quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Ok I give. What the hell is a “beard wife”?

A "beard" is slang for the wife of a man who is gay but pretending to be heterosexual by marrying.

You know, like Michelle Obama.


.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Ok I give. What the hell is a “beard wife”?

I had to ask Copilot AI:

In modern English, especially in Western popular culture, a “beard” is slang for a person—often a wife or girlfriend—who serves as a social cover to conceal something about another person, most commonly their sexual orientation or a hidden relationship. A “beard wife” would therefore mean a woman married to a man to present a socially acceptable image, not because of a typical romantic relationship.

Always learning something new here.

“Apparently”. Of course, totally unsubstantiated. But even if true, do we really give a damn if their supreme leader is gay? Really, WGAF? Whatever his orientation is, the only thing that matters is that he needs to be taken out, just like his father was.

He was pushed into Supreme Leadership by Revolutionary Guard Corps influence (read: threats) because of his long connection with the IRGC.

You know, the dudes who hang gays from cranes. THAT group.

In other news, overnight another 30 or so percent of the actual Key Men Behind The Curtain-- what would be cabinet-level Secretaries here-- joined their friends in the afterlfe.

The milk in my refrigerator has a longer life expectancy than the average Iranian official these days.

You know, the Trump's cabinet official who has been most conspicuously silent since the start of this war has been DNI Gabbard. But I wasn't suprised, since she's always been an anti-war hawk. She broke her silence today only after National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent submit his resignation effective immediately in oppostion to the war. Notice what she wrote, Trump "is responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country,". She didn't even say she supported the President's decision. That's a big tell, imo.


https://x.com/DNIGabbard/statu...-war-latest-march-17



"Donald Trump was overwhelmingly elected by the American people to be our President and Commander in Chief. As our Commander in Chief, he is responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is responsible for helping coordinate and integrate all intelligence to provide the President and Commander in Chief with the best information available to inform his decisions.

After carefully reviewing all the information before him, President Trump concluded that the terrorist Islamist regime in Iran posed an imminent threat and he took action based on that conclusion."

I take her, face value, at her word, and have no issue with her statement and position.

In the military, I may have had a different view than my Commander, but I followed his orders, and supported his directives.

I do not see any of her behaviors or actions being "a problem" for the President.

Unlike DHS, AG, FBI, etc.. (taking with an exceeding large grain of salt, as so much "reporting" is agenda driven)

Iran was eventually going to close off the straight.
Trump just ripped the bandaid off.
Better sooner than later.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
I take her, face value, at her word, and have no issue with her statement and position.

In the military, I may have had a different view than my Commander, but I followed his orders, and supported his directives.

I do not see any of her behaviors or actions being "a problem" for the President.

Unlike DHS, AG, FBI, etc.. (taking with an exceeding large grain of salt, as so much "reporting" is agenda driven)

Ditto.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
...Whatever his orientation is, the only thing that matters is that he needs to be taken out, just like his father was.

Yes, that is true. But the fact that they execute gay men and that they would be extremely humiliated to have a gay leader for their country makes this hysterical.


.


.

^^^^ There’s zero evidence he’s gay. It’s all unnamed sources spreading rumor that some tabloid took and run, and everyone else started parroting it. Just dumb.

I could go either way on it

That rumor is probably a Mossad covert psyop . . .

Or maybe he's a fanny bandit

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
“Apparently”. Of course, totally unsubstantiated. But even if true, do we really give a damn if their supreme leader is gay? Really, WGAF? Whatever his orientation is, the only thing that matters is that he needs to be taken out, just like his father was.

In the true "Global" aspect of him being a gay ruler of a country, yeah, who cares...

But this is Iran, a deeply Islamic country who enforces Shira Law.
That's a "No-No" in that part of the world.

Joe Kent wanted us to sit around and wait for a preemptive Iranian nuclear missile strike on the US ans Israel? What was Trump supposed to do in this situation? Israel has never led us wrong and I am grateful Trump is supporting them with more than juat words.

re NATO,
North Atlantic, not Persian Gulf,
so I can kinda see why they may resist, kinda


but are all not also members of the UN? which is not constrained by the North Atlantic area

NATO's not just in the North Atlantic and Australia is not a member of NATO.

quote:

07 December 2022 NATO's new Strategic Concept has highlighted the importance of the Indo-Pacific for Allied security and endorsed the growing collaboration

https://www.nato-pa.int/docume...eport-krimi-021-pcnp

quote:

Originally posted by Carpentermaass84:
Joe Kent wanted us to sit around and wait for a preemptive Iranian nuclear missile strike on the US ans Israel? What was Trump supposed to do in this situation? Israel has never led us wrong and I am grateful Trump is supporting them with more than juat words.

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! Turns out 'ole Joe Kent is a hypocrite.

https://x.com/MAGAVoice/status...076369383219482?s=20

quote:

Originally posted by lyman:
re NATO,
North Atlantic, not Persian Gulf,
so I can kinda see why they may resist, kinda

It’s not about the binding agreement signed by our NATO “allies.”

It’s about doing us a favor in a time of need.

WE have spent BILLIONS of $$$ on the alliance for seven decades. WE propped that alliance up. WE kept the Soviets from marching to the English Channel. WE even kept France free, even after those cheese eating surrender monkies pulled out of NATO.

Now, we ask for a pittance - just a ship or two as a token of good will. They say ‘screw you it’s not our war.’

President Trump was testing them. The libs say he was ‘begging’ for ships, but I believe we never needed them, and this was just a test to see if they would reciprocate when we asked a simple favor.

They said “no.”

Now, President Trump hs all the justification he meeds to pull out of NATO and let the weak Euros do the unthinkable - defend themselves with their own money.

Europe will capitulate to Russia for oil now.