POTUS has extended the pause on attacking power supply infrastructure on the grounds that “the talks are going very well”.
(Whatever that means).
Obviously not a pause on all hostilities but it’s something.
IMO they just aren't ready is all. Their welcome committee is MIA. Yesterday there was a report of arrest of a CIA and Mossad cell in Chabahar, Baluchistan. Many weapons, explosives and several Starlink units were seized.
Chabahar and nearby Konarak have two ports and an airport and a ready made ground insurgency population. After this arrest I feel strongly that this is the intended landing site.
I guess the alternatives are TACO as Arethosemyfeet suggested, or “time to get ready” as you suggest.
I suppose the middle ground would be caused by Iran blinking? That doesn’t seem very likely but there may be more moderate voices than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, given the levels of degradation, urging at least a try to get some ceasefire?
It doesn’t seem that “foggy” in Iran, despite Trump’s assertions, but you never know. The Gulf States may be having some significant influence behind the scenes. I’m sure they don’t want attacks on desalination for example.
I suppose the middle ground would be caused by Iran blinking? That doesn’t seem very likely but there may be more moderate voices than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, given the levels of degradation, urging at least a try to get some ceasefire?
We can hope for the best but I feel it's also good to be prepared for the worst.
The UK government, and others, used to issue booklets on how to build a bomb shelter. That's preparing for the worst, but I'm not sure it was ever sensible.
I don’t recommend it. It’s a large investment, both financially and emotionally , for a small risk.
Mental preparedness is another matter. “If the worst comes to the worst” is an encouragement to avoid complacency.
I’m a Tom Lehrer fan myself. “If the world becomes uranious we will all go simultaneous”. Maybe not? But I live near enough to a number of US airforce bases.
‘You will all go directly to your respective Valhallas
Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars”.
Well, we survived that angst despite signs at the times that we might not.
But I think you read AFF correctly. Though in the worst possible circumstances, from her perspective, either eternity or another chance will follow. Which is kind of comforting.
‘You will all go directly to your respective Valhallas
Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars”.
Well, we survived that angst despite signs at the times that we might not.
But I think you read AFF correctly. Though in the worst possible circumstances, from her perspective, either eternity or another chance will follow. Which is kind of comforting.
Well I did mean mental preparedness in the first instance, but if you have a practical plan for what you imagine the worst case scenario then that's up to your budget and discretion of course.
I personally don't plan on suffering through my own imagined worst case scenario. I have a plan but it doesn't involve the survival of this iteration of my earth suit.
Either way, I have made my decision and it's a long way from today to what I imagine is the worst case so I'm still planning to get my permanent Spanish residency in May.
There is, I hear, a fear that Trump - currently being outplayed by the resilient Iranians - may choose to deploy a nuclear weapon.
That, of course, would up the ante dramatically. Is it likely, or are there still enough trolls (in his entourage) with functioning brain cells to dissuade him from the ultimate madness?
It's also a sobering thought that the US is the only country (as far as we know) to have used nuclear weapons against civilians...
If a nuclear explosion occurs in Iran, the fallout will presumably go east and damage Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and maybe beyond that. Would any of that bother Trump?
If a nuclear explosion occurs in Iran, the fallout will presumably go east and damage Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and maybe beyond that. Would any of that bother Trump?
If a nuclear explosion occurs in Iran, the fallout will presumably go east and damage Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and maybe beyond that. Would any of that bother Trump?
Probably not, and the first strike, at least, might be of 'limited' power...what could follow, of course, doesn't bear thinking about.
Looks like Trump is waging war based on how the stock and oil markets are doing. He threatens to take out the power plants in Iran, the stock market tanks and oil markets soar. He then backs off extending a pause for up to ten days. It financial markets rally and oil prices drop.
Had the weekly coffee break with my Lebanese friend today. I've never seen him in such a rage. His hatred for Netanyahu and the US government - which he considers to be one and the same - is breathtaking. Keeping up my side of the conversation isn't easy.
Had the weekly coffee break with my Lebanese friend today. I've never seen him in such a rage. His hatred for Netanyahu and the US government - which he considers to be one and the same - is breathtaking. Keeping up my side of the conversation isn't easy.
I forget who said it, but it was a general who had been in command in Afghanistan, and prior to that in Iraq. He said that in the Middle East if you kill two of the (enemy) you end up with ten more.
That said, I do not consider anyone in Lebanon or Iran my personal enemy.
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
Had the weekly coffee break with my Lebanese friend today. I've never seen him in such a rage. His hatred for Netanyahu and the US government - which he considers to be one and the same - is breathtaking. Keeping up my side of the conversation isn't easy.
Given that Israel has displaced about 1million Lebanese from their homes, and is talking about holding territory in South Lebanon (annexation is only when the same thing is done by enemies of the West) the anger is somewhat understandable.
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
That linked piece does not say the videos are being used to brief Trump.
Indeed, it does not. @Gramps49, if somewhere in the 11+ minute video embedded in that article it is stated that Trump is being briefed using these videos, could you please give us a time stamp for exactly where in the video that can be found?
Have you seen the war videos the White House is putting out? Here is one sample. The hese are the videos they are using to brief Trump on what is happening over there.
That linked piece does not say the videos are being used to brief Trump.
Indeed, it does not. @Gramps49, if somewhere in the 11+ minute video embedded in that article it is stated that Trump is being briefed using these videos, could you please give us a time stamp for exactly where in the video that can be found?
Sorry, I was in a hurry to get to a NO KINGS demonstration. Let me submit this
O’Donnell has repeatedly claimed on air that Trump is receiving highly distorted, propagandistic, or artificially produced video briefings about the war.
Different segments frame it slightly differently, but they all point in the same direction.
Here are the key documented pieces:
1. O’Donnell said Trump is getting “two‑minute videos of missile strikes” instead of real intelligence
A March 25, 2026 segment reported that Trump’s daily briefings consist of short, sensationalized clips of explosions and battlefield footage, which critics called “war pornography.” https://topnewsshow.com/the-last-word-with-lawrence-odonnell-3-25-26/
2. He blasted Trump for posting AI‑generated or manipulated war videos
O’Donnell criticized Trump for releasing AI‑generated, Hollywood‑style propaganda videos that trivialize the war and mislead the public about what’s happening. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/lawrence-o-donnell-blasts-trump-190747781
So what’s the bottom line?
O’Donnell has said explicitly that Trump is being briefed with oversimplified, curated, sensationalized video briefings instead of real intelligence.
Even if you doubt Trump is being briefed with these videos, he is sharing AI‑generated or manipulated propaganda videos about the war.
These videos distort reality and mislead both Trump and the public.
O’Donnell has repeatedly claimed on air that Trump is receiving highly distorted, propagandistic, or artificially produced video briefings about the war.
Different segments frame it slightly differently, but they all point in the same direction.
Here are the key documented pieces:
1. O’Donnell said Trump is getting “two‑minute videos of missile strikes” instead of real intelligence
A March 25, 2026 segment reported that Trump’s daily briefings consist of short, sensationalized clips of explosions and battlefield footage, which critics called “war pornography.”
@Gramps49, that’s a 41-minute video. If you can’t do us the courtesy of pointing exactly to where in that video a claim that the AI videos you posted earlier are being shown to Trump as “briefings” is made, and the evidentiary basis upon which that claim is made, I see no reason to assume such a claim was made.
I do note that the one-sentence synopsis you did quite—“A March 25, 2026 segment reported that Trump’s daily briefings consist of short, sensationalized clips of explosions and battlefield footage, which critics called ‘war pornography.’”—seems to be talking about something other than the kinds of AI videos you posted earlier.
The bottom line is that if you’re going to claim that these AI videos are being used to brief Trump on what is happening in the war, rather than just that Trump complicit in their creation and use as propaganda, it would be helpful to cite a reliable source that backs that claim up. So far, you haven’t cited such a source. Instead, you appear to be reading more into the source you have cited than what that source actually says.
Even if you doubt Trump is being briefed with these videos, he is sharing AI‑generated or manipulated propaganda videos about the war.
Indeed. But the claim you made is that he’s being briefed using these AI-generated videos.
And I will stand by that claim. I invite you to watch MSNOW, in particular Lawrance O'Donnell's show, "The Last Word." He talks about it all the time.
Then it should be easy for you to identify at least one time he actually says it, instead of telling us to spend hours of our own time to see what he says.
What O’Donnell said about Trump being briefed with AI‑generated videos hasn’t been independently verified,. But there is a documented pattern that makes the claim plausible without needing to overstate it.
Here’s what we actually know:
1. Trump regularly consumes and reposts AI‑generated political videos.
TIME reported on Oct. 21, 2025 that he shared an AI‑generated “Trump Gaza” video imagining Gaza as a luxury resort.
2. He has posted AI‑generated videos depicting political opponents in fabricated scenarios.
Snopes confirmed on July 20, 2025 that he shared an AI‑generated video of Obama being arrested; the AI sequence begins around the 44‑second mark.
3. His administration uses AI‑generated imagery as part of its official communication strategy.
Poynter documented at least 36 AI‑generated posts from Trump’s Truth Social account and at least 14 from the White House X account, many depicting militaristic or foreign‑policy‑themed scenes.
None of this proves AI is being used inside classified briefings. But it does show:
AI‑generated video is already normalized in his information ecosystem.
He treats AI‑generated political content as meaningful.
His staff deploys AI imagery in contexts adjacent to national‑security messaging.
So while O’Donnell’s claim isn’t confirmed, it isn’t coming out of thin air either. It sits on top of a very real, very public pattern.
10 minutes into the 41 minute video and for the next 5 minutes or so, the detailed claims are made. I think they are asserted. I don’t think they are proven. I suspect eye witnesses to the production and use of these videos do exist but are unlikely to be prepared to identify themselves in public.
National Security standards and their enforcement seem likely to keep the lid on independent verification. I think it was Yes Prime Minister which asserted that the highest standard of secrecy was reserved for political embarrassment of those at the very top.
And the media will keep the lid on sources wishing to remain anonymous.
We may need another Ellsberg to smuggle out the evidence and make it public. Even then such a whistleblower would need to overcome fake news counter-assertions. Seeing is no longer believing.
I read this summary on the BBC about the corner trump has painted himself into.
No one is talking about a full-scale invasion of Iran, but it is possible the Americans will try to capture islands in the Gulf, including Kharg island, Iran's main oil terminal. That would involve a series of challenging and dangerous amphibious landings. That might even suit Iran, which wants to drag the Americans into a longer war of attrition. Iran calculates that the regime's capacity for pain is greater than Trump's.
Trump has found in Iran that he is coming up against the limits of his power. The Iranian regime has a different definition of victory and defeat than he does. For them, mere survival is victory.
I think mass protests and regime change could yet happen if trump escalates further - in America.
He relies on an inner circle of advisers who are in their jobs to back up his decisions and make them happen. Speaking truth to power is not, it seems, in their job description.
Launching a large scale attack on another nation is almost guaranteed to put back any popular uprising against the government, and any associated change in regime. It reinforces the messaging of the regime about enemies of the state, and casts those who would have supported a popular uprising into the status of traitor siding with the attackers against the nation. Plus, of course, though the people may be willing to suffer and even die in a popular uprising, to die under bombs from a nation claiming to be on your side is a different story.
If an uprising is underway then limited military action to support that might work, having air supremacy would (for example) provide options to take out drones and aircraft which might target the insurgency, or intercept reinforcements for the regime; or limited boots on ground to help coordinate uprising. Or, if the regime is embodied in a very small number of people, taking those people out might create a power vacuum into which a popular uprising could seize power - though, that vacuum would also allow other factions to take control, who may be no better than the old regime.
But, none of that's the case in Iran at the moment. Regime change in Iran is one of the things that the military operation was never going to achieve. It may yet result in regime change in Israel or the US.
10 minutes into the 41 minute video and for the next 5 minutes or so, the detailed claims are made. I think they are asserted. I don’t think they are proven.
Thank you for identifying a specific part of the 41-minute video to watch, @Barnabas62. I have watched the portions you suggested. I saw nowhere in it that O’Donnell claimed that Trump is being briefed using the AI-generated videos. What he says is:
Trump is being briefed using very short (two minutes or so) videos that compile US “successes” over the previous 48 hours, and these videos consist primarily of footage of “stuff blowing up”;
Trump has approved the production of AI-generated videos for propaganda purposes; and
Those AI-generated videos often include footage of “stuff blowing up” taken from the briefing videos.
So I see/hear nothing in what O’Donnell says that makes or supports a claim that Trump is being briefed using the AI-generated videos.
I think being clear about this matters because the reality of what Trump and his White House are doing is quite horrific and mind-boggling enough on its own. There is no need to manufacture additional reasons for outrage. Making unsubstantiated claims is straight out of the Trump playbook; it’s not a Trump tactic those of us opposed to Trump should adopt.
Yes, I thought that. There is a difference between misleading editing to please the boss and AI generating to deceive the boss. Whether the boss would like to use AI to deceive others is yet another matter!
I think being clear about this matters because the reality of what Trump and his White House are doing is quite horrific and mind-boggling enough on its own.
Spot on. When they go low, we go high. That’s the way to try to restore credibility in analytic processes.
I think being clear about this matters because the reality of what Trump and his White House are doing is quite horrific and mind-boggling enough on its own.
Spot on. When they go low, we go high. That’s the way to try to restore credibility in analytic processes.
Yes, while going low in the way they do undermines credibility.
I think some of the recent comments in the “Seeing is not believing” thread are apt here.
If Trump decides to insert boots on the ground, I highly doubt he will be able to have enough personnel to take Iran and hold it, especially without the help of other allies.
However, there are seven islands in the strait that could be key. CNN says " these islands – Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, Hengam, Qeshm, Larak and Hormuz – form what researchers at Sun Yat-sen University in Zhuhai, China, call Iran’s 'arch defense.'" (Report here.}
Iran calls them its stationary aircraft carriers. The Iranians have been bulking up their defenses on those islands. The US will have to take them out. But it will be tricky. Our ships may not be able to get close enough to them. Even if we could seize them, holding them would be tough. They would become sitting targets for all sorts of hell fire. I know I would not want to be on those islands.
Speaking of propaganda, has anybody seen the Lego Movie inspired AI video shorts released by Iranian state media? Pretty savage trolling, one even with a diss track.
Even the choice of Lego inspired characters is a subtle burn referring to Denmark and Greenland. A lot of layers.
Yes. His ego is worth much more than NATO or the (already dying) special relationship. Or indeed with most of Asia which depends on oil travelling through the Straits of Hormuz.
Comments
(Whatever that means).
Obviously not a pause on all hostilities but it’s something.
IMO they just aren't ready is all. Their welcome committee is MIA. Yesterday there was a report of arrest of a CIA and Mossad cell in Chabahar, Baluchistan. Many weapons, explosives and several Starlink units were seized.
Chabahar and nearby Konarak have two ports and an airport and a ready made ground insurgency population. After this arrest I feel strongly that this is the intended landing site.
AFF
I guess the alternatives are TACO as Arethosemyfeet suggested, or “time to get ready” as you suggest.
I suppose the middle ground would be caused by Iran blinking? That doesn’t seem very likely but there may be more moderate voices than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, given the levels of degradation, urging at least a try to get some ceasefire?
It doesn’t seem that “foggy” in Iran, despite Trump’s assertions, but you never know. The Gulf States may be having some significant influence behind the scenes. I’m sure they don’t want attacks on desalination for example.
We can hope for the best but I feel it's also good to be prepared for the worst.
AFF
Maybe this question is worth another thread.
Survivalism.
I don’t recommend it. It’s a large investment, both financially and emotionally , for a small risk.
Mental preparedness is another matter. “If the worst comes to the worst” is an encouragement to avoid complacency.
I’m a Tom Lehrer fan myself. “If the world becomes uranious we will all go simultaneous”. Maybe not? But I live near enough to a number of US airforce bases.
When you see that ICBM...
I think mental preparedness is probably what AFF means, and yes, that does seem sensible (not quite the right word, perhaps).
‘You will all go directly to your respective Valhallas
Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars”.
Well, we survived that angst despite signs at the times that we might not.
But I think you read AFF correctly. Though in the worst possible circumstances, from her perspective, either eternity or another chance will follow. Which is kind of comforting.
Well I did mean mental preparedness in the first instance, but if you have a practical plan for what you imagine the worst case scenario then that's up to your budget and discretion of course.
I personally don't plan on suffering through my own imagined worst case scenario. I have a plan but it doesn't involve the survival of this iteration of my earth suit.
Either way, I have made my decision and it's a long way from today to what I imagine is the worst case so I'm still planning to get my permanent Spanish residency in May.
Hoping for the best as we all do.
AFF
There is, I hear, a fear that Trump - currently being outplayed by the resilient Iranians - may choose to deploy a nuclear weapon.
That, of course, would up the ante dramatically. Is it likely, or are there still enough trolls (in his entourage) with functioning brain cells to dissuade him from the ultimate madness?
It's also a sobering thought that the US is the only country (as far as we know) to have used nuclear weapons against civilians...
Probably not, and the first strike, at least, might be of 'limited' power...what could follow, of course, doesn't bear thinking about.
What a way to prosecute a war.
What a way to prosecute profit from a war.
AFF
I forget who said it, but it was a general who had been in command in Afghanistan, and prior to that in Iraq. He said that in the Middle East if you kill two of the (enemy) you end up with ten more.
That said, I do not consider anyone in Lebanon or Iran my personal enemy.
Another examplehttps://x.com/i/status/2029657893155311927
Given that Israel has displaced about 1million Lebanese from their homes, and is talking about holding territory in South Lebanon (annexation is only when the same thing is done by enemies of the West) the anger is somewhat understandable.
Gladly: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lawrence-odonnell-despicable-donald-trump_n_69b3b4d1e4b01742cee2a9cd
Sorry, I was in a hurry to get to a NO KINGS demonstration. Let me submit this
O’Donnell has repeatedly claimed on air that Trump is receiving highly distorted, propagandistic, or artificially produced video briefings about the war.
Different segments frame it slightly differently, but they all point in the same direction.
Here are the key documented pieces:
1. O’Donnell said Trump is getting “two‑minute videos of missile strikes” instead of real intelligence
A March 25, 2026 segment reported that Trump’s daily briefings consist of short, sensationalized clips of explosions and battlefield footage, which critics called “war pornography.”
https://topnewsshow.com/the-last-word-with-lawrence-odonnell-3-25-26/
2. He blasted Trump for posting AI‑generated or manipulated war videos
O’Donnell criticized Trump for releasing AI‑generated, Hollywood‑style propaganda videos that trivialize the war and mislead the public about what’s happening.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/lawrence-o-donnell-blasts-trump-190747781
3. He described the videos as “not smart enough to be called childish” and created by “the sickest minds”
This was part of his argument that the videos Trump is using and sharing are not authentic representations of the conflict and are designed to manipulate perception.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/lawrence-o-donnell-sums-up-trump-s-war-propaganda-videos-with-damning-takedown/ar-AA1Yx56d
So what’s the bottom line?
O’Donnell has said explicitly that Trump is being briefed with oversimplified, curated, sensationalized video briefings instead of real intelligence.
Even if you doubt Trump is being briefed with these videos, he is sharing AI‑generated or manipulated propaganda videos about the war.
These videos distort reality and mislead both Trump and the public.
I do note that the one-sentence synopsis you did quite—“A March 25, 2026 segment reported that Trump’s daily briefings consist of short, sensationalized clips of explosions and battlefield footage, which critics called ‘war pornography.’”—seems to be talking about something other than the kinds of AI videos you posted earlier.
The bottom line is that if you’re going to claim that these AI videos are being used to brief Trump on what is happening in the war, rather than just that Trump complicit in their creation and use as propaganda, it would be helpful to cite a reliable source that backs that claim up. So far, you haven’t cited such a source. Instead, you appear to be reading more into the source you have cited than what that source actually says.
Indeed. But the claim you made is that he’s being briefed using these AI-generated videos.
What O’Donnell said about Trump being briefed with AI‑generated videos hasn’t been independently verified,. But there is a documented pattern that makes the claim plausible without needing to overstate it.
Here’s what we actually know:
1. Trump regularly consumes and reposts AI‑generated political videos.
TIME reported on Oct. 21, 2025 that he shared an AI‑generated “Trump Gaza” video imagining Gaza as a luxury resort.
2. He has posted AI‑generated videos depicting political opponents in fabricated scenarios.
Snopes confirmed on July 20, 2025 that he shared an AI‑generated video of Obama being arrested; the AI sequence begins around the 44‑second mark.
3. His administration uses AI‑generated imagery as part of its official communication strategy.
Poynter documented at least 36 AI‑generated posts from Trump’s Truth Social account and at least 14 from the White House X account, many depicting militaristic or foreign‑policy‑themed scenes.
None of this proves AI is being used inside classified briefings. But it does show:
AI‑generated video is already normalized in his information ecosystem.
He treats AI‑generated political content as meaningful.
His staff deploys AI imagery in contexts adjacent to national‑security messaging.
So while O’Donnell’s claim isn’t confirmed, it isn’t coming out of thin air either. It sits on top of a very real, very public pattern.
You might call it circumstantial evidence, yes?
I wouldn’t call it circumstantial evidence. I wouldn’t call it evidence at all. I’d call it speculation that cannot responsibly be presented as fact.
National Security standards and their enforcement seem likely to keep the lid on independent verification. I think it was Yes Prime Minister which asserted that the highest standard of secrecy was reserved for political embarrassment of those at the very top.
And the media will keep the lid on sources wishing to remain anonymous.
We may need another Ellsberg to smuggle out the evidence and make it public. Even then such a whistleblower would need to overcome fake news counter-assertions. Seeing is no longer believing.
I think mass protests and regime change could yet happen if trump escalates further - in America.
I've thought that as well. Be careful what you wish for. You might get regime change but it won't be the one you bargained for.
AFF
A thoughtful analysis
I was struck by this quote
If an uprising is underway then limited military action to support that might work, having air supremacy would (for example) provide options to take out drones and aircraft which might target the insurgency, or intercept reinforcements for the regime; or limited boots on ground to help coordinate uprising. Or, if the regime is embodied in a very small number of people, taking those people out might create a power vacuum into which a popular uprising could seize power - though, that vacuum would also allow other factions to take control, who may be no better than the old regime.
But, none of that's the case in Iran at the moment. Regime change in Iran is one of the things that the military operation was never going to achieve. It may yet result in regime change in Israel or the US.
- Trump is being briefed using very short (two minutes or so) videos that compile US “successes” over the previous 48 hours, and these videos consist primarily of footage of “stuff blowing up”;
- Trump has approved the production of AI-generated videos for propaganda purposes; and
- Those AI-generated videos often include footage of “stuff blowing up” taken from the briefing videos.
So I see/hear nothing in what O’Donnell says that makes or supports a claim that Trump is being briefed using the AI-generated videos.I think being clear about this matters because the reality of what Trump and his White House are doing is quite horrific and mind-boggling enough on its own. There is no need to manufacture additional reasons for outrage. Making unsubstantiated claims is straight out of the Trump playbook; it’s not a Trump tactic those of us opposed to Trump should adopt.
Yes, I thought that. There is a difference between misleading editing to please the boss and AI generating to deceive the boss. Whether the boss would like to use AI to deceive others is yet another matter!
Spot on. When they go low, we go high. That’s the way to try to restore credibility in analytic processes.
I think some of the recent comments in the “Seeing is not believing” thread are apt here.
However, there are seven islands in the strait that could be key. CNN says " these islands – Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, Hengam, Qeshm, Larak and Hormuz – form what researchers at Sun Yat-sen University in Zhuhai, China, call Iran’s 'arch defense.'" (Report here.}
Iran calls them its stationary aircraft carriers. The Iranians have been bulking up their defenses on those islands. The US will have to take them out. But it will be tricky. Our ships may not be able to get close enough to them. Even if we could seize them, holding them would be tough. They would become sitting targets for all sorts of hell fire. I know I would not want to be on those islands.
God, bring harmony to all sides quickly,
Even the choice of Lego inspired characters is a subtle burn referring to Denmark and Greenland. A lot of layers.
AFF
Here's a YouTuber's reaction channel I think it's safe, it was for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2QUKovgng
The version with the diss track starts around the 5 min mark.
AFF
Yeah. I just came here to post that it looks like he's trying to TACO, but dressing it up with tough-talking swagger.
The Truth in question
https://bsky.app/profile/phillipspobrien.bsky.social/post/3mie4vwkqms2n
Yes. His ego is worth much more than NATO or the (already dying) special relationship. Or indeed with most of Asia which depends on oil travelling through the Straits of Hormuz.
I’m not sure whether the King would want to go, or be welcome. I see that being the subject of some interesting diplomatic exchanges.