I'm assuming this guy knows what he's talking about. https://substack.com/home/post/p-193935610 From the article: "The Blockade Is the Smokescreen. Within Seven Days, 2,500 Marines Will Invade the Island Behind It. Your Portfolio Is Not Ready. I predicted this war 17 days before it started. I've tracked every ship, submarine, and bomber moving toward one island since. Every timeline converges this week."

"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." As someone with a background in national security, counterterrorism, and military service, I've spent years studying these issues from both policy and practical perspectives. Keeping that focus in mind quite often the debate surround gun control comes up. Tragically debate often focuses on emotional responses to tragic events, but I believe we owe it to ourselves to examine the topic with facts, history, and constitutional principles rather than slogans. Key Observations from the Data: - The AR-15 platform has been available to civilians since 1964.  Gun control advocates pointing to its use in a recent tragedy as proof it is the "source" of mass violence ignores both its long history and the broader reality that technology alone does not cause human action. - Small arms lethality has not dramatically increased in ways that fundamentally change the debate; meanwhile, alternative methods of mass harm (bioterrorism, chemical agents and improvised explosives) continue to evolve and are not addressed by firearm restrictions. - CDC research has noted that armed citizens are less likely to be injured by attackers, defensive gun uses are common, and many proposed "interventions" (assault weapon bans, gun-free zones, buybacks) show mixed or ineffective results in reducing crime. Utility of Civilian Firearms: Firearms serve purposes beyond personal self-defense. Philosophically, the Second Amendment embodies the idea that citizens are not subjects of the government, but the ultimate check on potential tyranny. George Washington emphasized that a free people should remain armed to maintain independence—even from their own government. However, modern realities (advanced surveillance, drones, cyber capabilities, and soft power/lawfare) mean the practical defensive utility against a tyrannical state has declined. Constitutional Interpretation: The Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) affirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense in the home, independent of militia service. This 5-4 ruling rejected a purely collective interpretation.

In order to respond to our Padeshah's invitation, HM Reza Pahlavi, to gather in front of the American's embassies around the world, Iranian showed their support to His Majesty and gratitude to USA and Israel yesterday with amazing rallies all over the world. We will win this war against the evil because we are together and the LIGHT will win over darkness. God bless America Am YIsrael Chai Javid Shah Payandeh Iran, Israel and USA

I hate being the guy saying "I told you so", but I knew Trump's strategy of "Hurt the civilians hoping the terrorists will make a deal" won't work on these demons running Iran, but people called me a regime supporter? It seems to me like the biggest supporter of this regime is Donald Trump. He's constantly praising them and now he's accepted a ceasefire on their terms. Ensuring their survival. Not that he ever intended to help us overthrow them anyways. He said he didn't wnat regime change, but had acheived it because he's such and overachiever. He's such an over achiever that he surrenders to terrorists...I'd say I'm disappointed if I hadn't seen this coming from a mile away. Let's see how many Iranians wanna thank him now!