
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Victor Davis Hanson: Trumps Counter Revolution End the Great Reset destruction of America
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:28 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:28 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Iran is a beacon of anti-globalism. That's why it's strongly allied with the #1 opponent of globalism, Russia. Venezuela was anti-globalism and allied with Russia, too. Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, and NK were all the primary opponents to globalism up to 2026.
Why do you view international diplomacy, trade, and power dynamics through a binary lens of Globalist v. Anti-Globalist?
First, you’re using a washed out and meaningless definition of globalist, and secondly, you seem oblivious to other motivations.
Applying the term anti-globalist to a radical Islamic state that is a repressive theocracy intent on warring with the power nations representing western values is quite a stretch.
Swing and a miss.
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:32 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
Why do you view international diplomacy, trade, and power dynamics through a binary lens of Globalist v. Anti-Globalist?
I personally don't.
The arguments in OP, however, do.
My intent is showing that "globalism" is nothing more than a nonsense word, so that people drop the NPC routine and discuss things outside of that binary lens
quote:
Applying the term anti-globalist to a radical Islamic state that is a repressive theocracy intent on warring with the power nations representing western values is quite a stretch.
How? You said it yourself, "warring on the power nations representing western values"
The "power nations representing western values" is literally just another way to describe most versions of "globalism"
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The "power nations representing western values" is literally just another way to describe most versions of "globalism"
This is what I’m talking about regarding your definition of globalism. It’s nonsensical.
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:37 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
This is what I’m talking about regarding your definition of globalism. It’s nonsensical.
*I* didn't create this definition.
There is a reason almost every definition has to encompass the EU and NATO.
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:39 am to Jimbeaux
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.quote:
VDH: Before you say Israel is pulling americas strings. Look at what our formal allies actually did.
While Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and their allies were busy floating puppet-master memes about Israel running American foreign policy, Victor Davis Hanson decided to take a look at what America's actual formal allies did when the shooting started.
Spain refused to allow use of the NATO base near Gibraltar for operations against Iran. The same base. The same country that in 1986 told Ronald Reagan he couldn't fly over their territory to hit Libya — forcing a 2,500-mile detour. Same answer, different decade.
France declared the war dangerous from day one and wanted no part of it. They also couldn't fly over the Iberian Peninsula in 1986. Pattern established.
The United Kingdom — the most surprising betrayal according to VDH — told the United States it could not use Diego Garcia, the critical Indian Ocean base, for long-range bomber operations. Only defensive operations, they said. Then when their own base in Cyprus was targeted by Iran, they suddenly found one destroyer they could spare — but couldn't keep it for the weekend because they didn't want to pay overtime.
VDH asks whether Prime Minister Starmer remembers the Falklands War. In 1982 Britain needed to fight halfway around the world and didn't have the fuel, the missiles, or the reconnaissance to do it. Reagan said yes to everything — 2 million gallons of gas, satellite intelligence, 200 Sidewinder missiles, a blank check to Margaret Thatcher. Did they forget that? VDH says they're going to remember it, because America won't be doing that again.
Germany sent Chancellor Merz to the White House looking hangdog — because two weeks earlier he had been trashing Trump in front of massive crowds in Germany.
Now let's talk about Israel. The country everyone is accusing of running American foreign policy.
Israel has 300 combat-ready jet fighters. Britain has fewer. France has fewer. Germany has fewer. The so-called great powers of NATO — with populations of 55, 60, 80 million people — cannot match the air capability of a nation of 11 million. Those 300 planes are flying every single day alongside American forces, destroying the Iranian infrastructure that has funded H-z-b, H-m-s, and the Houthis for decades — the same groups that have k!lled Americans from Beirut to Baghdad to Kabul.
VDH's accounting of 47 years of Iranian aggression is worth absorbing. The embassy takeover in 1979. The Marine barracks bombing — 241 d*ad. Khobar Towers. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. Assassination teams sent worldwide. Attacks on Bolton, Pompeo, and Trump. Shaped charges — IEDs — sent through Islamic militants that k!lled not 600 Americans as commonly cited but closer to 1,500, with thousands more maimed, across both Iraq and Afghanistan. Forty-one American citizens among the 1,200 butchered on October 7th.
That is who Israel has been fighting on America's behalf for 47 years while NATO allies were calculating overtime pay.
This post was edited on 9/26/26 at 8:43 am
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:39 am to SlowFlowPro
you really need help in understanding context. The op's lead mentions that global word one time. The op's info directs attention to counter revolutionary, revolution 6 times. The whole article is derived from VD's book.
I do not think I have ever seen you start a thread. Be bold go start one on globalism
I do not think I have ever seen you start a thread. Be bold go start one on globalism
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:43 am to Trevaylin
quote:
. The op's lead mentions that global word one time.
It references globalist-adjacent terms in other places like the Great Reset
quote:
The op's info directs attention to counter revolutionary, revolution 6 times.
Is this revolution against "globalists" or "globalism"?
quote:
I do not think I have ever seen you start a thread. Be bold go start one on globalism
Is there anything more "Deep State" than US military conflict with Iran?
quote:
Posted on 6/20/25
SlowProphetPro
That thread is on page 2 of my list of topics, just FWIW
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
War with Iran is supporting globalism
You have fallen into the "It Is All I Have" pool. Fortunately, it is not a big pool yet it is very crowded.
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Including outright falsehoods like references to the City of London or Bank of England, won't win this argument.
Remember when you said Carney wasnt a globalist and didnt work for the Bank of England
Posted on 9/26/26 at 8:57 am to SDVTiger
I admitted to that irrelevant mistake in real time. The fact you're bringing it up in this thread shows your inability to defend your position. Now you're just trying to derail the thread to make it not only about me, but something that's a non-factor to any discussion.
I didn't think you had the intellectual ability.
I hope you're not planning on repeating your failure above to try to derail the thread again
I didn't think you had the intellectual ability.
I hope you're not planning on repeating your failure above to try to derail the thread again
Posted on 9/26/26 at 9:04 am to SlowFlowPro
So insouciant
So above it all
So condescending
So FOS.
So above it all
So condescending
So FOS.
Posted on 9/26/26 at 9:09 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:LMAO
History since 1953 is my work. All you need is a basic understanding of what happened in 1953 and then 1979 to understand the dynamic.
Careful, now you're starting to sound like us Promethean supporters (or idiots as you say)... you know, from our other thread...
quote:
"Since the early 20th century, Iranian oil was completely controlled by the British owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), which became British Petroleum (BP). And how, under those agreements, Britain paid Iran a small royalty while reaping massive profits and retaining exclusive control over infrastructure and auditing"
And they still do... glad to see you coming around, counselor.

Popular
Back to top


0











