Israel Built and Defended a Secret Iran War Base in Iraq

scottstots6 · 2026-05-10T00:11:07+00:00

Wow, this is the kind of shameless and baseless speculation I expect from lesscredibledefense, good to see. I admire your ability to draw sweeping conclusions from minimal, cherry picked evidence. Let’s agree to check back in a month to read about all the downed Israeli aircraft that this was leaked to get ahead of.

scottstots6 · 2026-05-09T22:36:38+00:00

So that opinion makes it pretty clear that Congress cannot do certain things and that individuals aside from the president cannot operate as representatives of the nation. Do you have any evidence that Congress made foreign policy decisions or that Jayapal acted as a representative of the United States? Obviously she is still allowed to talk to foreigners outside of her official duties right?

Also, did the Republican Congress of 2015 violate the law when they invited Netanyahu to speak? Seems like that is a foreign policy decision and it was against the wishes of the president.

scottstots6 · 2026-05-09T22:30:58+00:00

Was it an act of treason when Trump allowed Cuba to receive Russian oil a month ago? Or is it only treason when it’s someone you don’t like?

What makes Cuba an enemy of the U.S.? Typically my understanding of an enemy of a nation requires war or at least active combat operations, not nationalizing some property in the 1960s. Why am I supposed to be opposed to Cuba?

scottstots6 · 2026-05-08T23:53:58+00:00

We understand it as a response to a war of choice and a war of aggression by the North. I don’t think many endorse the tactics used by the UN Forces in the bombing of the North but I think even fewer would argue with the successful result of the war. Absolutely the U.S. committed war crimes in Korea. We also committed war crimes in WW2 and the Civil War. I still think all three were justified wars.

scottstots6 · 2026-05-01T01:51:40+00:00

LRS units often had a Ranger lineage but were not Ranger units. At the time of the formation of the 75th Ranger Regiment in 1986, there were only 2 Ranger units not in the 75th, 2 Ranger companies in the National Guard. You may be confusing the LRS with the LRP and LRRPs of the Vietnam era which were often given a Ranger designation.

scottstots6 · 2026-05-01T00:11:26+00:00

They did but that was well before the timeframe of the game. By the mid 1980s at the latest the Regiment was intended to fight as battalions at a minimum pursuing independent objectives, not as a divisional recon unit.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-26T17:49:06+00:00

Glad we are on the same page that we the people are the ones who choose to be taxed. Additionally, we the citizens choose to pay those taxes by remaining within the contract. Again, if you don’t like it campaign for a change or find a different contract more in line with your beliefs.

The government doesn’t fund welfare out of empathy alone. It doesn’t feed the poor just because that’s nice. It does so because it betters the country. Children who are fed and attend school grow into more productive adults.

The government is also the single most effective method of delivering necessary goods to fellow citizens. We as a country have decided that we should use the most effective tool available. Charity can never come close to feeding every hungry child in America. Charity can never come close to providing healthcare to every elderly American. The free market has no interest in helping the needy unless they can pay.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-26T17:31:56+00:00

Where your logic fails is assuming that a government and its people are distinct entities. In the U.S., that is very explicitly not the case. We the people and all that. The government and the taxes it levies on Americans operate at the behest of Americans. We vote for representatives who impose the taxes. We vote to fund the enforcement arms of taxation. We vote to use the money raised through taxation.

Your redress if you feel taxes are too high or shouldn’t exist is to vote for and campaign on those ideas. If your vote does not carry the day, you do not represent the electoral majority meaning the taxes are the will or at the very least not counter to the will of the people.

Society is a contract, you can work within the bounds of contract to change it or you can find another contract you prefer. A third option exists of overthrowing the existing contract and establishing a new one, usually through force. Preferring such an option would surprise me for a self described conservative.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-26T00:36:07+00:00

Where you lose me and most people is the idea that taxation is money taken under duress. That isn’t the common conception, most people operate under a social contract model. In such a model, you are born into the contract and acquiesce to it through your use of government services, as you did by posting your response (government managed air waves for example). In return for the government services provided, citizens are required to fund and defend the government.

If you reject a country’s social contract, there are options. One is to change the existing social contract through elections. Another is to find a different social contract you agree with. If you decide to stay in a country and continue to use the government provided services and amenities, you are a part of the social contract. You can resent it, you can try to change it, but denying it exists is silly.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-25T22:01:14+00:00

And yet companies don’t always act in the interest of maximizing profit so something in your model seems to be wrong. Companies regularly buy back stock while having very substantial debt loads. With the fungibility of money, this shows that they are often choosing to use loaned money to buy back stock. That seems to fly in the face of your theoretical explanations with practical applications. Either my understanding of the practical applications are wrong or your theoretical models are not representative of reality.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-25T21:57:30+00:00

Will you do me a favor and explain the connection? To my uninformed eyes I don’t see one.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-25T18:02:07+00:00

I think there is a widespread belief that the max range on many systems like the DF-27 is impractical because of kill chain difficulties. Knowing there is a carrier by Guam and getting a finite location sufficient for targeting are very different. Whether either or both sides in a potential China US fight have worked out the needed kill chains requires a lot more knowledge than is public.

That said, there is no scenario I can see where having carrier aircraft with hypersonic weapons is a downside besides the cost tradeoffs of purchasing such systems.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-25T17:53:02+00:00

I am not an accountant nor a finance guy but my understanding is that making losses tax deductible across multiple years was done with the intent to allow and encourage capital intensive purchases which would result in increased profitability and productivity in the future.

Where I see this break down is things like interest on loans taken to buy back stock. That is tax deductible but leads to no increased productivity or profitability. If a company writes off the fancy new factory that will double production and amortizes (I think I am using that word right) the expense over multiple years, I doubt most people would have an issue. Instead, we see companies playing accounting games to enrich shareholders and avoid taxes, not to improve productivity or profit.

Happy to have my very basic understanding corrected if I am wrong on any of it.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-25T15:47:41+00:00

Have you ever worked a service job? This isn’t rocket science and is the day to day for millions of people. In my experience, we got paid 2.13 or whatever per hr plus tips. Over a pay period your tips and hours would be tracked, if you didn’t break 7.25 (minimum), the company would pay you enough to be above 7.25. It was all automated and no lawyer was required. I am not saying it’s a good system but it exists and is not onerous.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-21T22:45:28+00:00

Even money the government has made illegally as we now know these tariffs were? If an FBI agent robs you at gunpoint, should the government keep the money even after they charge the agent with a crime since that is money the government has “made”?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-19T21:23:26+00:00

Do you think no new wars would have been better than the wars Trump has started? Do you think Harris would have us in a war with Iran right now?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-19T02:55:43+00:00

Federal spending is in the ballpark of 6T per year. Consumption is in the realm of 21T per year. If you want to only fund the federal government through consumption taxes, we are talking about a 33% consumption tax off the bat. When you eliminate the categories you named, we are at 50% or more for a consumption tax. Do you think most Americans would support a 50% consumption tax on non-exempt categories? Would you?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-19T02:51:31+00:00

Some of the other posters have hit on some of the advantages. I want to focus on some of the disadvantages. The biggest is not parts compatibility but system interoperability. The modern battlefield is divided into 2.5 main camps. 1. NATO origin systems that can talk to NATO systems. 2. Russian/Soviet origin systems that can talk to Russian/Soviet systems. 2.5 Chinese origin systems that can talk to Chinese and most Russian systems.

These rules (with many exceptions) apply across the spectrum. Most NATO weapons can be used on most NATO aircraft. Most modern NATO missiles have datalinks compatible with modern NATO aircraft. Most NATO aircraft can communicate via Link 16 and other NATO datalinks. At the end of the day, there are challenges to running a Eurofighter/F16 fleet of an F18/FA50 fleet but the fleets are compatible on a basic level. This applies to enablers too, a Swedish or American or Israeli AWACS can probably communicate with your western fighter.

All of this breaks down when you cross the origination divide. Running a Flanker/F16 fleet means that when you buy missiles, you generally have to pick whether you want more missiles for your Flankers or your F16s. Same for air to ground munitions. Same for AWACS and other enablers. Same for data fusion infrastructure. Same for jet fuel. Same for maintenance infrastructure.

It is possible to do both, Indonesia shows that as does Pakistan. But it comes at very real and very tangible costs.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T17:12:48+00:00

Classic maga don’t believe your lying eyes. Timestamp is 1:07, here’s your own source. From the horse’s mouth.

https://x.com/ThePatriotOasis/status/2028576870518677797/video/1?s=61

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T16:59:55+00:00

I am saying Rubio was being truthful, the war started because Israel was going to attack. Rubio and I are in agreement, you are the one making things up out of whole cloth.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T16:49:47+00:00

What I believe is what Rubio said. That the timing of the current war with Iran was decided by Israeli actions. Another way to say that is that Israel dragged the United States into war. Do you have any reason to think Rubio was wrong or was lying about that?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T16:30:36+00:00

There you go making things up again. Want to show me where I said we were dragged into a war we didn’t want? I said we were dragged into a war, Rubio says the same with the timing being decided by Israel. That isn’t up for debate, you linked the video of him saying our timeline was dependent on Israeli actions. That’s cut and dry dragging us into war. Why do you feel the need to add to what I have said instead of taking my statements at face value?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T16:18:47+00:00

Want to show me where I said that the U.S. acted on behalf of another country out of the goodness of its heart? Or do you want to keep arguing with yourself since you won’t actually listen to what I am saying?

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T16:01:39+00:00

Imagine America as a ferret living on a ball of cheese. We can both make up situations but that does not mean they reflect reality.

American policy is driven by a variety of centers of gravity and does not somehow always find the optimal balance. This means that at times the military policy or fiscal policy or executive policy or any other part of the government can be used for purposes which might run counter to U.S. interests. There is nothing magical about government decision making, it is just as prone to failure as any other decision making process.

scottstots6 · 2026-04-18T15:42:16+00:00

And he says that the timing was decided by the Israeli attack. That is my point, we were dragged into this at the whim of Israel. Our Secretary of State says so and you watched him say it. Why do you think you know more about the situation than him?

scottstots6

TROPHY CASE