ListNook

GoneSilent 4 days ago +797

Remember the Saudi/UAE led blockade of Qatar, and the 99 year lease on 666 Fifth Avenue paid UP FRONT to bail out Jared Kushner? Pepperidge farm remembers

797

bigredthesnorer 3 days ago +76

Follow the money. It would not surprise me if there is more money flowing behind the scenes to the Trump mafia to keep the war going.

76

Nasty_Goblin 3 days ago +36

We already know there is a ton of it. Kushner is getting massive bribes from the Saudis, Trump has been ‘gifted’ planes and hotels, they dump money into his crypto scam / bribery machine.

36

TheGreatPrimate 3 days ago +16

They literally fund his private equity firm. $2billion. He also is tapped to work for the US in negotiations by his FIL. So Saudi and UAE just tell Kushner what to do or he'll lose his funding.

16

hass13 3 days ago +46

House Mormont remembers the north remembers!

46

giboauja 3 days ago +2

All these countries are loaded to the brim with atrocities, hell almost all have quite the rap sheet. Ones that dont just were to busy getting there own asses kicked. Morality between different states is kind of a twentieth centurary thing.

2

stonertear 4 days ago +571

We know the entire ME wants Iran out behind the scenes. They are tip toeing around it publicly. Trumps doing the heavy lifting for them.

571

Zizimz 4 days ago +140

The only way to neutralize the Iranian threat permanently is to go in with ground troops. That's not going to happen. So they are left with two options. Continued US/Israeli bombing, which threatens their entire economic basis, the oil industry, tourism and international investements, or a cease fire and return to some sort of fragile stability.

140

Old_news123456 3 days ago +146

I like how everybody is so certain that ground troops won't happen. Obviously any sane president would not do that. .... But you don't have a sane president, you have an unpredictable president who is easily enraged and obviously has some form of dementia/Alzheimer's. There's plenty of crazy things I didn't think Trump would do, and he's done them. I remain worried about ground troops.

146

YakResident_3069 3 days ago +43

They are fine with sacrificing the rest of us to start Armageddon. Shits unreal.

43

pargofan 3 days ago +9

Because the war would become insanely unpopular in 5 months. Gas will be $10 per gallon. Even in MAGA country, they won't tolerate that. Come November, Republicans will be voted out of the House and likely the Senate. Then Trump will be impeached. So will Vance. Then Democratic Speaker of the House will be President. Or, more likely, the war will end.

9

ShadowVulcan 3 days ago +2

Or, more likely, Trump rigs the game. Republicans accept it bec they stay in power while Dem politicians wave their flags and send more 'strongly worded letters' while taking in more donations and laughing their way to the bank

2

goldfishpaws 3 days ago +16

I don't think the topography of Iran makes it an easy invasion.

16

GeshtiannaSG 3 days ago +59

You: “There are 5,000 valid reasons why this is a bad idea. POTUS: “Just go there and take it.” Unfortunately, that guy is in charge.

59

Alleandros 3 days ago +4

All it takes is for Putin to tell Diaper Don that Obama never had the balls to put ground troops in Iran.

4

KinTharEl 3 days ago +31

Iran is a huge country with a hundred million people and now, a decentralized military command structure. You could put the entire NATO armed forces there and you wouldn't eradicate every single pocket of resistance. Iran has been preparing for this for almost fifty years. The United States got entangled in a war they can't win and can't get out of.

31

VentureIndustries 3 days ago +15

I don’t think they would be sent to invade the whole of Iran, but I could definitely see them being sent to take some of the islands and maybe even some of the coasts along the Iranian side.

15

nosfer82 3 days ago +9

Going in the islands is like standing under a crane that lift a piano to the fifth floor, and the operator want's you dead.

9

VentureIndustries 3 days ago +2

I’m not saying it’s a good idea, but I could definitely see Trump trying it.

2

DetectiveAmes 3 days ago +6

I think it’s just a lesson that America forever decides not to learn. There will always be an insurgency from the citizens that will always outlast Americas interest in staying. All this war is gonna do is cause massive civilian deaths that may result in blowback on America soil in the coming years.

6

Here4Pornnnnn 3 days ago +5

I wouldn’t say ground troops aren’t going to happen. I’m pretty confident we’re going in. There really isn’t any other solution to permanently stop irans nuclear ambitions, especially now that we’ve escalated this far. There is no choice left anymore, Iran has to have a regime change.

5

[deleted] 3 days ago +7

[deleted]

7

Here4Pornnnnn 3 days ago

Maybe, maybe not. But the existing regime in Iran is extremely dangerous for the region and must be resolved. If a new regime that is just as bad or worse takes over, we will have to manage it again. If a peaceful/growth mindset one decides to step in, then fantastic.

0

theixrs 4 days ago +35

UAE wants boots on the ground because they’re essentially held hostage

35

physedka 3 days ago +4

And it's win-win for SA. The price of oil skyrockets so they make tons of money. While the bulk of their oil normally flows through the Persian Gulf, they have Red Sea ports too. Even if this thing gets prolonged and the Strait is blocked for a while, they still win. Their only real danger is if the U.S./Israel suddenly backs out of the whole thing and Iran doubles down on a revenge tour.

4

Mortytowngang 3 days ago +6

It’s not a win if Iran continues to blow up Saudi infrastructure. Additionally a prolonged conflict or a failure to totally remove the current Iranian leadership as it will drastically reduce foreign investment which Saudi and the gulf states have been vying for the last 5-10 years.

6

Starmoses 3 days ago +12

I say this with the opinion that getting into a war with Iran is the worst decision Trump has made in a presidency of horrible decisions. But the IRGC needs to go and the world will be a much better place with them gone. No one wanted to be the one to do it and if they get nukes, everyone loses. That being said this was the worst way to do it.

12

Redhotlipstik 3 days ago +2

It's bad when in hindsight they handled covid better than this

2

Great_Revolution_276 4 days ago +11

The only heavy thing Trump is lifting is his con on gullible right wing American voters.

11

Stocky_Platypus 3 days ago +4

By heavy lifting you mean the toddler in charge is running an illegal war and committing war crimes to help the people that gave him a million dollar jet, billions of dollars and shady dealings with his family and friends...that heavy lifting. MAGA would be flipping their shit right now if Biden or any Dem, did just one of the things Trump is doing in Iran. That is how you know you are in a cult. If your guys does it Woohoo, if they other guy does it VERY BAD.

4

chambee 3 days ago +1

ME has been buying presidents for decades. To protect them.

1

iPisslosses 4 days ago +151

How about using your own personel for it . Then these clowns cry when iran attacks them saying "why are you attacking a neutral country" lol. Also people should remember they are the ones bombing yemen and financing militia massacres in africa for gold.

151

IFeelBATTY 3 days ago +50

Lol why would they when the US is falling over itself to do it for them?

50

Polytechnika 3 days ago +10

What personnel? The south asian slaves?

10

iPisslosses 3 days ago +11

Their islamic scholars who like to wage wars with the kafurs daily. Wanted to use the j word but have been banned thrice now for it

11

Worth-Lead-5944 3 days ago +5

There's no air conditioning on the battlefield, it's unacceptable.

5

Ultra_Metal 3 days ago +6

Arab countries tried to get the UN Security Council to authorize the use of force against the Islamic Republic, but Russia, China and France vetoed it. Arab countries do not want to go against the UN because they are not powerful enough to withstand a diplomatic offensive like the US and Israel can.

6

iPisslosses 3 days ago +1

Dont bring UNSC into it, they should get bombed first. And second its all excuses from gcc for their incapability. Did they ask for permission when bombing yemen or sponsoring massacres in africa. They just shit scared cause they very well know their army is just damn useless filled with nepo crybabies who dont give shit about anything but their asses and money unlike the extremist irgc who will get bombed themselves for power or their goals.

1

FlyConfident6622 4 days ago +63

UAE KSA Israel fighting side by side. What a time to be alive. The J kush special.

63

YakResident_3069 3 days ago +33

Side by side is stretching it. They are sitting in the back urging the USA on.

33

Dexterus 4 days ago +19

Except neither can do what they want, set back Iran a few decades and neuter it. They all want US to do it for them. And they complain it's not US getting hit back.

19

BizarroAzzarro 3 days ago +6

Why don’t they put the boots on the ground then? US and Israel are already providing aerial support. What’s stopping them? Why no skin in the game?

6

MoveEither1986 3 days ago +3

When was the last time a foreign military campaign successful overthrew a government and installed an enduring democracy? I can point to heaps of examples of it failing. Seriously asking.

3

BizarroAzzarro 3 days ago +4

Many examples, either overt or covert missions by US armed forces or CIA, Maduro regime being the latest example, Saddam Hussein the oldest one I remember. Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Latam countries. It’s another matter how long it lasts but successful overthrows are many.

4

MoveEither1986 3 days ago +1

I mean specifically US troops on the ground incursions, not covert ops.

1

FlyConfident6622 4 days ago +9

Iran is nuetered as is. They're sanctioned to f*** but still manage with some assistance via china and Russia and existing trade with GCC nations / india etc. If MBS and netanyahu want they can go grovel to Xi / Putin to ask them to change their stance on Iran and isolate them further.

9

Impressive-Potato 3 days ago +2

Arab military don't have the best track record when it comes to fighting in recent times.

2

Typical_Spray928 3 days ago +11

Listnook just got another country to blame amd karma farm after USA and Israel

11

KarmaSilencesYou 4 days ago +221

Yeah, and there is soooo much trust in the Trump regime too.

221

Assassam 3 days ago +14

Everyone keeps clamoring about Israel-US, but no one is saying that this war is probably what all those OPEC bribes were for

14

briandesigns 3 days ago +25

does UAE realize that the US planned bridge and powerplant day for Iran means an Iranian planned oil infra and desalination plant day for UAE in return?

25

SleepingRiver 3 days ago +8

The Iranians are effectively blockading the strait. The UAE ability to import food is severely limited to either by truck or by plane. UAE at the beginning of this conflict stated they had several months of food stuff reserves. It is weird from the UAE perspective. They did not allow US air craft to use their air space. Before the conflict they allowed the Iranians access to their banking systems that allowed the Iranian government a means to get around some US sanctions. Now they are one of the gulf states taking the brunt of drone attacks.

8

giboauja 4 days ago +85

I mean yeah, Irans been sort of bizarrely, mostly targeting the UAE. You would think Israel would be there primary target. So yeah I get why the UAE is frosty as fck.

85

AffectionateRub1857 4 days ago +46

Iran may have a limited number of weapons that can reach israel. Whereas they can hit UAE much easily.

46

Schmarsten1306 3 days ago +16

and slowing down the oil and gas infrastructure in the whole region sends a way bigger signal worldwide than just losing their own capabilities

16

TheMegaDriver2 4 days ago +56

That was always their stated strategy. They said so. They said that they would attack the oil and gas infrastructure. This comes to no surprise to anyone paying attention.

56

Darkone539 4 days ago +92

>I mean yeah, Irans been sort of bizarrely, mostly targeting the UAE. The big American base is there. It's not really bizarre.

92

topdownyeti 4 days ago +33

isn’t the base in Qatar the largest?

33

captjacksparrow47 3 days ago +13

Yeah but Qatar is gucci with Hamas.

13

mdedetrich 4 days ago +28

America's big bases are in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Iran has also attacked every single country in the region, regardless if it does or doesn't have US bases.

28

SpikesNLead 3 days ago +3

Which ones have they attacked that don't have US bases? I thought all the countries they've targeted so far have US bases.

3

Gandalior 3 days ago +1

Does the US have bases in Oman?

1

SpikesNLead 3 days ago +6

The US and Oman have an agreement to let the US use some Omani bases. Some people might want to split hairs and argue about whether those are technically US bases but they are certainly bases at which there is a US military presence.

6

giboauja 3 days ago +1

Which would be a reason to attack that base...

1

Donnicton 4 days ago +8

It's not really bizarre, a fair amount of the middle east *wants* Iran's regime obliterated even if they have to take a few tantrum missiles in the process, especially the UAE who's president recently outright referred to Iran as an enemy. If Israel/US does it for them then they'll gladly absorb a certain amount of cost, though Iran full well knows that and is set on making the UAE earn it.

8

DoxDoflamingo2 4 days ago +69

What do you mean bizarrely? The US is openly bullying a country in a different continent for its resources even at the peril of their own allies (South Korea, Japan, Europe) because Israel and the UAE wanted control of the region and their only "threat" is Iran. The US doesn't only attack Iran from Israel, through their alliances they built military bases all over the middle east and they have over 50,000 deployed army personnel, radars and other weapons in the region. You can argue that Iran has been so measured, that that is the reason why none of their usual allies (The EU, specially the UK), joined in the fight. They're only hitting back proportionally, never scaling the violence on their own. Western media is incredible, you watch the news and every anchor is like "Yeah the US can do whatever they want to you, so why do you even bother to fight back?". Iran has the right of self-defense. The US power mostly comes from the petro dollar and thats exactly where they are hitting. Does it suck? Major balls, but it also sucks that the US took all the money from the world with the excuse of making it more peaceful and now using it for imperial and territory dominance purposes.

69

FangioV 4 days ago +59

Iran also wants to control of the region. That’s why the are funding Hezbollah, the Houties and rebels in Iraq. They are very open about it, they want to be the superpower of the Middle East. That’s why they are trying so hard to destroy Israel and want the US out of the Middle East. They know that without Israel and USA they can dominate the whole region with little resistance.

59

Cosmic-Hello-2772 3 days ago +1

I agree with you though I object to your examples about Hezbollah, Houthis and Iraqi Shiite rebels. Like all those groups are specifically opposed to Israel, be it for justly or unjustly reasons. One side says that they just want to destroy Israel because they hate Jews, the other side says they are historically opposed to Israel's conduct in Gaza and Palestinians in general etc. So those are against Israel, not specifically against Middle East countries. But putting aside that, I would agree that Iran wants to dominate the whole region and they were also historically opposed to Middle Eastern kingdoms ever since the Islamic revolution and they even tried to dethrone those kingdoms. I don't think they were CIA-level complex or well funded, but I know they tried to instigate rebellions in the region. One of the reasons why UAE, Saudis etc. hate Iran's guts. But then again if we arrive at the topic of "dominating the Middle East", just because Iran wants to do that doesn't automatically makes them the "baddies". Right now, the US is dominating the region and we're seeing the fallout and aftermath of that. Since they entrenched themselves in all ME countries through AI/energy etc. infrastructures and military and intelligence outposts and assets, in a war with Iran, now all those stuff are like fair game and these countries are catching flak (literally) because of that. If you magically remove Iran and the US from the equation, then Israel would love to fill the void and dominate the region. They are using both hard power (against Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria etc.) and soft power (mostly against Gulf countries) to achieve that. So I agree with you, that Iran wants to dominate the region, but it would be a weak argument to put forth as sort of why Iran should be fought against, when the US is already doing that and Israel is acting/planning to do that. I'd be more happy for a Middle East that doesn't have any single dominating power or country be it Iran, Israel or the US. I think that would be more equitable compromise, even though it's naive.

1

VentureIndustries 3 days ago +1

The Saudi-Iran campaign conflict over dominance of the region goes way back. I can see the Saudi point of view that while it may be Israel taking the brunt of the Iranian attacks today, it will be them tomorrow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_proxy_war?wprov=sfti1#Qatif_conflict

1

Cosmic-Hello-2772 3 days ago +1

I mean like I said, left to their own devices, both Iran and Israel would like to dominate the region. But Saudis would still prefer Israeli dominion because better the "infidel" than the enemy sect. I see this very similarly to how historically Ottoman-Balkan relations played out: the Catholic-Orthodoxy wars were so brutal that for Balkan nations, the Islamic Ottoman rule was more preferable to the endless persecution of Catholics. You can find the similar playbook in every corner of the world. Iran doesn't want monarchic Sunni kingdoms in the region. They would prefer Shia governments. Gulf countries don't want a strong Shia republic right next to them. So Israel comes in with trade offers and stuff and that's more preferable. I get that to be honest. So I understand the Gulf point of view. But I was just saying that what Iran's ambitions are not some Iran-specific thing. The US is dominating the Middle East. If they were to leave tomorrow, Israel would go ahead to replace the US as the sole hegemon in the region. If Israel also didn't exist, Iran would like to play that role, etc. Only after them maybe Saudis for instance would like to assume that role if they had a chance. When it's that Machiavellian, it's disingenuous to only single out Iran as the "immoral" party here.

1

VentureIndustries 3 days ago +1

I think the “morality” arguments against Iran come from their: disruption of international norms (support of Houthis in Yemen), challenging established sovereignty (support of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza but I recognize that specific situation is more complicated), and freedom of navigation (free access of the gulf) that affect other members in the region. I can see your argument that, from the Iranian (and likely other religious hardliners) point of view, the gulf states “invite” conflict by hosting US military bases to the region, but that is ultimately their government’s choices to allow them to do so.

1

Cosmic-Hello-2772 3 days ago +2

Hey I'm not defending Iran. If I had such power, I would've just zapped Iranian regime out of existence. Long term, they are a net instability to the region as they are too zealous and militaristic. But also, I just don't get the argument that Iran's ambition to be the hegemon of the Middle East is some sort of "Iran thing" when we have the US deeply entrenched all over the Middle East, with tons of military and intelligence assets in the region, and we have Israel making moves left and right, sometimes diplomatically sometimes militarily to entrench and increase their own power projection. And you had Saudi Arabia literally bombing Yemen, trying to instill their government of choosing in the region. You have UAE, Qatar interfering with civil wars and conflicts of other countries both within the region and also in Africa. There is no moral, ethical side here in the Middle East. Every country is corrupt. It's just incredibly naive and perhaps even disingenuous to single out Iran in all of this, thinking that had Iran not existed, all other countries would've lived in a Paradise or something. The reality is that the region is the home to three great Abrahamic religions, so a religious tension will always be there. It has tons of oil and gas, so someone will always want to control those resources, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will always attract parties from both sides (US, Houthis, Iran, Hezbollah, whatever) in order to shape it to their wishes. If all those conditions were to somehow disappear, maybe we would have a more peaceful region, but Iran isn't the sole actor here that causes chaos. But they absolutely do and I wish their regime is somehow toppled by their own people someday.

2

VentureIndustries 3 days ago +2

Ok, I see where you are coming from in your arguments. I try to look at it the same way and try to be as objective as possible (everybody sucks).

2

wailferret 3 days ago +1

How exactly was Hezbollah "opposing Israel" by killing hundreds of thousands of civilians on Assad's behalf? Or killing hundreds of Lebanese politicians, scientists, and activists? Or causing a port explosion that cratered the Lebanese economy and killed or maimed thousands of Lebanese civilians? What justification did Iran have to sell Russia drones to kill thousands of Ukrainians?

1

Cosmic-Hello-2772 3 days ago +1

"How exactly was Hezbollah "opposing Israel"" I mean come on dude... If you are replying to somebody, or if you want to be taken seriously, just read what you write first. I would understand if someone were to ask something like, "how does ISIS claim itself as being an Islamic State and doing all that jihad etc. but never attacked Israel once?" then yeah, there is something there to be discussed, things to be taken in "quotation marks" like you did. But to start a question as stupid as that one, even putting "opposing Israel" in quotation marks, as if to imply some "big brain conspiracy theory" or something... that's just disingenuous. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah%E2%80%93Israel\_conflict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah%E2%80%93Israel_conflict) The Hezbollah-Israel conflict is probably older than you at this point lol.

1

im_thatoneguy 4 days ago +23

Yeah Iran killed hundreds of Marines in a bombing. They started a civil war to overthrow the democratic government of Lebanon. They blew up a thousand US soldiers in Iraq for 20 years and fomented a civil war in Iraq that also killed over a hundred thousand civilians. UAE gets to decide they want a little security by hosting the US.

23

zizp 4 days ago +10

Iran are the bad guys, yes. But UAE are not the good guys.

10

giboauja 3 days ago +1

But the UAE are the bad guys... wait and the US are the bad guys... and the... huh man this all fcking sucks, oil is posion.

1

lukwes1 4 days ago -7

Lmao, people say israel cant fight in gaza after Oct 7 but iran is just defending themselves by murdering an insane amount of people all over the middle east through their proxy groups

-7

PositiveUse 4 days ago -15

Typical Iranian apologist lol

-15

DoxDoflamingo2 4 days ago +8

Iranian apologist?, the president of the United States openly talks about stealing venezuelan oil and now wanting to do the same with Iran. The major reason for instability around the world has always been US interventionism, but you know nothing, snow.

8

PositiveUse 4 days ago +3

Not saying US is not an imperialistic country. But let’s not ignore Iran‘s meddling in the ME. China‘s meddling in Asia, Russia‘s meddling in Europe. So no, it’s not just the US…

3

Kooky_Project9999 3 days ago +2

Israel has likely been pummelled far harder than the media have represented. They have over 6,000 injured, and that’s with advanced warnings and bomb shelters for most civilians. For reference their war with Iran last year led to 600 injuries. Israel, and more recently the Gulf states have heavily censored strikes. They are further away and Jordan is in between so logistics are harder than the gulf states. Iran and the UAE have been on opposite sides in multiple proxy wars in the region (and beyond) too, so it may also be geopolitical.

2

giboauja 3 days ago +2

Yeah but unlike Iran, people in these countries do have internet access. So its much harder to cover up strikes. Also as far as I know only the UAE has been super draconian about censoring tourist video. Regardless lets hope this madness ends sooner rather than later. I know its not cool to throw any shade towards Iran, but the IRGC is as unhinged as Trump. They just aren't senile, so they come off better. Ultimately they are a radically religious military with no civilian oversight and get first dibs on most of Irans finances. Honestly they really do suck. But that really wasnt the US's problem...

2

Kooky_Project9999 3 days ago +3

Most of the gulf states and Israel are arresting people for posting information on strikes. Israel for example: https://www.972mag.com/israel-media-censorship-iran-war/ And regionally (including Israel) https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/03/12/how-posting-iran-war-info-can-get-you-arrested-in-uae-israel-and-more/ The point is, while we’re being fed a steady stream of images of Iran being blown up by the US and Israel, the damage Iran is causing in response is being heavily curated to both limit information to Iran and to try and sway domestic (within Israel and gulf countries) and “allied” public opinion. This war is among three groups of unhinged people (US, Israel, Iran), all motivated by religious and geopolitical interests. There is no good guy in all of it.

3

obliviousofobvious 4 days ago +15

Then the UAE should fight their own war? Oh yeah...those "investments" are paying off. 100$ oil isn't hurting them either.

15

VividBackground3386 4 days ago +9

Remember that time when there wasn’t a war of choice happening, and which the UAE wasn’t a part of its planning?

9

WorgenDeath 4 days ago +8

I mean, this would be reasonable if it wasn't for the fact that they wouldn't be getting bombed if the US hadn't started this war in the first place.

8

Stockholm-Syndrom 4 days ago

I thought Israel started the war?

0

WorgenDeath 4 days ago +9

Netanyahu and Trump are both to blame, neither would have gone without the other, but regardless of which one of those 2 you feel is more to blame, neither of them are the UAE.

9

Stockholm-Syndrom 4 days ago +3

UAE are clearly less to blame on this decision, I agree.

3

obliviousofobvious 3 days ago +5

The UAE have been apeing the US since MBS took over. They tried a few nation building attempts which blew right up in their faces....so I guess doing a pretty bang up job.

5

Schmarsten1306 3 days ago +2

[The politics would be way better if israel strikes first](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/25/white-house-politics-israel-strikes-iran-00799456) - white house, 4 days before the whole shabang started That shit was set up from the get-go and you can't convince me otherwise

2

sinfulBody1998 3 days ago +1

Friend of my enemy is my enemy

1

Wulfgrimm720 3 days ago +26

You cannot just have ceasefire with a terrorist regime

26

John_T_Conover 3 days ago +3

This situation is so fucked that you could literally be referring to any of the three main current combatant countries.

3

Street_Anon 3 days ago +5

You can't have one with a regime that bomb civilian targets in Arab countries who are not bombing Iran

5

MrBoomBox69 3 days ago +4

That is the terrorist regime. There’s only one in the region: Iran.

4

Vistella 3 days ago +9

only cause the US doesnt count as "in the region"

9

coreychch 4 days ago +41

There’s no trust in the Trump regime either. He changes his mind every time he shits himself.

41

jorgebrks 4 days ago +10

4pm trump has no idea what 10am trump said.

10

ThatCanadianViking 3 days ago +5

Lets be honest.. i doubt 430pm trump has any idea what 4pm trump said at this point.

5

YakResident_3069 3 days ago +2

None in the Saudi regime. Khashoggi remembers.

2

NoDiamond3445 4 days ago +17

Ok then that settles it. All we need is a quick trillion and we will fight them for you on the ground.

17

Onedweezy 4 days ago +6

Do you know how many US casualties that would incur?

6

mastergenera1 4 days ago +15

I think they were being sarcastic, but I wouldn't put it past Dorito Mussolini to make such a demand. Lol

15

NoDiamond3445 4 days ago +6

None of us do. I do not believe it as hard as people on listnook have suggested. I believe it would take 130k+ troops and a trillion dollars. It would require a massive mobilization like 2003 in Iraq. Nothing that can be done with one MEU and the 82nd. Nothing like that would be approved by Congress. As for Iran being some inferno that would eclipse Afghanistan and Iraq? I doubt it. With that said no one wants this. Even most Republicans do not want this. This is the greatest jackassery I have witnessed on the world stage. Unfortunately america needs this lesson. It shows what happens when you try to be a bully. You come across someone who is down to go all the way. And we're not. let's be honest.

6

Armodeen 4 days ago +8

UAE and probably the others in the region have realised the Iranians have them by the balls. If the regime stays in power they will extort them for years to come to transit the straight. No wonder they see continuing the war as the better option right now.

8

PrestondeTipp 3 days ago +8

Every remotely peaceful ME naton hates Iran. Iran is reaping what they sow after funding Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis etc. The benefiaries of the high oil prices stemming from this war will be liberal democracies like Canada, Norway, (nominally) the US, etc

8

Over-Willingness-933 4 days ago +13

The problem is there is very little education about the regime in Iran. It's an Islamic theocracy, hated by all its neighbours, sponsors terrorism around the Middle East.

13

hipsnarky 3 days ago +6

Funny thing that there is quite a few Shia nations in this “Alliance” against Iran.

6

Over-Willingness-933 3 days ago +5

Azerbaijan a Shia is Israel BFF in the region. Israel sells them weapons and Azerbaijan sells them oil. UAE and Bahrain are fairly close too. The interesting friendship emerging is Israeli and Saudi Arabia.

5

Bowler_Pristine 3 days ago +2

I would be terrified if I was in their place, they are a few explosions away from being uninhabitable! Edging Trump on is going to end badly once desalination plants and power plants start exploding! Instead I would do everything possible to put pressure on Donny and Bibi to end this madness now!

2

[deleted] 4 days ago +22

[deleted]

22

BizarroAzzarro 3 days ago +4

Same goes for Saudi Arabia. Both UAE and KSA have hated the Iranian regime for ages but didn’t lift a finger. Now Israel and US are doing the job, why don’t they join in and put boots on the ground? Demanding regime change from US us quite rich

4

alien8mf1 3 days ago +1

Lol why should they? They have the americans for that.

1

IranianLawyer 4 days ago +10

Did the UAE start this war?

10

Upbeat_Parking_7794 4 days ago +37

They are complicit with it. Enabling US to start it. And even financing the US president. They also host at least an US base and are allowing their airspace to be used by US.

37

sovietarmyfan 3 days ago +3

With a leader possibly in coma, the Iranian regime essentially is now like a car without a steer.

3

TRx1xx 3 days ago +2

The leader is just a religious figure, they’re irrelevant when it comes to military strategy

2

ecrane2018 3 days ago +2

They have a deep roster of replacement rulers because they have been planning for this war for about 40 years. They have at a minimum 10 people that can do their leaders role and a hundred others that can support it.

2

Ultra_Metal 3 days ago

Regime change in Iran is the only thing that will solve this problem. The Islamic Republic is the problem for the Middle East just like Russia is the problem for Europe. Reza Pahlavi will establish an interim government that's pro-US, pro-West, pro-peace and against terrorism. Pahlavi has the support of the vast majority of the people who chanted his name during the protests in January. The majority of the Iranian people have voted with their voices and Pahlavi won the voice vote by a landslide. No other name was chanted. Only Pahlavi. Their choice is clear.

0

[deleted] 3 days ago +3

[deleted]

3

Kooky_Project9999 3 days ago +1

Pahlavi is only popular among the diaspora that fled with his father. He isn’t popular in Iran itself. Realistically, the best options would be members of the elected government. But they wouldn’t necessarily be beholden to US interests and many of the reformists political careers have been destroyed by US and Israeli activities over the last few years.

1

Ultra_Metal 3 days ago +2

False. The vast majority of the protesters in Iran were chanting Pahlavi's name. He is extremely popular in Iran and they want him as their leader.

2

Kooky_Project9999 3 days ago +1

Even if true, the protestors didn’t represent the majority of Iranians. Polling suggests round 1/3 of Iranians would accept him as their interim leader. Edit: source for the numbers. Among ruling-affiliated individuals, Ali Khamenei (9%), Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (9%), and Mohammad Javad Zarif (6%) receive the most support. Among opposition figures, Reza Pahlavi (31%), Toomaj Salehi (6%), and Narges Mohammadi (5%) gamaan.org/2025/08/20/analytical-report-on-iranians-political-preferences-in-2024/

1

Ultra_Metal 3 days ago +1

You made up those numbers. Pahlavi wins by a landslide in the voice vote that the people of Iran had in January. No other name was chanted. Only his.

1

Boys4Ever 4 days ago +2

How can anyone trust the other anymore? Why perhaps best to vacate this war and let Israel fight their own battles. They wanted to pick a fight. Go fight.

2

minisoo 4 days ago +1

And that's how asian civilisations have been manipulated by western colonialists since the 15th century.

1

tommysk87 3 days ago +1

UAE have all money of world, but are unable to build sufficient defences?

1

txwoodslinger 3 days ago +1

No trust in bibi or donny either

1

princemousey1 2 days ago +1

Tells who? You’re missing something after the verb.

1

Thick-Monk6911 4 days ago +2

I mean he should really say this about the USA

2

Menethea 4 days ago -5

Well, when Iran in response to Israeli and US attacks wipes out its infrastructure (including energy and desalination) and the UAE ceases to be a viable country, is that enough? /s

-5

fleebleganger 3 days ago +1

Man, the MAGAt-asphere is working hard pumping out propaganda today

1

Brilliant_Crow6391 4 days ago

I mean it makes sense. With Irans attacks on the UAE (both military and civilian targets) they have completely ruined their relationship. Makes sense UAE doesnt trust current Iranian regime.

0

Aurorion 3 days ago +1

Maybe the UAE can make an army of slaves and invade Iran instead

1

ScottOld 3 days ago +1

Should sat, no trust in the US regime

1

sexislug 4 days ago +2

Oh trust yes, if you could die from irony Jesus Christ.

2

xin4111 3 days ago -2

these slave states afraid any local power and are more willing to be the American dog to maintain their wealth.

-2

Street_Anon 3 days ago +11

And Iran is bombing them and mostly Civilian targets. I wonder why they don't like Iran right now.

11

JapioF 3 days ago

That's rich, coming from the same country who's defacto head of state had a journalist murdered and cut to pieces...

0

J-the-Kidder 4 days ago -12

Did they actually mean no trust in the Trump regime? Because at this point, I trust the Iran regime and it's media more than I do our regime and the mainstream media "reporting" on this war.

-12

nonpuissant 3 days ago +5

>Because at this point, I trust the Iran regime and it's media more than I do our regime and the mainstream media "reporting" on this war. That would be extremely naive and foolish. Mistrust Trump all you like, I'm right there with you. But there is zero reason to trust Iran's government more than you would trust the US govt mainstream Western media. More than one thing can be true at a time. Both governments can and are being run by blatant liars that have proven track records of caring nothing about the truth or the well being of their people. Don't lose sight of that fact. If you're skeptical about the US government's trustworthiness under the Trump administration then you *absolutely* should be be just as skeptical about the Islamic Republic regime.

5

GloriousLebron 4 days ago -25

Too much yappin for a lil country the size of me nutz, that was just a big dessert a few decades ago. Iran is 20x bigger than the UAE and actually has a civilisation that is among the oldest ones in the world

-25

UAE tells ceasefire not enough for Iran war solution, says 'no trust' in Tehran regime

💬 Send a Message

145 Comments