fire, and strike camp - this hunt is over.

Nobody Didn't See It Coming

How Trump’s ‘Operation Epic Disaster’ turned the world against America

Donald Trump wanted to bring the Islamic Republic to its knees. He failed on all counts

One month into Operation Epic Fury, Donald Trump insisted that one of the most intense military campaigns in recent history would soon be over.

“We are on the cusp of ending Iran’s sinister threat to America and the world,” the US president said in a primetime address.

Almost two months later he signed a deal to end the conflict that many argue favours Iran and fails to meet his primary objectives.

The Iran war has revealed the limits of US military power to achieve political objectives. But it has also left allies and partners questioning their relations with Washington.

“We deployed American power recklessly and incomprehensibly,” said Aaron David Miller, a former US state department negotiator and adviser during multiple Republican and Democratic administrations.

“The moral and strategic argument is that Operation Epic Fury has been an epic disaster,” he said, adding: “What significance did this war have to advancing the national interests of the US?”

Mr Trump spent his last day at the G7 summit in Geneva this week trying to quell concerns about the peace treaty.

The page-and-a-half-long deal, signed on Wednesday night, consists of a broad and apparently flimsy set of principles to keep peace and kick contentious issues into the long grass.

Among US allies, concerns are being raised privately that the rushed framework is light on nuclear concessions and heavy on financial incentives.

A senior European diplomat said: “The deal will turn out to be a win for Iran. I don’t think Iran will give much in the coming 60 days of negotiations.

“Obviously, Iran has been degraded somewhat by the military campaign, but psychologically and politically I think Iran is the winner, at least for now.”

The conflict put unprecedented strain on the transatlantic alliance. Some European countries denied American warplanes use of their airspace, while the refusal of Nato countries to send warships to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz infuriated Mr Trump.

It culminated in Mr Trump threatening to abandon the alliance altogether.

The diplomat added: “The frustration with the current erratic foreign policy swings is growing and increasingly visible. We have always answered the phone, when the US has called. For the time being, those phone calls will be picked up less frequently.”

Militarily, the US has depleted its critical missile and munitions stockpiles and overstretched its artillery, forcing the relocation of assets from the Pacific.

The Gulf states have suffered severe damage to energy facilities and incurred heavy economic losses. Their long-held image as safe and luxurious tax havens has been shattered.

Israel, still at war with Iran-backed Hezbollah, has been sidelined in negotiations and forcibly brought to heel by Mr Trump, while its support in America is being drained.

The Iranian regime is emboldened, hardliners are empowered, and the civilian population is suffering from intensified repression.

Tehran will commit to fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days and reiterate its pledge to never produce a nuclear weapon – positions it held before the war began.

The White House has insisted “no dust, no dollars”, meaning Iran has to surrender its 430kg of highly enriched uranium before it gets sanctions relief. But such nuclear concessions were already on the table in February, days before the war began.

The terms have led allies to privately ask: What exactly did Mr Trump go to war with Iran for?

Even Mr Trump’s inner circle is expressing doubts. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary and John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, have reportedly questioned Iran’s good faith.

“It is emblematic of everything that is wrong with the Trump administration,” Mr Miller said, citing the lack of reliance on expertise and intelligence, the politicisation of American foreign policy and “Trump’s own predilections that US power is unlimited”.

More broadly speaking, Mr Miller added: “America’s capacity to deter has been undermined.

“The Islamic regime has now survived the largest deployment of US air, naval and missile assets since the Iraq War and survived a military campaign against Israel, the region’s most important military power.”

However, American credibility will recover, he said. “After Vietnam, the Iraq war, the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, people believed the US would never lead again. I didn’t believe them then, and I don’t believe it now,” he said.

Mr Trump’s credibility, on the other hand, may not. His shifting war objectives, constantly misleading public messaging and inability to secure what he promised have eroded public trust, polls repeatedly show.

“Trump overestimated the ability of the military to accomplish political objectives and learned the limitations of force,” said David Schenker, the assistant US secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs under the first Trump administration.

Shattering the illusion of security

Among the most urgent questions about US power and trustworthiness come from those in the Gulf who must confront the new reality that the US cannot ensure their security.

During the war, the presence of American forces in the region attracted, rather than deterred, attacks by Iran – helping to shatter the illusion of the US security umbrella.

Mehran Kamrava, a professor of Middle Eastern politics at Georgetown University in Qatar, said: “The US will continue to remain the dominant power globally, but what it has shown in the Gulf is they cannot rely on the US solely for their security.

“It will accelerate their push to diversify their security partners and strategic reliances.”

The rifts are already evident. The United Arab Emirates is deepening its ties with Israel and India, while Saudi Arabia is forging a new security axis with Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt.

Israel’s uncertain path forward

The news of the agreement to end the fighting “on all fronts” was greeted with anger and dismay in Israel. With Israeli forces still deployed in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank and Syria, it has left America’s key ally uncertain of the path forward.

In the eyes of many Americans who disapprove of the conflict, Benjamin Netanyahu pushed their president into a misguided war, accelerating the fraying support for Israel inside the US, a process that began with Gaza.

For some in the administration, the Israeli prime minister is the scapegoat for unfulfilled war objectives.

JD Vance, the US vice-president and a staunch sceptic on foreign intervention, publicly acknowledged the strain on relations, accusing Mr Netanyahu of “getting some things wrong”.

In April, Joe Kent resigned as director of the US national counter-terrorism centre in protest against the war, accusing Israel of dragging the US into a “war of choice” and manipulating Mr Trump into joining in the first place.

Prof Kamrava said the damage to US-Israeli relations is not irreparable, but in the short term hinges on the personal relationship between Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu.

“Trump feels in many ways misled by faulty or false intelligence of Israel. For Netanyahu, who has legal and political problems, this war with Iran was a lifeline, but he has emerged in a much weaker position as he enters his own electoral campaign.”

Mr Netanyahu, the longest-serving prime minister in Israel’s history, is seeking another term in the elections scheduled for later this year, with his political rivals using the MoU as a stick to beat him with before October’s vote.

An unpopular war

At home, a war with Iran was never popular.

Polls conducted in the first week of February showed that nearly half of Americans opposed an attack on Iran. By May, after two months of war, disapproval had risen sharply to 58 per cent.

During the most active stages of the conflict, it was estimated to be costing taxpayers an average of $2bn (£1.5bn) a day.

Announcing the “historic peace agreement” on Sunday, a White House spokesman said it would end “decades of hostility” and bring “stability to one of the world’s most volatile regions”.

But Americans won’t feel the relief of this “historic” moment for months to come. Oil prices have begun to fall, but fuel and food prices are expected to remain high for some time – long enough for a disgruntled electorate to damage the Republican Party in the midterms and perhaps see Mr Trump lose control of Congress.

He will have a hard time persuading voters the war was worth ongoing pain and is not another American military misadventure.

Mr Trump continues to insist that his deal is better than the one Barack Obama signed with Iran to limit its nuclear programme and missile capacity. Experts disagree.

“The US lost on virtually every point,” he tweeted in 2015. “We just don’t win anymore!”

The words are now coming back to haunt him, and are likely to be played again and again by Democrat campaigners ahead of the midterms.

Iranian citizens, too, have lost trust in Mr Trump. He told some 93 million of them that “help is on its way” as they took to the streets last winter to protest against the regime and were killed in their thousands.

The Iranian diaspora were purportedly dancing in the streets following the killing of Ali Khamenei. But now the mood has shifted.

Mr Trump’s attempt to foment a rebellion failed. So did his military action. His credibility has been eroded not only on the geopolitical stage, but among ordinary people worldwide, some of whom had been desperately hoping for a way out of living in an oppressive regime.

“If you look at the many examples of history, the US has only tried to answer its national security interests through military force,” Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, said.

“Time and time again, the US has not thought about the people on the ground of its conflicts,” said Dr Vakil, “and this has come at a catastrophic cost for the Iranian people.”

Belle

Some great points.

• If it's not really valuable, don't start a war over it
• The MOU has been signed "digitally"? Y'mean, like an autopen kinda thing?
• If it's a real deal, then let's see it

Escalation Please

I don't know if this is Iran being cagey - trying to tell us something about how the US government isn't what we've been told it is - but if Trump orders commensurate retaliation against Iran for hitting Elon's stuff, then we'll have a clearer idea on who's running things at the White House.

For my money, it'll just be a bit of confirmation of my worries about radical libertarians pushing hard for Plutocracy.

For those guys, the federal government has three main purposes:

1. Defend US commercial interests abroad
2. Keep the rabble in line at home
3. Settle contract disputes 

I'll say it again: Gettin' pretty fuckin' tired of living in interesting times.

Iran

We had the deal - a way better deal than what dumbass Trump is chasing.

But it had one fatal flaw. It had Obama's name on it, and that's something Trump just can't stand. So he blew it up and now we'll be paying thru the nose for a long time.

Everything

Trump touches

turns to shit

Both Ways

The official stance on outlets like DumFux News is that high gas prices are at their peak, and they'll start to come down soon.

- and -

The high price of gas, and groceries - and practically everything else - is painful, and may persist for a while, but it's a small price to pay for keeping Iran from getting the bomb.

Reminder: Keeping Iran from getting the bomb was an item in big bold red letters, at the top of the list when Obama hammered out the deal with Tehran 10 fucking years ago. You know - the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) - the one that Trump flushed down the shitter just because it had Obama's signature on it.

But I digress. They're doing the same thing they always do. ie: talking out of both sides of their mouth.

There's no policy, there's no plan, there's just bullshit and lame excuses to get Trump from one stupid momentary decision to the next moronically impetuous decision - whatever he thinks buys him another 48 hours before somebody puts his lights out altogether.

Core Components of the JCPOA Nuclear Constraints: 

• Iran agreed to limit its uranium enrichment to 3.67% (well below the 90% required for weapons) and reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium by 98%.
• Centrifuge Reduction: Iran reduced its installed centrifuges—the machines used to enrich uranium—by two-thirds and agreed to use only older models for a decade.
• Monitoring and Inspections: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was granted enhanced access to monitor nuclear facilities and ensure transparency.
• Sanctions Relief: The U.S. and European nations lifted nuclear-related sanctions on Iran’s banking, oil, and shipping industries.
• "Breakout Time": The agreement was designed to extend the "breakout time" (time needed to produce enough fissile material for one bomb) from a few months to at least one year.
• Implementation Day (January 16, 2016): The deal took effect after the IAEA verified that Iran had complied with its initial nuclear obligations.
• Cash Shipments: The Obama administration sent $1.7 billion in cash to Iran in 2016, settling a pre-1979 arms sale dispute, which was described by critics as a "ransom" in relation to the release of U.S. prisoners, a charge the administration denied.

Withdrawal and Later Developments:

• U.S. Withdrawal (2018): President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the deal in 2018, calling it one-sided and re-imposing, sanctions, which led to Iran exceeding the deal's limitations.
• Status in 2026: Despite efforts by the Biden administration to revive the deal, it has remained largely defunct. By early 2026, Iran had significantly advanced its nuclear enrichment activities, including producing high-purity uranium, following the formal termination of the 10-year agreement terms.

Bluff-n-Bluster

When is a blockade not a blockade?

Iran-Linked Ships Reportedly Navigating Through Strait of Hormuz — Despite Trump’s Blockade

Several ships linked to Iran, including a Chinese vessel, are coursing through the Strait of Hormuz, according to reports on Tuesday — a day after President Donald Trump imposed a blockade on the strategic oil pipeline.

Two ships, Christianna and Elpis, stopped at Iranian ports in defiance of the blockade, The New York Post reported, citing MarineTraffic data.

Two other ships, the tankers Rich Starry and Murlikishan, passed through the strait overnight, according to The Post, adding that the Rich Starry is owned by a Chinese shipping company.

The U.S. Central Command, however, said that no ships have crossed the strait since the blockade began, and six were forced to turn around.

“More than 10,000 U.S. Sailors, Marines, and Airmen along with over a dozen warships and dozens of aircraft are executing the mission to blockade ships entering and departing Iranian ports,” CENTCOM said in a statement. “During the first 24 hours, no ships made it past the U.S. blockade and 6 merchant vessels complied with direction from U.S. forces to turn around to re-enter an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman.”

The statement went on: “The blockade is being enforced impartially against vessels of all nations entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas, including all Iranian ports on the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. U.S. forces are supporting freedom of navigation for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz to and from non-Iranian ports.”

On Monday, Trump threatened to blow up any Iranian ships attempting to violate the blockade, saying any boats that try it will be “ELIMINATED” in the same way his administration attacked suspected drug-running boats from South America.

Trump shared the warning in a post on Truth Social. It came 23 minutes after the blockade went into effect at 10 a.m. Monday.

“Iran’s Navy is laying at the bottom of the sea, completely obliterated – 158 ships. What we have not hit are their small number of, what they call, ‘fast attack ships,’ because we did not consider them much of a threat,” Trump posted. “Warning: If any of these ships come anywhere close to our BLOCKADE, they will be immediately ELIMINATED, using the same system of kill that we use against the drug dealers on boats at Sea.”

Say What Now?

Interesting that shortly after Melania made her public statement about Epstein and Maxwell, Trump posted a video of a woman being murdered.

Make of that what you will.

Robert Arnold

He's mad. And righteously so.

If there was a god,

I'd pray for peace.

but since there isn't,

I guess I'll have to work for it.

Our #EpsteinPOTUS

The prick in the White House is teasing this shit like it's the next episode of some totally fucked up reality TV show. And he knows his ratings are in the dumper, so all he can think of is to pimp the drama.

So fucking sick of that fucking fuck.

Burn down the #EpsteinPOTUS

#A25

Today's Belle

China sees an opportunity to fill the void being created by Trump's latest grandiose fuck up.

Today's Belle

When Republicans are in charge, you have to know government isn't going to work - at least it's not going to work for the 95% of us who have to worry about paying the mortgage and financing silly little incidentals like food and gas and the orthodontist.

These guys could fuck up a 1-car parade, and that's what their whole project is about - they're doing it on purpose.

But then, along comes Donald - the ultimate Mr Fuckup - who's going to fuck up the fuck up.

Somebody must have put a bug in his ear about 2nd-term presidents turning to foreign policy, so that fuckin' idiot decided to go out and conquer the middle east - probably at the behest of Putin and the other players in the Dirty Fuels Cartel.

And what do you and I get? 4-dollar gas, more upward pressure on food prices, and a growing probability that we're going to tip into a really nasty recession this winter.

So much winning.

And right now, it all stems from the Douchebag-In-Chief needing to burn the joint down in order to satisfy his ego, and hide his crimes.

Here's Belle with a rundown on the "war plans".

BTW - seems like now would be a good time to pivot away from oil, and start a concerted effort to spin up wind and solar and other alternatives. But, oops - it seems Republicans have shit-canned all the incentives and subsidies for green energy.

Ya don't think there might be a connection there, do ya?

On 3 Porcupines

• The invader has to overwhelm and dominate. The defender need only survive.
• The invader loses by not winning completely. The defender wins by not losing.

Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is a type of war between belligerents whose relative military power, strategy or tactics differ significantly. This type of warfare often involves insurgents, terrorist groups, or resistance militias operating within territory mostly controlled by the superior force.

Trump's War

When you start a fight by kicking a hornet's nest, the deciding vote on when the fight is over belongs to the hornets.

(search: us military bases hit in middle east)

As of late March 2026, Iranian missile and drone strikes have severely damaged multiple U.S. military bases across the Middle East, rendering 13 locations "all but uninhabitable". Major, confirmed strikes occurred in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, forcing personnel to relocate to temporary sites. 

Key Details of Strikes (March 2026):

• Destruction Level: Reports indicate nearly 13 bases have been heavily impacted, with satellite imagery showing massive craters and destroyed buildings at several locations.

Impacted Bases:

• Kuwait: Port Shuaiba (destroyed tactical center), Ali Al Salem Air Base, and Camp Buehring suffered significant damage, with India Today reporting six U.S. service members killed at Port Shuaiba.

• Qatar: Al Udeid Air Base (largest in the region) had critical early-warning radar systems damaged.

• Bahrain: BBC reports the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters saw a drone strike damage communication radomes.

• Saudi Arabia: Prince Sultan Air Base sustained damage to aircraft-related facilities and equipment.

• Jordan: A critical BBC reports the AN/TPY-2 radar system was targeted.

Operational Impact:

The strikes, estimated at $800 million in damage, have forced a shift to "remote" operations, with personnel relocating to hotels and non-traditional facilities. 

These attacks are part of a direct, intense retaliation from Iran following U.S.-Israeli strikes in late February 2026

Iranian strikes on bases used by US caused $800m in damage, new analysis shows
7 days ago

Iranian strikes on military bases used by the US in the Middle East caused about $800m (£600m) in damage in the first two weeks of the war, a new analysis shows.

Much of the damage was caused in initial retaliatory strikes by Iran in the week after the US and Israel launched the war, according to a report by the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) and an analysis by the BBC.

The full extent of the damage caused by Iranian strikes on US assets in the region is not clear.

But the $800m in estimated damage to US military infrastructure - a figure that's higher than has been previously reported - offers a picture of the steep costs to the US as the conflict drags on.

"The damage to US bases in the region has been underreported," said Mark Cancian, a CSIS senior adviser and co-author of the think tank study. "Although that appears to be extensive, the full amount won't be known until more information is available."

In response to a request for comment, the US Department of Defense referred the BBC to US Central Command, which is leading the war. Officials there declined to comment.

Iran's retaliatory strikes targeted US air-defence and satellite-communication systems, among other assets, in Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and other countries across the Middle East.

A significant portion of damage was caused by a strike on a US radar for a Thaad missile defence system at an air base in Jordan.

The AN/TPY-2 radar system costs approximately $485m according to a CSIS review of defence department budget documents. The air-defence systems are used for the long-range interception of ballistic missiles.

Strikes by Iran caused an additional $310m in estimated damage to buildings, facilities and other infrastructure on US bases and military bases used by American forces in the region.

Iran also has struck at least three air bases more than once, according to an analysis of satellite imagery by BBC Verify. The repeat strikes underscore Iran's efforts to target specific US assets. Russia has reportedly shared intelligence with Tehran on American military forces in the region.

Satellite imagery shows the three air bases - Ali Al-Salim base in Kuwait, Al-Udeid in Qatar and Prince Sultan in Saudi Arabia - with fresh damage appearing during different phases of the conflict.

The US has also lost 13 military service members since President Donald Trump joined Israel in launching the attacks on Iran on 28 February.

The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (Hrana) estimates the overall death toll has reached nearly 3,200, including 1,400 civilians.

Trump has said the US is on track to achieve his goals of destroying Iran's nuclear program, degrading its conventional military power, and ending the regime's support for proxy groups in the region.

"We're doing extremely well in Iran," Trump said at a White House event on Friday.

But the war has rattled the global economy with the near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and uncertainty over the duration of the conflict and whether Trump will deploy ground troops.

Analysis of satellite imagery has been hampered by restrictions imposed by major US-based providers on the release of the imagery.

But it is possible to discern certain patterns in Iran's retaliatory action against US military interests in the region.

Radar and satellite systems have been a focus from the start, when Iranian strikes hit a US naval base in Bahrain. They function as the eyes and ears of modern military operations.

Satellite imagery most notably showed the destruction of two radomes - protective enclosures for such sensitive equipment. It is highly probable the systems themselves were damaged, although it is not possible to gauge the extent.

Radar sites were hit at Camp Arifjan, a US military facility in Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia's Prince Sultan Air Base, where US aircraft are located. Imagery of the latter shows smoke rising from a radar component for a Thaad air-defence system.

More extensive damage to Thaad systems is evident at US bases in the UAE and Jordan. It's unclear what the cost of that damage was. The degradation of these systems reportedly led the US to redeploy Thaad components from South Korea to the Middle East.

The damage from Iran's retaliatory strikes account for a fraction of the overall costs to the US for the war.

Defense department officials reportedly briefed members of Congress that the first six days of the war had cost $11.3bn. The first 12 days cost 16.5bn, according to CSIS.

The Pentagon is asking for another $200bn in funding for the war. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday that the figure "could move."

"It takes money to kill bad guys," Hegseth said.

The Diss Track

RogueGeneral1293

Heather Delaney Reese

Iran Clusterfuck

Some things:

• As someone who's been known to attempt an inappropriate joke at an inappropriate time, I get the Huckabee thing - but damn, son - I never did that shit
• "...do no rely on the US government..." has become the entire world's motto
• If the reporting on what you're doing is making you look bad, maybe you should be doing something that won't make you look bad when somebody reports on it

Iran

The idea that we can topple a government with low-risk airstrikes is pretty dumb.

The idea that if we knock off the Irani government, killing 80 school girls in the process (oops), and then expect the new government to get all chummy with us - well that's just fuckin' stupid.

It's like thinking that once the Russians lose in Ukraine, we can expect Ukrainians to embrace the Russians even though they've outright murdered Ukrainian civilians for years - It's just really really really fuckin' stupid.

And BTW, Trump has blustered, "We can't allow a country to raise up terrorist groups".

So maybe we should stop creating those countries, and giving them reason to do it. We've been fucking with Iran for 75 years. Stop doin' that, you stoopid fuck.

We are not distracted