Noble Gold
NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
Real Time US National Debt Clock | USA Debt Clock.com
Share this site:
Copyright 1987-2024
| United States National Debt | |
| United States National Debt Per Person | |
| United States National Debt Per Household | |
| Total US Unfunded Liabilities | |
| Social Security Unfunded Liability | |
| Medicare Unfunded Liability | |
| Prescription Drug Unfunded Liability | |
| National Healthcare Unfunded Liability | |
| Total US Unfunded Liabilities Per Person | |
| Total US Unfunded Liabilities Per Household | |
| United States Population |
Copyright 1987-2024
(last updated 2024-08-09/Close of previous day debt was $35123327978028.47 )
4/13/26
OIL From The Middle East
OIL:
AMERICA is energy independent. We produce what they call 'SWEET' crude oil. Oil is uses for many things. Why we are connected is because OIL is priced and traded on a WORLD MARKET. WE can control our supply but not the world market. We have a Conflit with Iran, but we don't control the price of gas and oil.
When Biden was in office we had high gas prices. NO ONE COMPLAINED. Now everyone wants to cry and bitch because they don't understand the system.
SHUT UP!!! SHORT TERM PAIN FOR LONG TIME GAIN.
#Gas #Oil #Economy #Iran #Trump
The Price of Ignorance: Why Your Gas Pain Is a Patriotic Investment
In the modern American political landscape, few things expose the intellectual bankruptcy of the Left faster than the topic of gasoline prices. For four years under the Biden administration, Americans watched the price at the pump creep past four, then five, then six dollars a gallon. The response from the mainstream media, progressive pundits, and Democratic leadership was a collective shrug. We were told that “Putin’s price hike” was unavoidable. We were told that high energy costs were the moral price of “green transition.” We were told, in essence, to shut up and pay.
But now? Now the political winds have shifted. Now, as the United States reasserts its dominance in global energy markets and short-term volatility creates a pinch at the pump, the very same people who demanded our silence have turned into a cacophony of complainers. It is time for a dose of reality. It is time for conservatives to explain, once and for all, the difference between American production and global pricing. And most importantly, it is time to say to the whiners on both sides of the aisle: Shut up. Short-term pain is for long-term gain.
The Sweet Reality of American Energy Independence
Let’s start with a fact that seems lost on the average cable news viewer: America is energy independent. Today, the United States produces more crude oil than any country in history. We are blessed with an abundance of what the industry calls “sweet” crude oil—a low-sulfur, high-quality resource that is cheaper and cleaner to refine into gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and the thousand other petrochemicals that make modern life possible.
From the Permian Basin in Texas to the Bakken formation in North Dakota, American ingenuity and fracking technology have unlocked a treasure trove of energy. We are not dependent on the whims of OPEC or the charity of the Saudi royal family. We drill. We pump. We refine. That is the good news.
But here is where the populist rage gets it wrong. Being energy independent does not mean we are price independent. Oil is not milk. It is not a loaf of bread sold exclusively at your local grocery store. Oil is a global commodity, priced and traded on a world market that operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week. When a tanker leaves Houston, it doesn’t ask whether the buyer is patriotic. It asks who is paying the highest bid in Singapore, Rotterdam, or Dubai.
This is Economics 101, yet it remains a mystery to the average protestor holding a “I Did That” sticker. We can control our supply. President Trump’s “Drill, Baby, Drill” agenda proved that. But we cannot control the world market. When Iran a terrorist-sponsoring regime that chants “Death to America” starts a conflict in the Strait of Hormuz, global shipping insurance rates rise. When Russia rattles its saber in Ukraine, European buyers panic and bid up every available barrel. When OPEC+ cuts production to prop up prices, the ripple hits the pump in Ohio within two weeks.
You can have all the sweet crude in Texas, but if a war breaks out on the other side of the planet, you will feel it at the cash register. That is not a failure of American policy. That is a reality of global trade.
The Biden Hypocrisy and the Left’s Selective Amnesia
Let us revisit the recent past, because the national memory hole is deep. From 2021 to 2023, Joe Biden waged a war on American energy. He canceled the Keystone XL pipeline on day one. He halted new drilling leases on federal lands. He pressured banks to divest from fossil fuels. He flew to Saudi Arabia to literally beg OPEC to increase production groveling before the very regimes conservatives have always told you not to trust.
And what happened? Gas prices soared to record highs. Inflation, driven largely by energy costs, ate away the paychecks of working-class families. Yet, where was the outrage from the Left? Where were the cries for lower prices? They were silent. Worse, they celebrated. They told us high gas prices were good because they would force people to buy electric cars. They told us pain was the point.
Now, with a new administration focused on American energy dominance, we are seeing strategic adjustments. We are using the leverage of our production to negotiate peace, to weaken our enemies, and to restore rational trade. And yes, that comes with short-term volatility. Suddenly, the same people who told you to accept $5 gas for “democracy” are screaming bloody murder over a temporary spike.
You do not get to cheer for energy poverty under one president and then complain about market corrections under another. The conservative position is consistent: cheap, reliable, abundant energy is a national security imperative. But stability requires strength. And strength sometimes requires short-term sacrifice.
The Iran Conflict and the Illusion of Control
The current tensions in the Middle East are a perfect case study. The United States has a conflict with Iran not because we want war, but because the Islamic Republic has spent four decades building nuclear weapons, arming terrorists, and attacking our allies. Every responsible administration must confront this reality.
When we impose sanctions on Iranian oil to prevent them from funding Hezbollah and the Houthis, we take Iranian barrels off the world market. That reduced supply, even by a few percentage points, sends a shockwave through global pricing. When we strike back at Iranian proxies attacking our ships, tanker companies get nervous and raise their rates. When the world sees instability in the Persian Gulf, they hoard oil, driving up spot prices.
You cannot both demand that America stand up to the mullahs in Tehran and demand that gas prices never move. The world does not work that way. Every time a conservative president uses American energy as a geopolitical weapon to starve Russia’s war chest or to cut off Iran’s terror funding there is a cost. That cost shows up at the pump. It is the price of leadership.
Short-Term Pain, Long-Term Gain
So here is the conservative bottom line, and I say this with the respect of tough love: Stop complaining. If you are a conservative who is crying about gas prices today, you are playing into the enemy’s hands. The left wants you to panic. They want you to demand immediate government price controls, rationing, and a return to the failed green policies that made energy expensive in the first place.
Instead, understand the strategy. The “short-term pain” we are experiencing is the turbulence of decoupling from global market manipulation. It is the result of rebuilding American refinery capacity after years of regulatory assault. It is the necessary friction of forcing Europe to buy American LNG instead of Russian pipeline gas. It is the price of telling Iran that they cannot hold the world hostage.
Long-term gain is American energy supremacy. Long-term gain is a domestic manufacturing renaissance powered by cheap, abundant electricity and fuel. Long-term gain is watching our allies become energy-secure because of us, not in spite of us. Long-term gain is a world where the petrodollar remains strong and where the ayatollahs and autocrats have no leverage.
You cannot build that future without some pain. The greatest generations in American history understood this. They rationed gasoline during World War II not because there was a shortage, but because the fuel was needed for tanks and planes in Europe. They accepted sacrifice for victory. Today, we are not being asked to ration. We are being asked to pay a few extra dollars per fill-up while America restructures the global energy order in our favor.
That is a bargain.
Conclusion: Grow Up and Get On Board
The modern American conservative is supposed to be tough, resilient, and economically literate. Whining about gas prices while benefiting from the most energy-independent nation on earth is beneath us. We produced the sweet crude. We built the pipelines. We invented the fracking revolution. And now, we have a president willing to use that strength to crush our enemies and revive our economy.
So, to the fair-weather friends of energy independence: shut up. You cannot have cheap gas, no foreign entanglements, a strong military, and a clean environment all at once without trade-offs. The Biden years showed us the alternative weakness, begging, and $6 gas with nothing to show for it.
This is not a price crisis. This is a strategic investment. Pay the premium. Drive the truck. And thank God we live in a nation that drills its own destiny. Short-term pain for long-term gain is the conservative way. It always has been. Now act like it.
#oil #MiddleEast #Iran #Trump
THE REAL REASONS PEOPLE PREPARE – BEYOND THE PREPPER STEREOTYPE
SPP413: THE REAL REASONS PEOPLE PREPARE – BEYOND THE PREPPER STEREOTYPE
#Survival #Survival #Servivor #Prepping #Prepper #Canping
4/10/26
Pathetic Republicans Want Amnesty
Pathetic Republicans Want Amnesty:
There are 20 House Republicans are presenting the DIGNITY ACT. They want to give ILLEGALS Amnesty if they have a job, been working, and haven't committed a crime. How are they 'working'? Where E-VERIFY? Once it starts it won't end. They claim we need ILLEGALS for the economy. They already broke 1 to 4 Immigration Laws.
Ronald Reagan got duped by the Democrats in the 80's over giving Amnesty to over 11 Million ILLEGALS in return for Funding for Border Security so another 11 Million wouldn't come in. The Democratic Congress back out. Reagan told his Chief of Staff it was the worst mistake he ever did. Before then the Dry Wall Industry in California was dominates by Black Men. The wages averaged $17/hr. When the ILLEGALS got amnesty they came in and worked for $9/hr. The Black Men said basically 'I can't work for that'. The rest is ongoing history.
I was a Logistics Officer in the Army...Beans, Bullets, Water, Supply Points, and Warehousing. Compton, CA is where much of the cargo coming from the Port of Los Angeles, which is actually in Long Beach. The shipping containers are trucked up the 710N Freeway to Compton. I was a Field Supervisor of a Security Company that manage the incoming and outgoing traffic at gates of the 5 warehouses we secured. The entire Security Company was basically Black. Usual for SOCAL. However, the warehouse workers were 98% Latino. So to be a Supervisor in any of those warehouses, regardless of experience, you HAD to speak Spanish. Once again, where is E-Verify?
When they dropped 20,000 Haitians in to Springfield, OH all of a sudden thousands of low paying meat packing jobs showed up that were being hidden from 'Citizens' the whole time. This is about Math and the Census and Cheap Labor.
NO TO AMNESTY. DEMOCRATS WILL TAKE AND RUN WITH IT. "DON'T TRUST IT" ~NWA [STRAIGHT OTTA COMPTON]
Another thing. The ILLEGALS started moving into Compton. When their Black neighbors left there house for a day or the weekend the ILLEGALS started fire bombing their homes as a way to force them out. As far as ILLEGALS go Black Americans are the lowest form of life. I have met Africans, Jamaicans, and even from St.Croix Virgin Islands.They all look down on US Blacks.
#Amnesty #Immigration #Illegals
4/9/26
THE FOOD LABEL IS LYING TO YOU
THE FOOD LABEL IS LYING TO YOU
TRUE STORY, I DID THE MATH:
Read The Food Label, But Have A Calculater
I, myself, examined many clients to make this statement. I hope it helps someone. In short, the food labels are lying to you. I included pics of 3 labels. They are in the smallest print for a reason.
I started reading food labels when I was a Personal/Fitness Trainer. In the beginning I was simply studying the protein, carbohydrates, fats, and cholesterol counts as well as the serving size.
Speaking of serving size, if you buy a bag of chips there may be 2.5 servings in the bag, but the average person may eat the entire bag. Anyway, that is another story.
The labels give you the servings/mg per day based on the 'recommended' daily requirement based on the small print. This is why it's in small print. The food companies want you to eat more. They base those numbers on a 2,000 calorie a day diet. I circled that info in red.
Here is WHAT I SAW ... When I was a Personal Trainer we had a device that recorded your RMR/Resting Metobolic Rate. Our clients breathed into it for 5 to 7 minutes. It gave us a for digit number. It measured how many calories your body burned a day at rest. When I side hustled Herbalife we were given a 'slide rule' that did the same thing. I noticed a correlation and another reason I knew GOD was real. In all of the tests the body weight was 10% of the Daily Resting Metobolic Rate!!! In other words, if you weigh 150lbs you eat 1500 calories a day, exercise 3 times a week and you stay they same. If you weigh 150lbs and want to lose weight, eat around 1300 calories a day and exercise around 3 to 4 days a week. If you weigh 150lbs and want to gain weight eat 1700 calories a day and workout at least 3 days a week.
What I am saying is this. The numbers on the label are based on a 2,000 calorie daily diet. Unless you weigh 200lbs that label won't apply to you unless you have a calculator or are good at math on the snap.
EVERY LABEL IN AMERICA HAS THE NUMBERS BASED ON A 2,000 CALORIE DIET
#Nutrition #Fitness #Diet
4/8/26
The Price at the Pump: How State Gas Taxes Shape What You Pay in All 50 States
The Price at the Pump: How State Gas Taxes Shape What You Pay in All 50 States
April 8, 2026
Every time a driver pulls up to a gas station, a significant portion of the price they pay is determined not by global oil markets, but by their state legislature. While the federal government adds a flat 18.4 cents to every gallon of gasoline, state taxes vary wildly from a low of just 9.0 cents in Alaska to a staggering 70.9 cents in California as of 2026. This patchwork of taxes explains why a gallon of gas can cost over $5.89 in one state while hovering around $3.27 in another.
This article provides a comprehensive breakdown of gas taxes in all 50 states and explains exactly how these taxes affect the final price you pay at the pump.
📊 The Full Ranking: State Gas Taxes From Highest to Lowest
The following table ranks every state’s gasoline tax and fee as of January 1, 2026. These figures represent state-imposed taxes only and do not include the 18.4 cent federal excise tax that every driver pays.
| Rank | State | Gas Tax (cents/gallon) | Rank | State | Gas Tax (cents/gallon) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 1 | California | 70.9￠ | 26 | Nebraska | 33.0￠ |
| 2 | Illinois | 66.4￠ | 27 | Wisconsin | 33.0￠ |
| 3 | Pennsylvania | 57.7￠ | 28 | Idaho | 33.0￠ |
| 4 | Washington | 49.4￠ | 29 | Minnesota | 32.0￠ |
| 5 | New Jersey | 49.1￠ | 30 | Maine | 31.0￠ |
| 6 | Nevada | 47.8￠ | 31 | Vermont | 31.0￠ |
| 7 | Indiana | 47.4￠ | 32 | Alabama | 31.0￠ |
| 8 | Oregon | 47.1￠ | 33 | Iowa | 30.0￠ |
| 9 | Maryland | 47.0￠ | 34 | South Dakota | 30.0￠ |
| 10 | Hawaii | 45.4￠ | 35 | Missouri | 30.0￠ |
| 11 | Michigan | 45.3￠ | 36 | Colorado | 29.0￠ |
| 12 | Florida | 44.9￠ | 37 | South Carolina | 29.0￠ |
| 13 | Ohio | 44.7￠ | 38 | Massachusetts | 27.0￠ |
| 14 | Rhode Island | 41.4￠ | 39 | Tennessee | 27.0￠ |
| 15 | North Carolina | 41.0￠ | 40 | Kansas | 25.0￠ |
| 16 | Utah | 40.6￠ | 41 | Arkansas | 25.0￠ |
| 17 | Georgia | 40.3￠ | 42 | Connecticut | 25.0￠ |
| 18 | Iowa | 40.2￠ | 43 | New York | 25.0￠ |
| 19 | Connecticut | 40.1￠ | 44 | Wyoming | 24.0￠ |
| 20 | Texas | 40.0￠ | 45 | New Hampshire | 24.0￠ |
| 21 | Delaware | 40.0￠ | 46 | North Dakota | 23.0￠ |
| 22 | Massachusetts | 39.0￠ | 47 | Delaware | 23.0￠ |
| 23 | New York | 34.7￠ | 48 | Mississippi | 21.0￠ |
| 24 | West Virginia | 32.2￠ | 49 | Louisiana | 21.0￠ |
| 25 | Montana | 32.8￠ | 50 | Alaska | 9.0￠ |
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration
The Dynamic Nature of State Gas Taxes
State gas taxes are far from static. Between January 2025 and January 2026, 26 states changed their gasoline taxes 19 raised them and 7 lowered them. These changes are driven by several mechanisms.
Indexed and Variable Taxes
Some states have moved away from fixed per-gallon rates and instead tie their taxes to external factors. Kentucky's gas tax, for example, is indexed to the average wholesale price of gasoline. When wholesale prices drop, the tax rate per gallon falls as well. This has led to a 12% decline in Kentucky's gas tax rate (from 27.8 cents to 26.4 cents) over two years, directly reducing Road Fund revenue by nearly 10%.
Connecticut employs a unique two-tax system: a 25 cent retail tax plus a petroleum products gross receipts tax of 8.81% on wholesale transactions. As wholesale prices rise, so does this tax—during the 2026 Iran war, this wholesale tax jumped from 17.6 cents to 24.9 cents per gallon in just 19 days.
Legislative Actions
Other states change taxes through direct legislative action. Michigan increased its gas tax by 5.2 cents per gallon between 2025 and 2026, while Washington raised its tax by 6.2 cents—one of the largest year-over-year increases.
How State Gas Taxes Affect Pump Prices
Understanding the relationship between state gas taxes and retail prices requires looking beyond simple addition. While taxes are a direct component of the final price, several factors mediate their impact.
The Direct Impact: Tax as a Price Component
The most straightforward effect is additive: when a state has a high gas tax, all else being equal, its pump prices will be higher. The numbers bear this out clearly:
- **California** (70.9¢ tax) pays an average of **$5.89 per gallon**
- **Oklahoma** (20¢ tax) pays an average of **$3.27 per gallon**
- **Texas** (20¢ tax) pays approximately **$3.82 per gallon**
However, the relationship is not perfectly linear. Washington has a 49.4¢ tax but pays $5.37 per gallon, while Pennsylvania has a higher 57.7¢ tax but pays just $4.08 per gallon. This demonstrates that taxes are only one piece of a complex pricing puzzle.
Other Factors That Influence Pump Prices
The U.S. Energy Information Administration identifies several additional factors that explain why gas prices vary between states:
Distance from Supply: Retail gasoline prices tend to be higher the further gasoline must be transported to the point of sale. This explains why **Hawaii**, despite a moderate 45.4¢ tax, pays $5.50 per gallon it must import all its fuel.
Environmental Programs: California requires a special "reformulated" gasoline blend that reduces air pollution but requires more processing steps and expensive blending components. This alone adds significant cost beyond the state's already-high taxes.
Supply Disruptions: Any event that slows or stops gasoline production can result in increased bidding for available supplies. The 2026 war with Iran has caused global oil prices to surge, with the national average jumping from $3.00 to $4.08 per gallon in just one month.
Retail Competition and Operating Costs: Prices are often highest in locations with fewer gas stations. Stations also retain about 10% of the retail price to cover operating costs such as transportation and labor.
The Complexity of Tax Holidays
When states suspend gas taxes, the savings don't always reach consumers as expected. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis learned this during previous tax holidays, noting: "I don't think the consumer really felt relief" because retailers may absorb the difference rather than passing it along.
Retail gas stations have charged consumers an average of 38 cents per gallon above wholesale prices over the past five years, with their profits after expenses often less than half that amount. When wholesale prices swing dramatically sometimes by the equivalent of around 40 cents per gallon in a single day the effect of a tax suspension can be lost in the noise of market volatility.
Where the Money Goes: Funding America's Roads
Gas taxes serve a crucial purpose: funding transportation infrastructure. The vast majority of revenue is constitutionally or statutorily dedicated to road and bridge projects.
Pennsylvania: Direct Municipal Funding
In Pennsylvania, gas tax revenues flow directly to municipalities through a "liquid fuels" allocation system. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation recently issued more than $460 million to help local governments fund road and bridge projects, snow removal, and repaving. Since 2023, nearly $1.87 billion in gas tax money has been funneled to road and bridge projects, improving 19,525 miles of roadway and 1,757 bridges.
The allocation formula is based on population and miles of locally owned roads. To be eligible, a roadway must be formally adopted as a public street and meet specific dimension requirements.
Kentucky: Supporting Local Governments
Kentucky allocates 7.7% of its state gas tax revenues to the Municipal Road Aid program for city roads, funded at $54.3 million for the 2026-27 fiscal year. However, declining gas tax revenue due to lower wholesale prices and flat consumption has forced cuts—this represents a 22% decline from the previous biennium.
The Debate Over Gas Tax Holidays
As gas prices have surged past $4 per gallon nationally in 2026, policymakers have clashed over whether suspending gas taxes provides meaningful relief.
Georgia Takes Action
Georgia became the first state to act in the current crisis. Governor Brian Kemp signed a 60-day suspension of the state's gas tax on March 20, 2026, with the governor stating: "Because we budget conservatively, we can take steps like these that actually deliver on affordability issues for families in our state". Georgia is dipping into its budget surplus to replace the lost revenue.
Utah's Partial Approach
Utah took a different approach, trimming just 6 cents off its 38-cent-per-gallon fuel tax for six months beginning July 1, 2026.
States That Have Held Back
Other states remain skeptical. Maryland Democrats rejected Republican calls for a 30-day gas tax suspension, with Governor Wes Moore's spokesperson noting it would "blow a $100 million hole in our transportation budget while we're working to close Maryland's budget shortfall".
South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster dismissed tax suspensions as a "sort of knee-jerk reaction," noting that the state's gas tax provides about $800 million yearly for infrastructure projects. "We'd like them all to be lower and lower," McMaster said, "but that's one we should not take any money out of".
California's Political Standoff
In California, where gas prices have reached $5.89 per gallon, Republican State Senator Tony Strickland proposed SB 1035 to suspend the state's climate programs and gas tax, estimating it would provide immediate savings of roughly $1.08 per gallon. However, the bill was shot down in committee. Democratic Senator Catherine Blakespear argued that the fees associated with climate programs about 38 cents per gallon help "the same people who are struggling with those high gas prices" through funding for disadvantaged communities.
The Future of Gas Taxes
The traditional gas tax model faces an existential threat. As vehicles become more fuel-efficient and electric vehicle adoption grows, drivers are buying fewer gallons of gas, reducing revenue even as road maintenance costs remain constant.
Pennsylvania officials have explicitly noted that "the traditional revenue streams that support local infrastructure are not keeping pace" with the shift toward EVs and alternative fuels. This challenge will likely define transportation funding debates for the next decade, forcing states to consider alternatives like road usage charges, increased vehicle registration fees for EVs, or broader tax reforms.
Understanding state gas taxes is essential for anyone wondering why prices vary so dramatically across state lines. While taxes are a significant factor accounting for nearly 20% of the price at the pump in many states they interact with global markets, local regulations, and retail competition to produce the final number on the sign. As the 2026 Iran war continues to roil global energy markets and state legislatures debate competing priorities, the gas tax remains one of the most visible and politically charged elements of America's transportation funding system.
#Gastax #gas #tax
.jpg)
Rex Heuermann admits to killing 8 women in Gilgo Beach serial killings
Rex Heuermann admits to killing 8 women in Gilgo Beach in changed plea hearing
#RexHeurmann #NewYork #LongIsland #Crime #Murder
If You Are One Of Those People All Twisted On The US Bombing A School In Iran:
If You Are One Of Those People All Twisted On The US Bombing A School In Iran:
If you fire rockets and missiles from a school that school gets bombed. In WWII you could have a sniper on a building and 5 Nuns hiding in the basement. They called in air support or artillery, leveled the building, and moved on. War is Hell, remember. Trump is solving a PROBLEM we have had for 47 years. Every President since Carter has Bitched and Moaned about Iran. Iran is responsible for the deaths and maiming of thousands of US Troops. They responsible for 241 deaths in Beruit, Lebanon in 1983. I suggest everyone go get a history BOOK, or something other than GOOGLE. Do that and then talk foreign policy. It amazes me that people that have never served in the Military think they know more than the Military.
When War is Hell: Deconstructing the Argument for Bombing a School in Iran
The digital battlefield of foreign policy is often littered with hyperbole, selective history, and raw emotion. A recent social media post, reacting to hypothetical or potential US military action in Iran, has ignited a firestorm of debate. The post, which argues that if militants fire rockets from a school, the bombing of that school is a justified military necessity, touches on the deepest questions of the laws of armed conflict, historical precedent, and the generational trauma of the Middle East.
To many, the logic seems brutally simple: "If you fire rockets and missiles from a school, that school gets bombed." To others, it is a dangerous oversimplification that ignores the value of innocent life, the laws of proportionality, and the long-term strategic costs of such actions. Let us dissect the argument, fact-check its historical claims, and explore whether the “school bombing” scenario is a legitimate act of war or a recipe for perpetual chaos.
The Core Argument: Military Necessity vs. Human Shields
The foundational claim of the post is that the responsibility for a school’s destruction lies solely with the combatants who misuse it. Under the Geneva Conventions, this is partially true. Using a civilian structure like a school, hospital, or place of worship for military purposes constitutes a war crime by the party doing the hiding. It strips that location of its protected status. Consequently, a military force has the right to target that location if it poses a legitimate threat.
The author invokes the grim axiom: "War is Hell." This phrase, popularized by General William Tecumseh Sherman, suggests that trying to fight a "civilized" war is a fools’ errand; the only objective is to break the enemy’s will as quickly as possible. In that context, a commander faced with rocket attacks from a school would likely prioritize neutralizing the threat over saving the building.
However, the law of armed conflict also requires proportionality. Even if a school is a legitimate target, the attacking force must weigh the military advantage gained against the "collateral damage" the death of innocent civilians, particularly children. If a single sniper is in a school, leveling the entire building with a 2,000-pound bomb is almost certainly illegal. If a battery of rockets is actively firing from the courtyard, the calculus changes. The post assumes the latter scenario, but real-world intelligence is rarely that clean.
The WWII Comparison: A Misleading Precedent
The author appeals to the moral clarity of World War II: "In WWII you could have a sniper on a building and 5 Nuns hiding in the basement. They called in air support or artillery, leveled the building, and moved on."
This is historically reductive. While it is true that Allied and Axis forces engaged in massive urban destruction (Dresden, Stalingrad, the bombing of Tokyo), these actions are now viewed by many military ethicists as atrocities or, at best, necessary evils of a total war. Furthermore, the author ignores that the post-WWII Nuremberg Principles explicitly outlawed the wanton destruction of cities and civilian infrastructure.
Moreover, the comparison fails to account for the information environment of the 21st century. In WWII, leveling a building in France or Germany did not instantly generate a viral video that recruits a thousand new insurgents. In the modern Middle East, the image of a bombed school is often more powerful than the rocket that came from its roof. The "move on" part of the WWII equation is impossible today because the political consequences linger for decades.
The Political Grievance: "47 Years of Bitching"
The post pivots sharply from military tactics to geopolitics, stating that Trump (presumably a reference to a future or hypothetical administration, as Trump is not currently in office during the writing of this article) is solving a problem the US has had since 1979: the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The author is correct that US-Iran animosity is a 47-year saga, beginning with the hostage crisis. They are also correct that Iran has blood on its hands. The 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, which killed 241 US Marines, is attributed to Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed group. Furthermore, the Department of Defense has attributed over 600 US troop deaths in Iraq (2003-2011) to Iranian-supplied explosively formed penetrators (EFPs).
However, the leap from "Iran is responsible for American deaths" to "bombing a school in Iran is justified" requires a logical bridge the author does not provide. There is a vast spectrum of military action between diplomatic sanctions and destroying a civilian educational facility. The post conflates Iran's state sponsorship of terror with the tactical decision to level a specific building in a specific village.
The Ad Hominem Fallacy: "Get a History Book"
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the post is its closing salvo: "It amazes me that people that have never served in the Military think they know more than the Military."
This is an appeal to authority, and a selective one at that. The US military leadership itself has often argued against the very tactics the post endorses. During the Iraq War, Generals David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal famously restricted airstrikes on civilian structures, even those used by insurgents, because they understood that "kinetic" solutions (bombs) created more terrorists than they killed.
In fact, many of the loudest voices against the "bomb the school" mentality are retired military officers. Admiral Mike Mullen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, famously stated that the greatest threat to US national security was the national debt, not Iran, and that military action without diplomatic strategy was a failure of leadership.
The author tells readers to avoid "Google" and read books. Let us take that advice. In The Utility of Force, General Rupert Smith argues that modern war is no longer about destroying the enemy’s army but about shaping the will of the people. Bombing a school, even if legally justified, alienates the people. In On War, Clausewitz notes that war is a continuation of politics by other means. If bombing a school leads to the Iranian public rallying around a repressive regime (as has happened after every foreign strike on Iranian soil), then the political objective has failed, regardless of the military success.
The Uncomfortable Truth
Is there a scenario where a school used for military purposes must be bombed? Yes. If a commander has intelligence that a launch is imminent that will kill dozens of soldiers, and there is no other way to stop it, the commander is within their rights to call the strike. That is the tragedy of war.
However, the casual dismissal of those deaths the nuns in the basement, the children in the classroom as merely the cost of doing business is morally lazy. It assumes that the only two options are "do nothing" or "drop a bomb."
There is a third option: precision. There is the option of a ground raid using special forces to clear the building. There is the option of cutting off the fuel and food to the building so the militants leave. There is the option of non-kinetic warfare (jamming, cyber-attacks). All of these are riskier for the attacking force, which is why commanders sometimes prefer the bomb. But preferring the bomb does not make it right.
Conclusion: The Hell of Forever Wars
The author of the original post is correct that war is hell. But they miss the corollary: Occupying the rubble is worse. The United States has spent two decades and trillions of dollars fighting insurgencies born from the rubble of destroyed cities. The enemy’s goal is often to goad the US into overreacting to bomb a school, kill a family, and create a generation of orphans who will hate America.
If the US bombs a school in Iran, regardless of the rockets fired from it, the headline will not read "US Strikes Legitimate Military Target." It will read "US Bombs School." And for the next 47 years, Americans will pay the price for that image.
The author suggests we talk foreign policy after reading a history book. Let us do that. But let us read the whole book including the chapters on the bombing of the Marjah district in Afghanistan, the fall of Fallujah, and the rise of ISIS. Those chapters teach us that sometimes, the military knows how to win a firefight, but loses the war with every bomb dropped on a classroom.
War is hell. But stupidity in war is eternal.
#Iran #MiddleEast #Trump
.jpg)
Why Donald Trump Is The Right President To Deal With Iran
Why Donald Trump Is The Right President To Deal With Iran
Let’s get something straight, because this hasn’t been talked about enough. And I’m tired of seeing people grabbing headlines and posts that agree with their narrative instead of doing their own research.
What’s happening right now in Iran is not Israel’s war. It’s not a Jewish vendetta, it’s not a Middle East skirmish that has nothing to do with the rest of us, and contrary to Tucker Carlson, it has nothing to do with Chabad. You need to know what’s actually going on.
Washington severed diplomatic ties with Iran under the Carter administration after Iranian students stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage. That was 1979.
Since then, EVERY administration, Carter, Reagan, Bush (senior), Clinton, Bush (junior), Obama, Biden, and Trump, has said that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable. The White House recently documented 74 separate instances of Trump making that case, calling it “longstanding, bipartisan American policy.” This isn’t a new position. It isn’t a right-wing position. It’s what every administration has believed for half a century.
So why did it take until now? Because Iran kept moving the goalposts, and the world kept letting them.
By May 2025, the IAEA reported that Iran’s cache of near-weapons-grade enriched uranium had surged by roughly 50 percent in just three months, putting Tehran one step away from having enough material for ten nuclear weapons.
That’s not some little vague threat. That’s a countdown.
The head of U.S. Central Command testified that if Iran decided to sprint toward a nuclear weapon, it could produce enough weapons-grade material for a simple device in one week, and enough for ten weapons in three weeks.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it plainly: “They have everything they need to build nuclear weapons.” When you’ve built the engine, loaded the fuel, and pointed the car at the wall, it doesn’t matter much whether you’ve pressed the gas yet.
Iran spent years insisting its program was civilian. All the while, it was moving toward weapons capability. According to reporting sourced by the Institute for International Political Studies, Khamenei had authorized development of miniaturized nuclear warheads for ballistic missiles as recently as October 2025.
Now let’s talk about China, because this piece of the picture is pretty darn critical.
China is not a bystander in this story. Iran is central to Beijing’s entire overland trade and energy strategy. Iran sits at the heart of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the infrastructure network connecting East Asia to Europe through land-based transport and Persian Gulf energy routes. Without stable access through Iranian territory, Beijing’s supply chains have no viable alternative. Iran exported more than 520 million barrels of crude oil to China in 2025 alone. Only Saudi Arabia supplied more. China buys over 80 percent of Iran’s oil. This isn’t ideological solidarity. It’s a dependency that neither side wants disrupted.
Which brings us to the Strait of Hormuz.
Roughly 13 million barrels of oil per day moved through the Strait in 2025, about 31 percent of all seaborne crude in the world.
About 45 percent of China’s oil imports pass through it. Iran has threatened to close it. And here’s what that threat actually produced: China is now in direct talks with Iran, pressing Tehran to allow crude oil and LNG vessels safe passage and to hold off on targeting tankers or key export hubs. When Beijing’s energy supply is on the line, the anti-American posturing has real limits.
Here’s what this all adds up to.
The United States didn’t stumble into this war because Israel asked nicely. It acted on a threat that five decades of American presidents acknowledged and mostly kicked down the road.
Iran was weeks away, not years, from having the material needed for nuclear weapons. It had long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching U.S. bases and allies throughout the region. It had a weapons development program it had been lying about for years.
Calling this Israel’s war ignores fifty years of American policy, multiple rounds of failed diplomacy, and a nuclear program that was running out of road.
The world needed someone to act. The better question isn’t why it happened. It’s why it took this long.
#Trump #Iran #MiddleEast
If you are a protester in America, or if you disagree in what we are doing in the Middle East:
If you are a protester in America, or if you disagree in what we are doing in the Middle East:
Since January, Iran has killed around 45,000 protesters - That we know of. If you are a Protester, America is the BEST PLACE TO BE. I.C.E. shot 2 knuckleheads and Democrats wanna eliminate the agencies that enforce the laws that politicians wrote.
Iran Protest Death Toll Could Top 30,000, According to Local Health Officials
The Privilege of Protests: America’s Dissidents Have No Idea How Good They Have It
In the summer air of American cities, from Portland to New York, there is a distinct sound of grievance. It is the sound of chants, bullhorns, and the rhythmic pounding of fists on federal property. We are told by the Left, by the mainstream media, and by the angry mobs that America is an oppressive state. We are told that the United States has no moral authority to act in the Middle East. We are told that the greatest threat to a protester’s safety is the local police or a federal agent from the Department of Homeland Security.
Let’s pause that narrative for a moment and look at a reality the chattering class refuses to acknowledge. Since January of this year, the Islamic Republic of Iran a regime that the Biden administration has desperately tried to appease with nuclear concessions has reportedly killed an estimated 45,000 of its own citizens. Let that number sink in. Forty-five thousand souls. Men, women, and teenagers who took to the streets to demand basic human dignity. They weren’t throwing milkshakes or blocking traffic; they were begging for their lives, and the mullahs answered with live ammunition, torture, and disappearances.
If you are a protester in America even one who disagrees fundamentally with what we are doing in the Middle East you are living in the safest, freest, most legally protected environment for dissent in the history of the world. To argue otherwise is not just ignorant; it is an insult to every person crushed by the tyrannies we are supposedly too "heavy-handed" to confront.
The Tyranny We Refuse to See
The contrast could not be starker. In Tehran and the surrounding provinces, the protest movement known as "Woman, Life, Freedom" was met with a level of state-sponsored brutality that is medieval in its savagery. Security forces fired shotguns full of pellets at the faces of young girls. Prisoners were raped and executed. The regime bulldozed graves to erase evidence of the dead.
Forty-five thousand dead. That is the conservative estimate from outside human rights groups. The Iranian regime doesn’t arrest you for "wrongthink" and give you a court date; they hang you from a construction crane in public.
Now, look at the American protester. When an American disagrees with U.S. policy regarding Israel, Iraq, or the naval presence in the Strait of Hormuz, what happens? They gather on a public sidewalk with signs. They are given a permit. If they block traffic, they might get a citation. If they become violent—if they throw a Molotov cocktail or assault a federal officer they might be arrested.
And yet, the narrative on the progressive left is that the American protester is the victim of a fascist takeover. This is cognitive dissonance of the highest order.
The "Knucklehead" Defense
Which brings us to the recent incident involving I.C.E. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and the "two knuckleheads." I use the term "knuckleheads" because that is the kindest description for individuals who allegedly engage in dangerous behavior that necessitates law enforcement intervention. Without endorsing specific unproven allegations, the conservative position is clear: We enforce the laws that our elected representatives wrote.
Here is the fundamental truth that the defund-the-police crowd refuses to grasp. Democrats in Congress, spurred on by the Squad and the radical fringe, are currently pushing legislation to eliminate or cripple the agencies that enforce the laws on the books. They want to abolish I.C.E. They want to defund the FBI. They want to hamstring Customs and Border Protection.
Why? Because a handful of agents, in a high-stress, split-second encounter involving potentially armed individuals, did their job.
The conservative view is that you cannot write laws establishing a border—or establishing the rules of engagement for federal agents—and then abolish the very mechanisms that enforce those laws because you don’t like the optics. If politicians write a law that says illegal entry is a civil violation or a crime, they have a moral and constitutional duty to provide the executive branch with the tools to enforce it. To do otherwise is chaos.
When Democrats demand the elimination of I.C.E., they are not fighting for justice; they are fighting for the dissolution of the American nation-state. They are siding with the lawbreaker over the lawkeeper.
The Middle East Paradox
To the protester who says, "I disagree with what we are doing in the Middle East," I have a simple question: *Do you prefer the Iranian method of dealing with dissent?*
Because that is the alternative. The United States maintains a presence in the Middle East not out of imperial greed conservatives largely reject the neocon fantasy of nation-building but out of necessity. We are there to keep the straits open, to protect Israel (the only functioning democracy in the region), and to prevent the very regime that kills 45,000 of its own citizens from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
If the protesters got their way tomorrow, and the U.S. withdrew all forces and cut all aid to allies, what would happen? Iran would sweep the region. The protests in Tehran would go from 45,000 dead to 450,000 dead. The "knuckleheads" who assault I.C.E. agents in America would find themselves facing the morality police of the Islamic Republic. And I guarantee you, they would not be asking for the abolition of the police; they would be begging for the return of the American Constitution.
Domestic Order vs. Progressive Chaos
We have seen the progressive vision for American protests. It was the summer of 2020. It was federal courthouses burning in Portland. It was the "Autonomous Zone" in Seattle where two young black men were murdered by the very "community protection" forces that the Left put in place after they chased the police out.
The American protester has the luxury of burning a flag or spray-painting a monument because 240 years of conservative principles rule of law, property rights, and a Bill of Rights that protects speech even when it is hateful have built a wall of civility. The moment you tear down that wall, you get Tehran.
Democrats want to eliminate the agencies that enforce the laws because they believe that all law enforcement is inherently racist or violent. That is a radical, nihilistic position. The vast majority of I.C.E. agents and police officers are decent public servants. They are the thin line between the chaos of the mob and the order of a republic.
When you shoot a "knucklehead" who is posing a lethal threat, you are not committing an act of tyranny; you are enforcing the social contract that allows the other 330 million Americans to sleep safely in their beds.
The Bottom Line
So, to the protester in the street, the one with the megaphone screaming about American imperialism: Look in the mirror. You are breathing free air. You are not being dragged to Evin Prison. You are not being shot with a shotgun pellet to the face for showing your hair.
America is the best place to be a protester precisely because America has a strong backbone. We have a military that projects power to keep the tyrants busy in their own backyards. We have law enforcement agencies like I.C.E. that ensure that the rule of law applies at the border. And we have a conservative movement that refuses to apologize for any of it.
The Democrats want you to believe you are a victim. They want to abolish the very institutions that guarantee your right to be an irritant. Don't fall for it. If you truly want to see what happens when the "abolish I.C.E." crowd wins, buy a one-way ticket to Tehran. Just don’t expect to come home.
#Protesters #Iran #MiddleEasr #Protesting
4/7/26
What Is Really Going On In Iran
What Is Really Going On In Iran
Credits: https://www.facebook.com/share/1CVgRFnVpN/
"Let’s get something straight, because this hasn’t been talked about enough. And I’m tired of seeing people grabbing headlines and posts that agree with their narrative instead of doing their own research.
What’s happening right now in Iran is not Israel’s war. It’s not a Jewish vendetta, it’s not a Middle East skirmish that has nothing to do with the rest of us, and contrary to Tucker Carlson, it has nothing to do with Chabad. You need to know what’s actually going on.
Washington severed diplomatic ties with Iran under the Carter administration after Iranian students stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage. That was 1979.
Since then, EVERY administration, Carter, Reagan, Bush (senior), Clinton, Bush (junior), Obama, Biden, and Trump, has said that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable. The White House recently documented 74 separate instances of Trump making that case, calling it “longstanding, bipartisan American policy.” This isn’t a new position. It isn’t a right-wing position. It’s what every administration has believed for half a century.
So why did it take until now? Because Iran kept moving the goalposts, and the world kept letting them.
By May 2025, the IAEA reported that Iran’s cache of near-weapons-grade enriched uranium had surged by roughly 50 percent in just three months, putting Tehran one step away from having enough material for ten nuclear weapons.
That’s not some little vague threat. That’s a countdown.
The head of U.S. Central Command testified that if Iran decided to sprint toward a nuclear weapon, it could produce enough weapons-grade material for a simple device in one week, and enough for ten weapons in three weeks.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it plainly: “They have everything they need to build nuclear weapons.” When you’ve built the engine, loaded the fuel, and pointed the car at the wall, it doesn’t matter much whether you’ve pressed the gas yet.
Iran spent years insisting its program was civilian. All the while, it was moving toward weapons capability. According to reporting sourced by the Institute for International Political Studies, Khamenei had authorized development of miniaturized nuclear warheads for ballistic missiles as recently as October 2025.
Now let’s talk about China, because this piece of the picture is pretty darn critical.
China is not a bystander in this story. Iran is central to Beijing’s entire overland trade and energy strategy. Iran sits at the heart of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the infrastructure network connecting East Asia to Europe through land-based transport and Persian Gulf energy routes. Without stable access through Iranian territory, Beijing’s supply chains have no viable alternative. Iran exported more than 520 million barrels of crude oil to China in 2025 alone. Only Saudi Arabia supplied more. China buys over 80 percent of Iran’s oil. This isn’t ideological solidarity. It’s a dependency that neither side wants disrupted.
Which brings us to the Strait of Hormuz.
Roughly 13 million barrels of oil per day moved through the Strait in 2025, about 31 percent of all seaborne crude in the world.
About 45 percent of China’s oil imports pass through it. Iran has threatened to close it. And here’s what that threat actually produced: China is now in direct talks with Iran, pressing Tehran to allow crude oil and LNG vessels safe passage and to hold off on targeting tankers or key export hubs. When Beijing’s energy supply is on the line, the anti-American posturing has real limits.
Here’s what this all adds up to.
The United States didn’t stumble into this war because Israel asked nicely. It acted on a threat that five decades of American presidents acknowledged and mostly kicked down the road.
Iran was weeks away, not years, from having the material needed for nuclear weapons. It had long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching U.S. bases and allies throughout the region. It had a weapons development program it had been lying about for years.
Calling this Israel’s war ignores fifty years of American policy, multiple rounds of failed diplomacy, and a nuclear program that was running out of road.
The world needed someone to act. The better question isn’t why it happened. It’s why it took this long."
#Iran #MiddleEast #Israel #War
4/6/26
Photos From Space
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
Locate The International Space Station
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)