Tom Bilyeu

I tried to stay completely sober about that.

So we are being gaslit right now about that.

He said very clearly in the beginning that that was like part of the negotiating.

The reason we're going to hit them so hard was we needed to open the strait.

I said a while ago at some point we should probably pull this clip.

I think he'll leave.

even if it's in chaos.

And he'll just be like, peace out.

And so that's where we're at.

It looks like he will indeed leave peace out, even if the Strait is in total chaos.

The stated objectives are destroy their military, ensure that they're not going to be able to build back their long range weapons, their nuclear weapons.

And this is a very close paraphrase, if not an exact quote, blow them back to the Stone Age where they belong.

If they don't negotiate.

OK, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he means the IRGC and not the Iranian people.

But God damn, if we actually do start destroying all of their civilian infrastructure, which they've already started blowing up bridges, saying that they were being used and they probably were being used, but for military purposes, but nonetheless.

When you start blowing up the civilian infrastructure, you really are going to set the country back.

This goes back to my initial thing.

How many people in Iran support the IRGC?

If it's a lot, then yes.

If you're going to see through your mission of weakening the regime, even if you don't care if there's full regime change, then you're going to end up hitting a lot of the civilian infrastructure.