Dr. Gonzo

Jesus fucking Christ, are you made of plastic?

I forgot about Rangnick. I do think he’s worse than Solskjaer, Moyes, & Van Gaal though. I don’t think Moyes really got a fair shake with them - although he was an idiot for tearing up Ferguson’s back room staff. Solskjaer was limited tactically but United had some identity at least. Mourinho’s a football terrorist but I genuinely think he wasn’t joking when he said one of his biggest achievements in management was getting that shit squad to 2nd place. Van Gaal you could at least take more seriously than Ten Hag. Ultimately the biggest problem at United is probably not the manager - it’s the players. 10 years of bad recruitment, being shit at moving on deadwood, and too many players with shit attitudes (idk how Bruno Fernandes can captain them with his dogshit attitude) are the biggest problems. You couple that with Ten Hag being seemingly useless at recruitment, looks like a poor man manager, and having shit tactics… and I genuinely think he’s been the worst - or one of the worst - managers United have had in their banter era.

I think he’s their worst manager in the post-Ferguson era of United. So I hope he stays for a very long time.

the hand holding incident? If that’s a clear penalty the games well and truly gone. You give that and you’ve got to give a penalty for pretty much every grab and pull in the box for set pieces. If Palace wanted that to be given they should have tried being Man City, because they’re just about the only team that gets gifted penalties like that in our league.

Alisson must be the world’s most injury prone keeper

I think the US is always ready for a war to start... but they've had a pretty poor go of things since the Korean War (and even the way that ended wasn't great because it's technically still not over). Vietnam, the Bush era Iraq invasion, the pointless Afghanistan 20 year adventure. Honestly the Afghanistan one is kind of cruel, the US and allies came in looking to find Bin Laden - who had fucked off to Pakistan lol- then settled on removing the Taliban. Afghanistan, especially their women, then got 2 decades of improved human rights and a taste of a more normal life. Then the US fucked off and the Taliban came back and rolled back human rights for a shitload of people. The Iraq invasion really ended up shaping the modern Middle East though. The US coming in and toppling Iraq's government and trying to make Iraq the sandbox for wahabis to run wild ultimately led to the creation of ISIS and similar groups. That ended up spilling into Syria and then we got the Syrian civil war and Syria turning into a sandbox for the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Israel to fuck around with warfare they don't want to call warfare and nobody really gives too many shits about it. And this led to the Islamic Republic of Iran gaining a huge amount of influence in both Syria and Iraq - a situation they'd dreamed of since 1979. The US's problem is that since WW2, they've gone into wars with big lofty and general goals - but I think not too much thought's put into smaller short term goals to get to that end result. That ultimately leads to their wars being pointless despite their military superiority and their ability to land big wins on the battlefield. But the Vietcong and the Taliban ultimately just had to wait out the US. ISIS was made into a much smaller and less threatening group - but that took an international effort from... the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Syria weirdly. I think if the US truly wants to beat Iran too... like I said earlier, a ground invasion's probably not going to get them much success. It could be like Iraq where they can quickly defeat the opposition military and depose the government - but it's a lot harder of a country to occupy than Iraq because of the geography. So then they'd be in that same position they were in with Iraq where they've taken out a government but won't truly have a plan for what's next. If the US and Israel did strike Iran's weapon facilities... I wonder what that would mean for Russia's war in Ukraine where they've been using Iranian drones, missiles and rockets.

I'm not so sure about this. Iran's got a larger population and a larger military. But I think there's a lot to consider other than just the manpower both countries have to throw at war. First, Iran's air force is incredibly outdated. They're still flying US planes and helicopters from the 70s when Iran and the US were close allies. They've been cut off from being able to service these aircraft with the proper parts since 1979 - they've had to reverse engineer their own. Iran's air force, as a result, has had an increasingly poor safety record with each decade since the revolution. They did have buy a couple of Russia's latest and greatest fighter jets - but the evidence in the Ukraine war is that these aren't so great compared to even older western counterparts. Second, the military of Iran is very fragmented between the traditional 3 branches of the army and the IRGC. Artesh (the army) is deliberately kept weak compared to Sepah (the IRGC) - this is by design, to prevent military coups (it is why the IRGC was founded in the first place during the Iran-Iraq war). You can think of the IRGC's relationship to Artesh as very similar to Nazi Germany's Waffen SS v. the Wehrmacht. Diehard believers in the IR's ideology vs. soldiers who were just conscripted. Third, I think due to Iran's government's support of Palestinian a lot of people assume Iranians are fully aboard with the idea of going to war with Israel. I think doing so seriously underestimates the general feeling of resentment many Iranians have towards Palestinians due to their government spending so much of their tax money on the Palestinian's conflict while Iran is in absolute disrepair and the economy is in terrible condition. In the past years we have seen Iranians more willing to take to the streets to risk their lives, safety, and their freedom (and the freedom of their families) to demand better from their government. Are these people going to be more willing to go to war with Israel or take advantage of the chaos of war to fight back against their government while it looks at it's weakest. Fourth, Israel's got the military tech advantage... by far. Fifth, Israel's clearly got a pretty deep network of spies within Iran. In the past 10 years there's two high profile assassinations in Iran that we know Mossad was responsible for. We know they've got spies/double agents within the IRGC to relay information about when only IRGC members are going to be in a particular building of Syria so they are the only ones who are killed by an Israeli strike. So aside from the tech advantage, they've likely also got the military intelligence advantage over Iran. Sixth, if the US (or other western countries) won't get involved in an actual invasion with Israel... Israel is still allies with the US/UK/France/Germany and many others. These countries, while both Iran and Israel are not "officially" at war have already acted to defend Israel. I don't think anything indicates that this would stop should official war break out. Ultimately though, I doubt Israel or the US actually invade Iran. I could see them bombing Iran, but I can't see an actual invasion happening. Especially if Israel is alone in this war. Just look at the geography of Iran. It's not Iraq, it's not Afghanistan... it's got features of both. Big mountain ranges, large deserts... and it's also got terrain completely unlike both countries. In the provinces of Gilan and Mazandaran up in the north of the country by the Caspian Sea - an invasion would have to consider jungle warfare as well. And Tehran's a far bigger city than Baghdad, Fallujah, Kabul, or Gaza City. Urban warfare is hell, now imagine urban warfare in a massive city with a metropolitan population of over 16 million. I think Iran's geography make it incredibly difficult for any sort of invasion generally. You've got to be prepared for: mountain warfare, desert warfare, jungle warfare, and urban warfare. I think if Israel is going to hit Iran back after this attack, they're more likely to use airstrikes and covert-ops/assassinations of IRGC officers. Maybe some members of their higher up leadership too. Not really tbh. It's not like the JCPOA removed sanctions from Iran and let them be normal participants in a global economy. It simply marginally improved relations between the US and Iran, giving Iran mild sanctions relief and giving the US (and the international community) more transparency with what was going on with Iran's nuclear project. Subsequently, we've seen the JCPOA ripped up by the US... which directly led to the collapse of the so called "reformists" who seek improved relations with the west (though they're still horrible theocratic cunts). This ushered in the worst sanctions and a total collapse of Iran's economy (for ordinary people, mullahs and the IRGC still make money through black market dealings) - as well as pulling the Iran's government towards the ultra-extremist hardliners. Subsequently, Iran's still under all the Trump-era sanctions. More sanctions were imposed due to Iran providing aid to Russia with the Ukraine war. They were meant to get $6B USD after a prisoner exchange, but their involvement with the October 7 attacks on Israel had those funds frozen. US relations with Iran are probably at the lowest point they've been since 1979.

Rodgers is an absolute dickhead tbh

Yeah that's one of those things where I have no idea how you can't laugh tbh.

Welcome back pal

Think that means the UK is the opposite of fine if a third world war breaks out.

I hope to fuck this doesn't mean Iran's going to get the shit bombed out of it now.

Me: please be a normal week Netanyahu: Wonder if Israel really is going to start dropping bombs on Iran.

See Pep’s playing history lol.

Tons of Iranians are so happy Nasrallah is probably dead too - because Hezbollah is where they see their taxes go while their country goes to shit. And when they’re protesting, they get beaten and killed by Hezbollah flows in to do the dirty work when basiji start getting a little fearful of their neighbors. And I’m not surprised Syrians are celebrating his potential death as well. Hezbollah has been a horrible influence on Syria.

Collective punishment is not the cop out term. We've seen it before with Gaza and Lebanon - civilian deaths are considered acceptable as long as one known terrorist is killed, even within refugee camps and aid stations. That is the definition of collective punishment. That second sentence there... is not great reasoning tbh. Just because Israel has refrained from systematic destruction of the Palestinians amounting to the same sort of mass murder we've seen in the Holocaust and Armenian genocide... this does not make Israeli human rights violations and war crimes acceptable by any means. You are right that within Lebanon, there are many who don't like Hezbollah. But have you looked at the actual numbers of how many Lebanese people support Hezbollah or view them as the lesser of three evils (the evils being: Hezbollah, Lebanon's dogshit army that is worthless, and Israel)? It's staggering. The target of the attack today was an entire apartment complex - a lot of civilians will have died, been injured, or lost their homes. I'm sure Israel knows this and decided it is worth the blowback the attack will cause. I think it is once again Israeli leadership being shortsighted. I think expecting a full scale attack and invasion of Iran by the US is hopeful at best. Iran isn't Iraq, go look at a map that shows the topography. It is a tough place to invade - it would make the Iraq war and Afghanistan war look like a piece of piss in comparison. I also think invasion would do more to pull Iran's public support more to the IR than not. Iran's government is unpopular with Iranians - but the idea of foreign invasion is also very unpopular. Anything other than assassinations of government officials and sepahis and very targeted strikes (like the 2 recent strikes on Iranian facilities) would likely prompt massive outrage against the attackers. It's the rally-around-the-flag effect; even hardcore Shah loyalists in the military happily fought against Saddam Hussein's invading force to protect the revolutionary government. If you want to see change in Iran that leads to a more peaceful Middle East, you want Khamenei and sepahi higher ups dead ASAP. I think once he dies there will be a massive power struggle, there's enough domestic chaos in Iran and lack of support in the current system of government for that to be realistic. Meanwhile, you think the Houthis can survive if the IR isn't there to prop them up? That's laughable tbh, the Houthis greatest asset is they're in a terrain that is tough to bomb and they're receiving weaponry and training from Iran (and now Russia).

I don't disagree with that - but for longer than 15 years Israel has enflamed the region. It's not like new illegal Israeli settlements announced every time a US president lands in Israel, to make it look like the US is fully in support of Israel flaunting international law, is anything new. Nor is the way Israel views collective punishment in warfare or the belief that 100s of civilians dying to kill 1 terrorist leader is justifiable. I think maybe a better strategy than leveling an entire apartment complex to kill one Hezbollah leader, going back to the more targeted strikes and assassinations of Iranian leadership would do more to keep Israel safe than what we've seen in Gaza and Lebanon which is just going to create a new generation of Arabs that hate Israel with every fibre in their being. Even that pager and radio attack I think did more to hurt relations between Lebanon and Israel than any real long term military benefit to Israel. If Israel is serious about wanting lasting peace and stability, they've got to remember they still have to live next to their neighbors. By making a huge number of their population freak out about whether or not their electronic devices will randomly explode (and it was a HUGE number of Lebanese people that reported fear that their phones and radios might kill them, regardless of whether they had any ties to Hezbollah or not). There's an argument that it amounts to terrorism - I'm not so sure about that, because obviously Hezbollah militants were the direct target - and while civilian deaths are always sad, there just being 2 civilians killed is particularly remarkable (especially when considering how Israel typically fights wars). But it certainly inflicted a lot of mental anguish for Lebanese people, whether that was the point or not. But like I've said, none of the parties with any power to end this: Israel, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah... none of them are serious about peace at all.

I'm also pretty sure that's why Netanyahu isn't really wanting to deescalate at the moment, other than his own legal struggles in Israel. He's tight as fuck with Trump and the GOP & he'd prefer to be dealing with the US President that recognised Jerusalem as Israel's capital for no good reason other than Netanyahu wanted it, despite basically every US foreign policy expert saying "this is stupid and needlessly enflames the region."

First off, I think Netanyahu deserves that kind of reception at the UN. I've got no love for Hamas and Hezbollah, but Netanyahu's a power-hungry psychopath who let the attacks of October 7th happen so he could have a long war to keep himself in power despite his enormous legal struggles. He's a war criminal, he should be on trial at the Hague. But secondly, isn't Trita Parsi the NIAC guy? If so, he's just a US based mouthpiece for the IR... and probably not someone you should be listening too closely to on Twitter unless you've got a particular interest in how a lobbyist from a nation with no ties to the US operates. I believe he was a part of the group of "Iranian ex-pats" that was invited to meet with Iran's president in NYC (he's also there for the UN General Assembly) that got to put on a show for cameras of how Pezeshkian's some sort of moderate, despite his reign as president beginning with increased enforcement of laws of morality laws (that Iran's "reformists" supposedly think need more lax enforcement) and executions. Anyone involved with NIAC is a wolf in sheep's clothing. They say "the right thing" half the time to try to draw people in to get them to tacitly support the IR. I think it's weird but interesting that they're allowed to operate in the US.

Hasn't that just led to Russia and China's involvement in Africa over western intervention? Russia's supported that recent military coup and on paper, China pulling African countries into the belt & road project isn't so bad... but in effect it's been pretty heavy-handed economic imperialism with very predatory loans that let China essentially take over a country's infrastructure entirely - which is like the US style of economic imperialism but much more heavy handed. Imperialism never really ended, we just live in an era of more sneaky & dishonest imperialism.

This case concerns stuff that happens after the period the 115 charges covers. Legal fees should count towards PSR

Lopetegui's got to be up there.

Imo the religious right (not just in the US, tbh, in most countries where the religious right is a big political bloc) are conditioned to basically be cult members. Conditioning people to put aside critical thinking and objective fact guiding their political beliefs and instead telling them their beliefs must be guided by their faith. Also what @Spike said. Trump didn't start the cult, he's just hijacked it.

Does this mean Diddy fucked Jay-Z?

I don’t think it’s the fans fault Roma have been financially mismanaged & that the Serie A has really struggled to bring money back to their league, though? It certainly wasn’t the fans who sacked Mourinho after he’d taken them to multiple European finals, or who sacked De Rossi after 4 matches. I will say I think the Roma fans I know personally are a bit mental and a little over the top and probably some of their criticism of their owners is over the top. But they certainly feel a disconnect between the fans and the club’s owners. Although in 2024… probably most fans of top flight clubs can say something similar.