100 милијарди досега за одбрана. Плус ракетите за напад ...
Иначе заливските земји дебело инвестираат во америка во ВИ, па дури и во последниот дил за превземање на Warner Bros од страна на Paramount. Иначе без тие пари кредитниот рејтинг на Парамаунт е ѓубре.
Заеби таа работа, никој не може да знае што све имаат произведено...а имаат врвна технологија околу ракетите. Дали имаат наравено е прашањето....ја и ти тоа не го знаеме, ама ако имале малку памет онака паушално би лупнал бројка, дека со овој интензитет би лупале ракети уште најмалку два месеци.
Колку вакви тунели за мобилни лансирни рампи имаат?
За сега само од западниот дел од Иран ги користат, источните лансирни локации ги чуваат за кога ПВО-то ќе им се разретчи.
According to emails dated December 20, 2018, Epstein reacted to Trump’s sudden Syria troop withdrawal by writing:
“Trump pulling troops out of syria, is a bad sign. He is up to something. And its not good”
He continued:
“You guys need to understand that he is psychotic. And would not blink twice at encouraging an attack on us. So he can leap to the country’s defense… If I go down I’m taking everyone with”
He added:
“Cornering a rat, never a good idea”
And further warned:
“Could be he doesn’t want them there if a much bigger operation might put them in jeopardy. Reminder, he will take everyone down with him, if he feels the end is near. I always urge people not to corner a rat… they become extremely dangerous and unpredictable”
Finally, he wrote:
“We only had 2k troops there, if he were to bomb Iran, they would be slaughtered”
The Syria withdrawal coincided with mounting legal pressure on Trump. His lawyer, former national security adviser, and former campaign chairman had all been convicted of financial crimes, perjury, or campaign finance violations.
Before any potential operation against Iran, Trump faced no immediate legal threat. However, renewed attention on the Epstein files dealt significant political and reputational damage — a story that quickly faded as focus shifted to the Middle East.
Автоматски споено мислење:
Leaks from yesterday’s Lebanese cabinet session reveal what may become one of the most consequential internal debates in Lebanon’s modern political history, a debate not about whether Israel is attacking, but about who the Lebanese state should confront first.
At 8:00 a.m., ministers were urgently summoned to an emergency session following the escalation on the southern front.
As proceedings began, President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam reportedly entered visibly angered, repeating a single line: “Have you seen what the choices of the resistance have brought upon us? Israel is striking us.”
What made this moment striking, according to those present, was the framing.
The statement came as if Israeli airstrikes and violations had not been ongoing for more than fifteen months prior, a period during which no comparable emergency rhetoric was publicly directed at Tel Aviv.
The Commander of the Lebanese Army then outlined four strategic options before the cabinet:
1- The army confronts the Israeli offensive directly, despite limited military capabilities.
2- The government orders a tactical redeployment in the south.
3- A full withdrawal of the army from southern Lebanon.
4- The army is instructed to engage the resistance internally.
The fourth option became the flashpoint.
According to the leaks, the army commander firmly rejected any order to confront the resistance, stating that the army would not turn its weapons inward.
The Prime Minister reportedly reacted angrily and formally requested that the army engage.
The commander repeated his refusal, adding a pointed argument: if the state seeks confrontation, it should first arm the army to face Israel, not redirect it toward domestic conflict.
The most controversial moment came when the President reportedly stated that if Israeli forces were to enter southern Lebanon, the army should avoid direct confrontation, withdraw northward, and begin an operation to disarm the resistance, even by force.
Beyond the immediate exchange, the leaks suggest something even more consequential: that the American side is pushing toward an internal confrontation and a reconsideration of the Lebanese Army’s doctrine.
According to this account, there may be pressure to remove the army commander and a significant number of senior officers, alongside proposals for direct external oversight in vetting and appointing new officers, potentially through an American company operating in an advisory or supervisory capacity.
If accurately reflected, this exchange reveals a dramatic strategic divergence at the highest level of the Lebanese state:
- Confront external aggression directly, despite military asymmetry.
- Or avoid direct engagement with Israel while prioritizing internal restructuring of armed power.
This is not merely a tactical disagreement.
It is a doctrinal question about the identity of the Lebanese state itself: Is its primary security doctrine oriented outward against Israeli incursions, or inward toward consolidating monopoly over arms?
At a moment of regional escalation, such positioning carries profound consequences.
Redirecting the army internally while Israeli operations continue risks reshaping Lebanon’s internal balance of power, and potentially redefining the meaning of “national defense.”
If these leaks reflect the actual tone and direction of the meeting, then the real issue is no longer just escalation on the southern border.
It is whether Lebanon’s official military doctrine is being recalibrated inward, precisely when the external front remains active.
До сега ни една вест не сум прочитал околу Иран..Имам еден колега кој ги прати тие работи на тикток..Вика Иран не е сам,со него е и Техеран и многу се јаки и ми покажува клипови од ракети кои вриштат со АИ потпис ама го оставам нека верува во тоа што гледа..интересен ми е..
Американски бази имаат, плус Израел и САД смеат да го користат нивниот воздушен простор. САД е во НАТО, базите не се само на САД туку и НАТО, шо значи и цело НАТО че се инволвира.
Се чуваше Иран демек и во 12 дневната војна, стари ракети испукувал, ќе виделе сеа што ќе се случи, Израелците и Америте трошеле многу пари за ракетите ова она... Еве веќе 4 дена поминаа и од новата војна и Иран со цел парламент и религиозни лидери разнесен во воздух ама ракатите уште ги чуваат...
Рускиот политички филозоф Александар Дугин по американско-израелскиот напад врз Иран, на платформата Икс објави: „Почна трета светска војна. Пак“. -Ако во Русија не започнат вистински патриотски реформи сега, ситуацијата ќе стане целосно непредвидлива. Нашите сојузници систематски се уништуваат...
100 милијарди досега за одбрана. Плус ракетите за напад ...
Иначе заливските земји дебело инвестираат во америка во ВИ, па дури и во последниот дил за превземање на Warner Bros од страна на Paramount. Иначе без тие пари кредитниот рејтинг на Парамаунт е ѓубре.
Palestinian videographer Rami Abu Saada filmed his conversation with a Palestinian girl who expressed despair, saying death would be an escape from the dire conditions in Gaza. The moment sheds light...
Оваа страница користи колачиња за персонализирање на содржината. Со продолжување на користењето, се согласувате со нашата политика за користење колачиња.
www.latimes.com
