How do we know if US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were successful? by Brookings institute
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=G3IlKgj3Rn4
https://youtube.com/watch?v=G3IlKgj3Rn4 [Embed]
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-do-we-know-if-us-strikes-on-irans-nuclear-facilities-were-successful/
tl;dr We don't. They talk some more.

The same institute published a book in 2009 titles Which Path To Persia? which details possibilities, scenarios how to handle Iran and her nuclear program pdf related but available on libgen - libgen.st and libgen.bz worked for me now. Have not yet read, but plan of this bombing was in the making for quite a while, in fact probably was complete, waiting just for a President that says: I wanna do this.
Even the Israeli option is discussed: Chapter 5: Leave it to Bibi, which option is basically about putting Israel in the way of blowback, so the US is not blamed for the attack and this issue don't gets in the way of other US plans in the Middle East.
I have to say Trump just adding the final blow, and step forward as the peacemaker perfectly fits into the picture.

Watched the Conclave.
I think it's pretty good, some pretty pictures.
The outcome can be guessed but the real outcome just very late.
To really write my opinion I have to spoil the movie.
Probably many would pout on shoehorning a "tranny" into the movie, but I view it as a commentary of the sins of the church. Throughout the movie they ditch candidates, the one who was lustful, the one who bribed, the racist, just to end up with the sexually "ambiguous", the not man and not woman, neither Adam or Eve. Just one more hypocritical act of the church. I have no doubt this isn't how the creators of the movie think about it, but I can see that, and this is what I prefer to get out of it.

After a short internal debate where to post this (the sci-fi mag and the Bible threads were strong competitors) I decided to use this thread.
Did you know that Hungary has S-P-A-C-E-? We just can't stop winning, and our country just steps into a new, brighter future underground.
Anyway, we are getting news updates on daily basis that the launch of the spacecraft that brings our astronaut to the ISS is getting delayed again and again for various reasons. So I decided to check it out what's this about because I had only vague notions did not follow - although I did post some about it on this board such as about the training of the Hungarian astronauts on the Gripens of the Hungarian Defense Forces.
I was thinking about writing a comprehensive summary of this when I came across the funniest thing...
So tl;dr: Space-X's Axiom 4 mission is launched soon with the participation of the fake-delay spacegranny, an Indian air force pilot, and a Polish and a Hungarian specialist. They will travel to the ISS run by NASA and Rockocmoc, where they do a series of experiments.
Here's our heroes, top pic is from Hungarian site: https://hunor.gov.hu/ they put some effort into the lighting so our boy can't be mistaken with the Indian dude like on the photo below from Axiom's website: https://www.axiomspace.com/missions/ax4
This site says:
>With a culturally diverse crew
Because that's what's important to tell. This always makes me feel a bit confused tho. They're telling us for a long time now that we are all the same, but apparently we are so different in the same time. They should make up their minds.
Besides how is this diverse? Three Indo-Euros and an Ural-Altaic?
But this is not the funny part. And not the fake-delay on vidrel. But exhibition #3...
Each participants has dedicated page to introduce them they carefully skip spacegranny's date of birth:
https://www.axiomspace.com/astronaut/peggy-whitson
https://www.axiomspace.com/astronaut/shubhanshu-shukla
https://www.axiomspace.com/astronaut/slawosz-uznanski
https://www.axiomspace.com/astronaut/tibor-kapu
I noticed there is the pronunciation of their names in their data sheet. Pronunciation guide for Anglos that is. Found the pajeet's funny, I giggled at Gzegorz ofc, Polish names get everyone, but I lost me shit at our boy. Tibor Kapu is a very simple name, could not be more simple, and what do I see?? Yeah I laffed. Poor Tibi, he might just got to be remembered as the poo astronaut which is also funny considering the competition. At least they did not divided it to syllables with a hyphen like they did with every other names, probably noticing this particular issue.

>>54315
cont.
Covert interventions. Two main questions divide these interventions: can the military detached from the regime, turn against them; and if there is an internal front or only exiles are available?
1. Coups d'état
This is different somewhat to the client coups, since in case of an enemy it's rare the US has direct ties, relation to the enemy's military. In fact they usually see that the military backs the regime, so they aren't suitable to foment a coup. So there are two situations when this can happen: if the regime just came to power, not solidified yet, or if the regime consists of a shaky coalition where the members are at odds with each other, which allows the US has some way to drive a wedge between them. Indonesia is the second type, starting in 1958 and culminated in the anti-communist massacres.
2. Punctuated military operations
These are a form of utilizing proxy forces. They organize raids with the promise of building a resistance, a guerilla activity, a rebellion, etc. If an exile or emigrant group already planning this then the US is likely to take over the organization, their training. They provide them plans, equipment, weapons, and transport. Very typical example is Albania after WWII (Operation BGFIEND). From the examples: typically these raids are huge failures, the volunteers are sent to their death, and achieve no results. However this does not stops the US to continue as long as there are people who are willing to go. The Brits are also practiced in this type of operations, in fact they got the US into the business (with Albania and some other). Frankly this really reminds me of the Krynky operation in Ukraine...
3. Aid to internal armed opposition forces
Proxy forces again, except they are in the country controlled by an enemy regime, or in a country where enemy military is present (they are occupying it or the client of theirs). Some sort of internal group has to be present, which could be propped up. In these cases the help the US can offer is either monetary or material (equipment, weapons), since training and/or organizing these movements aren't really possible. So the US acts from one step further and easier to stop and/or disassociate from these groups, if situation changes or becomes necessary. In this case the proxy will most likely claim they were sold out to the enemy. Good examples are the Kurds, who are present in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. It seems they were supported on and off by the US. The book's example when they were used against Iraq in the early '70s - US got Israel and Iran to send weapons to them, and they compensated these countries for the help. And in the end US shut down relations with the Kurds. Now in Syria similar happens, they were used as proxies against ISIS, and to corner Assad (not to oppose him directly), and now they are getting abandoned in the face of Turks.

pdfrel: synopsis of bgfiend by the CIA

>>54316
cont.
Overt interventions - when the open use of US combat troops are justified, and can be widely accepted by US citizens, diplomats, the mass public.
1. Large-scale combat
If the enemy is at war, or occupies a state "illegally", and the US judges that the enemy forces are sufficiently anchored, they are too strong, this is the only option. Ground combat troops has to be deployed. Germany WWI, Germany WWII, Japan WWII are the classic. The bonus is the Soviet Union in North Korea 1950-51. The US viewed that the SU acts through a puppet, as NK was not viewed as a legit government (according to UN only SK was legitimate), the US aimed to expel the Soviet from Pyongyang.
2. Sustained and asymmetrical attacks
Bring 'em freedoms in the form of bombs. Essentially the modernized versions of sending ships to bombard enemies into submission - or as the book puts it use of airpower as an instrument of coercive diplomacy. Typically used to pressure enemy to give up some land or give up on a military campaign. "Typically" since only two examples exist: North Vietnam (1965-72) with Rolling Thunder and Operation Linebecker to get them to stop backing insurgents in South Vietnam; and Serbia (1999) to pressure them releasing Kosovo. This kind of intervention is a strategic bombing campaign to break their morale, where strategic target list is given to the military which they should hit. The effectiveness of this form of intervention is debatable. They will still use it since it is an available option.
3. Combat operations alongside local insurgent forces
If there is a local opposition to the enemy, and the enemy regime acquires the pariah status, the US props up the insurgents and also sends some type of own ground combat force in support. This is one of the oldest type of tools against enemies. Nicaragua 1909-10, a rebellion broke out against president Jose Santos Zelaya, the US supported them, and sent some forces too after Zelaya executed two US citizens who fought with the rebels.
4. Invasion by U.S. troops
This is quite new policy tool. Deployed when an enemy regime has to be overthrown, it does not occupy anything and no local proxy force is available. Grenada in 1983 and Iraq in 2003.

This shit never gets old.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-car-driven-into-crowd-at-magdeburg-christmas-market/a-71127071
Mercedes of peace. Same site other article says:
>2 killed, including a young child, and at least 60 injured
This is the politics side, but:
Germany is preparing for election as noted here >>52671 This will radicalize Germans more, more votes for AfD and BSW (that is Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance – Reason and Justice). They'll gain quite a lot of seats. I'm not sure if it will be enough for anything. Is this gonna result in a bunch of 15% parties, and an impasse when it comes to forming a new government?
Recent polls from Politico, which means little, but still. Strong CDU/CSU, the "classic" conservative party of Germany, at 30%. Considering they initiated the migration danke, mutti people might turn away. AfD is at 19% and second, perhaps they can move up to over 20, maybe to 25%.

Nigeria's interior ministry is keepin it real.
Dey retweeted a porn actress' poon shot. It was up for 15 hours or something.