Image of the day

Captured by
John Greenlee

Before and after

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: James Lacey

June 23, 2025 04:15 AM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Richard Davis


Gee you think??  Its so funny to watch you get your panties in a twist at every move that Trump makes James.

Tell me something is that supposed to MEAN a damn thing that Trump didn't have anything to do with Planning and execution of the attacks?  

Are you fucking kidding me James?  This is something you came up with trying to denigrate the military action by saying the obvious that NO President would be involved in military operations as if he's doing the timing and coordination of a military operation? 

Do you think that Joe Biden would have something to do with any military operation around the globe?

How about Bill Clinton, or even George Bush?  Do you really think any of these guys did the planning and execution and the precise timing of any of their operations? 

Do you realize just how petulant and fucking ridiculous and stupid you sound James when you make such ignorant comments about Trump as you do continuously?  

Do you realize what a complete idiot you sound like pointing out facts like the above?

Tell me, do you think Barack Obama figured out the game plan when the Military specialists took out Osama Bin Laden??  

Are you really this absurd James?

Do you think that Obama personally coordinated with the men who took him down?  Do you think he was on the horn with the guys in the room that did that operation?  

You've made some foolish, ignorant, and yes, ASININE statements in the past, but this one takes the cake!  

No SHIT Sherlock.  Do you really think that any President would be involved in the planning and execution of this attack on the Iran sites?  

Umm.... EARTH to James.  That is why the military has those guys who are elevated in stature..... what do they call those guys again.....Hmmmm...... Oh yeah, they are called Generals and Colonels, and lt. colonels.

My God TDS is surely alive and well in your head...

And the rest of your posting is just more of your usual BS.  LOL tongue

Haha. Someone seems to be easily provoked these days. All that because I pointed out that Trump's competency ended at pulling the trigger on the action? And to think you have the gall to accuse anyone else of seething or of having anger issues.

June 23, 2025 02:03 PM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Richard Davis


Nothing provoked or angry at all James, just pointing out how your massive TDS is causing you to make moronic remarks as you did, urging that Trump wasn't involved in the very planning or coordinating of a military action himself.

And if your petulant response isn't the very best evidence of YOU being provoked by Trump having a massive success in Iran, then I don't know what evidence could be stronger.

That's why my response to you was NO SHIT Sherlock! 

Your's has to be one of the dumbest and most petulant assertions and implications ever made on this forum.

Simply put, your implication is STUPID, plain and simple as that because your statement implies that Presidents regularly engage in planning and coordination of military battles in real time.  

Of course they don't.  Did you think you had some sort of revelation there?  tongue

I'll reiterate if I haven't stated it before, what a naive and stupid assertion you make. 

Your very statement "well Trump didn't coordinate or plan the attack" implies that other Presidents regularly engage in the specifics of the actions on the ground or in the air.  That is what Generals are for in case you didn't understand how it works. smile   

I think it is pretty damned obvious that you are SO angry that Trump had such a great military success aimed at one of the US's biggest enemies that it caused you to lash out, and make a ridiculous false implication. 

I think you really need to speak with someone about your condition, because it is making you look like a fool.  smile

Haha. You spew all that and call me angry? Your lack of self-awareness is eclipsed only by your inability to be anything other than a Trump bootlicker.

June 23, 2025 02:57 PM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"Do you think that Joe Biden would have something to do with any military operation around the globe?"

You certainly did when you blamed him for the military action when the US left Afghanistan, something Trump would have done, too.

This is a good point, Rod, since as I recall Rich and many other right-wing MAGA types were blaming Biden for everything that went badly during the Afghanistan withdrawal, and also conveniently ignoring that Biden was simply honoring the troop withdrawal timeline that was brokered by, you guessed it, Trump under the DOHA agreement. And it's far too early to think that this military strike against Iran was wildly successful. Sure, we rolled back their program for a decade or so, maybe less. But we'd have to be pretty gullible to think that Iran didn't have a backup plan for Fordow. It's entirely possible they moved their stockpile to a new location and are currently enriching more uranium as fast as they can. And what are we to do in that case? Are we going to go back in and militarily strike Iran every decade or so, every time we think they have gotten a bit closer? Maybe, just maybe, the JCPOA agreement should have not been unilaterally withdrawn from by Trump in 2018 and we wouldn't be in this current situation. The IAEA was certifying that Iran was abiding by the deal, even as late as 2019. Iran didn't abandon the deal entirely until Trump ramped up his "maximum pressure," sanctions. European countries were willing to remain in the JCPOA, but Iran was not, and who can blame them after what must have felt like to them a betrayal? It's almost like Trump is not a great deal-maker and negotiator, but hey, at least we have the Gulf of America and Mount McKinley back.

June 23, 2025 04:18 PM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by James Brown
I want to change the topic a bit.  I have read on social media some otherwise rational people who simply can not approach this event without concluding Trump had entirely nefarious motivation.  One example is this:

"Make no mistake, Trump wants to start a war with Iran to increase his already near-total control over the federal government..."  For this person and others, everything Trump does is evil.  To fully support this absolute belief, these people must convince themselves that a precision military action, which most believe has prevented or significantly delayed Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, is just a pretext for Trump's actual and far more sinister motive.  I  am worried when otherwise sane people publish stuff showing they sincerely believe this operation was just a pretext to enhance what they "know" is Trump's end game of a monarchy/dictatorship. 

I suppose one could argue Trump's personality justifies and causes this sort of reaction.  I don't buy that angle.  Sometimes even Trump does the right thing and does it well.  I say this knowing that Trump is the greatest narcissist of our time and often speaks or acts with entirely self-serving motivation.   But not always, and not this time.  Why have some people lost the ability to recognize the rich complexity of politics, of Trump, of our diverse points of view?

It wasn't an atrocious decision by any means. We know publicly that Iran had increased its stockpile of enriched uranium far beyond the JCPOA limits, and that they were likely already enriching more uranium at Fordow, which is why it probably got six bunker busters dropped on it. We will never know what other intelligence prompted the action, but it's silly to think that Trump wants to start a war to distract from domestic issues. Unfortunately, we are simply in a dangerous and complicated timeline right now, and Trump bears some responsibility for our arrival here IMHO.

June 23, 2025 06:18 PM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by James Brown

This is rational, unlike some of the stuff I have seen on social media.  I can buy "some responsibility" "some" being "a little bit."  I also think Obama, Biden, Bill Clinton, Bush, and maybe even Jimmy Carter bear "some responsibility" for the current situation with Iran.  That said, I think the Iranian government bears the lion's share of responsibility.  Similarly, Putin, the Iranian leadership, and Hamas/Hezbollah bear far far far more responsibility than any US president for the dangerous and complicated timeline we live in right now. 

I bet we disagree on the following, but I am glad Trump and his team (rather than Biden/Harris) crafted our response to the knowledge that Iran had increased its stockpile of enriched uranium far beyond the JCPOA limits etc. etc.  

Pure speculation of course, but in my view this response, which I approve of obviously, took individual decisiveness, and I am not sure Harris would have made the right call.  Biden sadly lacked capacity to act decisively.  I absolutely would have trusted Bill Clinton or Obama with these decisions, lest you think I'm being overtly partisan...

If it wasn't for Trump, the JCPOA would still be in place, and Iran would most likely be at or less than the amount of enriched uranium allowed by that agreement. Anyone who cares about the Iranian nuke issue owes it to themselves to read up at least a little bit on the JCPOA and understand how intrusive and comprehensive the inspection process was. The IAEA had oversight over Iran's entire nuclear apparatus, from its supply chain to its procurement, and conducted continuous monitoring of Fordow and other sites via cameras and other advanced surveillance equipment. Cheating under the JCPOA would have been almost impossible, and it had the backing of China, Russia, Germany, the EU, the UK, and the US until Trump. However, he somehow knew better than anyone else that it was a "bad deal" and withdrew the US from it unilaterally. So, sorry, in my estimation, Trump has more than just a little bit of responsibility for our current timeline, but, of course, the Iranians are ultimately mostly to blame given their state sponsorship of terrorism and many other things that make them a bad actor that can never become part of the nuclear club as long as we can prevent it.

June 23, 2025 06:25 PM Forum: Politics

F*** Iran and F*** their Ayatollahs.

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

The only reasonable response is to not respond at all and to ignore you altogether.

Rich is unpredictable in the sense that you never know what nonsense will prompt him to give way to an emotional outburst laced with anger. He's been AWOL for weeks, but suddenly, anyone who expresses even the tiniest amount of doubt in Trump's actions against Iran is worthy of his full unchecked outbursts. For the most part, I simply ignore him when he's like this; there is no point in engaging with him when he's being his version of normal, and doing so now would genuinely be a gullible fool's errand.

June 23, 2025 07:53 PM Forum: Politics

F*** Iran and F*** their Ayatollahs.

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

All I did was post link from Fox News and commented on it. You on the other hand..........

Did Davis just tell you with a straight face that, "Obviously politics dictates every thought you have!" Oh my! Every time I think he can't be less self-aware, he rises to the challenge and proves me wrong.

June 23, 2025 09:55 PM Forum: Politics

F*** Iran and F*** their Ayatollahs.

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

Since you bring it up I wouldn't doubt he made his decision to bomb Iran in order to prove the TACO thing is wrong.

Haha, instead of "Not the puppet!" now it's "Not the TACO!"

June 23, 2025 09:58 PM Forum: Politics

F*** Iran and F*** their Ayatollahs.

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

I didn't say I supported anything and everything some so-called (by you) unnamed "leftist leadership" has to say or do.

You however, selectively target anything and everyone that you perceive to be "leftist" and you do so consistently so the only one that really gives, in your words, "2 shits" about what someone says is you and that makes you a hypocrite...

Wow! Rich is on one of his benders, isn't he? He hasn't reached legendary status, but he's swinging for the bleachers, that's for sure. Did he tell you with a straight face that he's not a mouthpiece for the far-right republican party and he doesn't defend everything they do? Especially Trump? Oh my!

June 23, 2025 11:04 PM Forum: Politics

It's Always "In ABOUT TWO WEEKS"

Posted By James Lacey

Originally Posted by James Brown

Until Iran unilaterally stopped the inspections.  Even though the IAEA plus China, Russia, Germany, the EU, and the UK were still on board.

I think it is naive to believe Iran's subsequent behavior would have been meaningfully different if Trump had stayed in the JCPOA.  I believe Iran always intended to run roughshod over its JCPOA commitments by continuously and actively pursuing a weapon.  This is exactly what they have done.

However, one of the reasons they abandoned the JCPOA, despite other countries (including France) still being on board, was due to Trump's "maximum pressure" sanctions that he implemented after unilaterally withdrawing from the agreement. Let me be crystal clear. I'm not defending Iran, but I think the JCPOA was our best option at the time, and even after the US abandoned it, other countries, like France, Germany, and the UK, continued to try to make it work. So, they thought it was the best option at the time as well. Also, Iran had around 150kg of 30% enriched uranium in 2018. Now they have more than 900 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, and we currently have no idea where it's at.

Like you, I don't trust Iran's leadership one bit, but I still believe abandoning the JCPOA was a bad decision that helped lead us to our current timeline. Of course, these kinds of what-ifs are never completely knowable, so we will merely have to agree to disagree at this point.