there is perception and then there is reality. You can think something as much as you want, but when you actually see the facts reality will change your perception or reaffirm it. there also is what politicians say versus what they do, if they say they will do A A A and then do B B B what they do isn't what they said they would do.
Cybersecurity - particularly protecting the United States from foreign threat actors, especially those who are state-sponsored - isn’t on typical polls. The Trump administration has put the US at a disadvantage in its efforts to mitigate cybercrimes, cyber espionage, and other cyber-enabled attacks by criminal and state (sponsored) actors. We live in a borderless world, where some of the most serious threats can’t be mitigated by walls or deportations. See https://interisle.substack.com/p/death-by-1000-paper-cuts-how-foreign
In today's Politico - What explains it? Ryan Girdusky , a Republican political consultant with ties to VP JD Vance , put it to Playbook succinctly: “No one gives a fuck about a few bombs so long as we don’t send in ground troops.”
You make a good point. When I was teaching the poem "Eighth Air Force" in a literature class, a poem about the Army Air Corp group in World War II, I found that I had to explain to my students that the Eighth Air Force had a 50% casualty rate. They assumed, based on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that pilots and air crews never get hurt. Iran has more deadly weapons than Iraq had. The reality of such a war will be higher American casualties, not to mention loss of planes.
Interesting report. I do not think our current president cares much about public opinion. The owners of major media will spin all stories to support him out of loyalty or fear. The decision will hinge on how it effects his personal wealth or persona.
In deciding whether Republicans are isolationists are not, we might do well to leave the Iran-Israel conflict out. This case may be exceptional due to Republican Evangelicals’ support for Israel. Would the answer be the same if, for example, Republicans’ opinions were only considered with regard to Ukraine and Taiwan?
I appreciate having an empirical basis for hoping after all we may not be headed to war with Iran, which would be endless and asymetric and unwinnable. Thanks for all you do to literally try to rationalize our world.
This poll shows that Trump voters are not serious people. How can someone vote for Trump because of Biden's "Forever Wars," then change course in five months to support invading Iran. Or worse?
Can't help but wonder how many people understand that the alleged reason for this in the first place is because *Trump* pulled us out of a deal that basically prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons in the first place.
This is not a complicated issue. If the Trump regime bombs Iran, the Iranian regime will not negotiate, and the bombs may or may not temporarily delay the Iranians in building a bomb. But, you can bet that the uranium that has already been enriched has already been moved, along with spare parts and machinery to build centrifuges, so the bombing would accomplish little.
If, instead, the Iranians were pressured into choosing between being bombed and negotiating, a competent president would get his negotiations. These could lead to a return to the old Joint Plan of Action, allowing all nuclear sites to be inspected and emptied, including the ones we currently do not know about.
But, we're not dealing with a competent president. We're dealing with Trump, who is proven to have no skills in negotiating but massive skills in making a mess of things, so we'll see what happens.
So, instead of sticking with the deal and holding back Iran developing a nuclear weapon by 10-15 years, he decided to just drop out of the deal, allowing Iran to pick up their nuclear weapon's program immediately.
Kudos on the success you are finding here! Onwards!
there is perception and then there is reality. You can think something as much as you want, but when you actually see the facts reality will change your perception or reaffirm it. there also is what politicians say versus what they do, if they say they will do A A A and then do B B B what they do isn't what they said they would do.
Cybersecurity - particularly protecting the United States from foreign threat actors, especially those who are state-sponsored - isn’t on typical polls. The Trump administration has put the US at a disadvantage in its efforts to mitigate cybercrimes, cyber espionage, and other cyber-enabled attacks by criminal and state (sponsored) actors. We live in a borderless world, where some of the most serious threats can’t be mitigated by walls or deportations. See https://interisle.substack.com/p/death-by-1000-paper-cuts-how-foreign
In today's Politico - What explains it? Ryan Girdusky , a Republican political consultant with ties to VP JD Vance , put it to Playbook succinctly: “No one gives a fuck about a few bombs so long as we don’t send in ground troops.”
You make a good point. When I was teaching the poem "Eighth Air Force" in a literature class, a poem about the Army Air Corp group in World War II, I found that I had to explain to my students that the Eighth Air Force had a 50% casualty rate. They assumed, based on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that pilots and air crews never get hurt. Iran has more deadly weapons than Iraq had. The reality of such a war will be higher American casualties, not to mention loss of planes.
Interesting report. I do not think our current president cares much about public opinion. The owners of major media will spin all stories to support him out of loyalty or fear. The decision will hinge on how it effects his personal wealth or persona.
Kudos on the accomplishments and recognition! Well deserved! FANTASTIC writing taking place for sure! :)
In deciding whether Republicans are isolationists are not, we might do well to leave the Iran-Israel conflict out. This case may be exceptional due to Republican Evangelicals’ support for Israel. Would the answer be the same if, for example, Republicans’ opinions were only considered with regard to Ukraine and Taiwan?
Your work estimating the No Kings turnout was excellent. Congratulations on the recognitions and milestone, they're well deserved.
I appreciate having an empirical basis for hoping after all we may not be headed to war with Iran, which would be endless and asymetric and unwinnable. Thanks for all you do to literally try to rationalize our world.
This poll shows that Trump voters are not serious people. How can someone vote for Trump because of Biden's "Forever Wars," then change course in five months to support invading Iran. Or worse?
Can't help but wonder how many people understand that the alleged reason for this in the first place is because *Trump* pulled us out of a deal that basically prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons in the first place.
Trump said the original deal was only for 10-15 years, too short.
Estimates indicate that if the US were to drop a 30,000-pound bunker buster, it would set back Iran's nuclear program by approximately 4 to 6 years.
This is not a complicated issue. If the Trump regime bombs Iran, the Iranian regime will not negotiate, and the bombs may or may not temporarily delay the Iranians in building a bomb. But, you can bet that the uranium that has already been enriched has already been moved, along with spare parts and machinery to build centrifuges, so the bombing would accomplish little.
If, instead, the Iranians were pressured into choosing between being bombed and negotiating, a competent president would get his negotiations. These could lead to a return to the old Joint Plan of Action, allowing all nuclear sites to be inspected and emptied, including the ones we currently do not know about.
But, we're not dealing with a competent president. We're dealing with Trump, who is proven to have no skills in negotiating but massive skills in making a mess of things, so we'll see what happens.
So, instead of sticking with the deal and holding back Iran developing a nuclear weapon by 10-15 years, he decided to just drop out of the deal, allowing Iran to pick up their nuclear weapon's program immediately.
"Art of the Deal" strikes again.
Except... Experts say the bunker buster will not reach the compound, so it would cause only a few months delay.