814 replies to this topic

[dasmo]

I asked the robot to explain.


1) “Strategic defeat” vs. “military success”

Stein is drawing a distinction between tactical/military results and strategic outcomes.
• The U.S. may have damaged Iranian targets militarily.
• But strategy is about long-term goals—and many of those weren’t achieved.

Key U.S. goals going into the war included:
• Weakening or toppling Iran’s regime
• Stopping its nuclear program
• Reducing its regional influence
• Reopening the Strait of Hormuz on U.S. terms 

What actually happened:
• Iran’s regime survived intact
• Its nuclear capability was not eliminated
• It still has missiles, proxies, and leverage
• It gained influence over the Strait of Hormuz (a critical global oil route) 

➡️ So Stein’s point: you can win battles but still lose the overall strategic contest.

⸻

2) The Strait of Hormuz = the big issue

A major reason analysts (including Stein) see this as a defeat:
• Iran showed it can disrupt or control global oil flows
• The U.S. could not fully reopen the strait without negotiating a ceasefire

That’s significant because:
• It exposes a limit to U.S. power
• It gives Iran ongoing leverage over global markets and diplomacy

Some analysts even describe this as a “confession of weakness” by the U.S. 

⸻

3) Iran “won by not losing”

A common strategic concept here:

Iran didn’t need to win outright—it just needed to survive.

Despite heavy damage:
• The government stayed in power
• It retained key military capabilities
• It can now negotiate from a position of resilience, not collapse

This is why some analysts say Iran emerged “bruised but more powerful” geopolitically 

⸻

4) The ceasefire itself signals limits

A ceasefire can sometimes mean:
• Both sides want to stop escalation

But in this case, critics argue it shows:
• The U.S. couldn’t achieve decisive victory
• It had to pause and negotiate without securing its main objectives

That’s why some describe the deal as:
• A “retreat without clear gains” 
• A pause in a conflict where “no military solution seems viable” 

⸻

5) What position it leaves both countries in

United States
• Avoided a larger, riskier war (short-term benefit)
• But:
• Credibility may be weakened
• Objectives unmet
• Rivals (China, Russia, Iran) may see limits to U.S. power

Iran
• Took heavy damage economically and militarily
• But:
• Regime survived
• Maintains regional influence
• Holds strategic leverage (Hormuz, proxies, nuclear program)

⸻

Bottom line (what Stein is saying)

When Stein calls it a “huge strategic defeat,” she means:
• The U.S. used force but didn’t achieve its core goals
• Iran emerged still standing—and in some ways stronger strategically
• The ceasefire reflects limits of U.S. power, not dominance

[dasmo]

Because war is peace in clown world….

[Mike K.]

The dust hasn’t even settled yet and the talking heads are already promoting books they’ll be writing.

[Matt R.]

Are we all following the Lindsay Shepherd saga?

Something stinky going on perhaps.

https://x.com/newwor...kwKsq-Q8cZlrq-g

Looks like this person, Frances Widowson and Dallas Brodie were invited to appear on this mockumentary. Maybe others.

Edited by Matt R., 13 May 2026 - 10:50 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

Are we all following the Lindsay Shepherd saga?

Something stinky going on perhaps.

https://x.com/newwor...kwKsq-Q8cZlrq-g

Looks like this person, Frances Widowson and Dallas Brodie were invited to appear on this mockumentary. Maybe others.

 

 

 

Following outrage over a media set up, academic Frances Widdowson exposed on X, the CBC has confirmed that the public broadcaster was behind the media sting on notable political commentators. The project also received significant media grants from Canadian Heritage.

Widdowson told Juno News that she, along with author Lindsay Shepherd, author Jerry Amernic, an unnamed RCMP officer, and later Dallas Brodie, had all been targeted by the media company.

The commentators are all known for criticizing claims that 215 bodies were found at a residential school in Kamloops B.C., as well as for defending Canada’s first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald.

 

https://www.junonews...they-are-behind

[Matt R.]

I look forward to seeing Marc Miller squirm.

[dasmo]

Stuff like that would be funnier if it wasn’t politically and propaganda motivated. See them all squirm.

[Mike K.]

I suppose this is the Canadian version of the Matt Walsh documentaries.

[Victoria Watcher]

https://x.com/jenger...592049958261078

 

[Victoria Watcher]

Now CBC has to report on themselves.

 

 

 

 

CBC called out for role in prank interviews of Kamloops residential school grave critics

 

Some conservative politicians condemn use of taxpayer dollars to prank people

 

 

https://www.cbc.ca/n...loops-9.7198349

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 14 May 2026 - 06:58 AM.

[dasmo]

“Prank.” It’s not for fun…. There is a FN guy who has a podcast where he interviews these folks. They do kinda revise things and avoid things. They should have just stuck to the facts. Once they had the claim that the FN asked for the Indian Act and to be taught farming because of the “sudden collapse of the buffalo population” they were just swinging the pendulum to the opposite….

I’ll post the podcast later. I’ve only listened to the latest where he debates Tim Thielmann. You guys will like it because the host pretty much doesn’t debate. It’s just a good thing that the debate is invited to happen with two opposing positions with respect. Host isn’t totally opposite I guess as they are closer to the middle.

[Mike K.]

That was so hostile, in that studio.

What is wrong with these people?

[dasmo]

Is it posted for viewing?

[dasmo]

The podcast is called Nuanced.

[dasmo]

That was so hostile, in that studio.

What is wrong with these people?

Ya, that guy is brimming with hate. here are some more civil conversations https://www.youtube....aronPete/videos

[Victoria Watcher]

[Victoria Watcher]

https://x.com/AaronG...716432693047485

 

[Victoria Watcher]

[Victoria Watcher]

I was deceived by a CBC show

I was deceived by social activists in an elaborate taxpayer-funded, government-backed scheme to defame Canada's first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, and mock Canadians who defend him.

 

 

https://youtu.be/4lG...3NTpzMz3BRCYl84

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 17 May 2026 - 06:10 AM.

[dasmo]

Trying to make it black and white. Divide and conquer. I am not standing behind MacDonald. I think our country has flawed political foundations. I also think our country is great. But it’s not because of him. Just like the present day our country is not great because of them. It’s despite them. I think some of these targets are making up their own history as if that’s the truth where all history is a narrative of some sort and also won’t stand with them either. What the CBC is doing here is not comedy and is absolutely horrible because of that. I doubt it will be funny. It’s also not grounded in any universal truth as this subject in general is not a simple black and white subject. I hope it gets released as it will do more damage to their reputation and maybe help spur some restructuring there. Maybe they will destroy each other!