This is gonna cover a LOT of ground, so you may think it won't come together. It will, so stay with me.
If you're a rational adult (so not a tranny or tranny supporter) you learned as a child that females have a unique ability men don't have: they can conceive and bear children.
If you're rational, this isn't a controversial observation, eh?
If you know anything about math you also know that to keep a population level, females of that race must average essentially 2.1 children apiece. If they have fewer children than that, on average, that race will steadily decrease in population.
If you don't know that, do some research.
Of course you won't...because you don't wanna know. Cuz if you're white and conservative, what you find will upset you--as it should if you're rational.
Here's another survival-positive truth: Leftists in the U.S. want whites to die off. They're quite open about it, screaming that whites should be killed--and they do it as often as possible. (They celebrated the anniversary of Charlie Kirk's assassination, and wail that po' li'l Tyler din' hab nuffin' to do wif it.)
But murder is risky, so there's an easier way: Get lots of white American women to not want to have kids.
And it's working: The so-called "elites" and their leftist followers hate America, the nuclear family, straight men, Christianity and anything remotely conservative, they hate the notion of children being raised by a husband and wife.
(By contrast, Dems support Islam, Hamas, Paleswine, open borders, trannies and homosexuals.)
Until fairly recently most Americans prized children. But over the past decade or so the idea of having children has been denigrated by feminists, who've convinced women that having a corporate career is more exciting and rewarding than being a stay-at-home mom.
And of course many liberal males support that, since having children is expensive. When given the choice of having a child or buying a vacation home in a trendy city, lots of liberals choose luxury.
And it's working: the average number of children per white American female is now around 1.5--far below the replacement level. So the white race is being replaced by third-world denizens who have lots of kids--because they still believe kids are a good thing. It's civilizational suicide for whites.
Leftists and Democrats: "Dis guuuuud! Dere too many pipo on duh Erf, so we'll fix dat by not havin' kids. So obviously it GUUUD to not have kidz! See, whites iz baaaaad! Udder races beez guuuud! So we needs t'leave duh Erf to dem. See, dey smaaaht"
It doesn't take a PhD to see how self-destructive that is. And yet leftists love it: "We gots t'save duh Erf! An' duh only way to doodat is fo' white pipo to disappear!"
The Left has turned what was once the unequivocal joy of having and raising children into a perceived burden...one that interferes with the carefully-sold "joys" of having a more luxurious car, a vacation home, a corporate career.
Virtually every Leftist/Dem sneers at the notion of a cis-gender hetero couple--the classic family--raising children. The vulnerable link there is women: years ago most would have wanted children, but the Left and the leftist Media have succeeded in pressuring them to decline it. (Of course most leftists/Dems deny that on't see it as pressure And the results are all around you.
It's working just as the Left planned.
So is there a way to avoid what seems to be inevitable?
Let me start with the optimistic scenario: For the first year or so of WW2, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japanese forces won almost every battle. Their troops and officers knew what they were doing. We didn't, and the results showed it. But after heroic efforts, with virtually every American supporting the war, the allies won.
And in the 81 years since 1945, both Germany and Japan have been model nations, and solid allies.
But it should be obvious to all that today doesn't in any way resemble 1941 to 1945: Today Americans are equally divided between shithead leftists, who believe America is evil, awful...and those who love this country. Mull that over for a bit.
In 1941 every American rallied around FDR. Today American leftists--half of the public--fiercely hate Trump. "Orange Hitler," eh? "No kangs," eh?
In 1941--after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor that killed 2,500 Americans and sank every American battleship--not a single American media outlet supported either Germany or Japan--as you'd expect. By huge contrast, today the Left and their Dem-fellating Media allies repeatedly bleat that the U.S. is eeeevil and that Iran has defeated the U.S. And all leftists believe it, even though it's utter horseshit--at least militarily.
But American Media rooting for Iran is only part of the difference. There's another huge difference: In 1941 Germany and Japan didn't have a huge presence in the U.S. But today Muslims have dozens of strong supporters in congress and the Media, and mosques in every state.
Point is, since 1990 or so Islam has been at war with the U.S. But before Trump, no U.S. political leader admitted it. If you're not willing to admit you've been attacked, you can't realistically expect to defeat your attacker, eh?
SO...predictions: Because Dems in congress, the Media and about half the American public refuse to support Trump's efforts to defeat the current combatant Islamic nation, future presidents will be even less willing to stand up to Islamic attacks--cuz the Media will scream that you're Hitler. And because we've refused to unleash our full power on Iran, they have no reason to surrender. If that's true (and it clearly is) there's only one way to stop the conflict: the U.S. pulls our forces out--which is what the Democrats and Media have been demanding.
That's coming, because the Dems will win a majority in at least one chamber of congress. The Dems, the Media and the left will gloat, and will pass an appropriations bill demanding that no more funds be used for military operation is the mid-east. Other Islamic nations will be emboldened to attack U.S. assets, either overseas or here in the U.S. Democrats will win every presidential election because a majority of voters will refuse to pay an extra dollar a gallon for gasoline. The Media will wail and scream that the U.S. must not retaliate. And week by week, the west will lose.
Of course there's a solution, but leftist Americans and Democrats in congress will always block it. Always.
As every American should known, on December 7th, 1941 Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, killing 2,500 Americans and sinking every American battleship.
Every. Battleship.
If the same pack of Democrats, leftists and Media shitheads we have today had been running things on December 7th, 1941, the Media would have wailed that it wasn't reasonable to go to war over "just" 2,500 Americans killed, and "a few ships" sunk. Dem "leaders" would have agreed, bleating "We just need to understand the 'root causes.'" (For young Americans: After the Twin Towers were destroyed and the Pentagon seriously damaged on 9/11/2001, Dem leaders said the same thing: "We need to understand the 'root causes.'" Seriously, Democrat traitors said that about 9/11.)
Seeing a majority of voters against going to war, the U.S. wouldn't have declared war on Japan in 1941. And since the only reason we declared war on Germany was because that nation and Japan had declared themselves allies, we wouldn't have gone to war with Germany either!
A smart philosopher once said "Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat it." [Okay, that's slightly re-worded but you get the point.] The lesson of WW2 was "Sometimes you have to go to war to keep things right--even if you know it's gonna involve spending trillions and cost thousands of American lives." (WW2 killed about 400,000 American troops.) But in WW2 we had a Dem president, and the Media loved FDR, so he could declare war and congress would so vote.
But today the Media and Democrats in congress automatically scream bloody murder and block everything Trump does. Everything. Example: Iran had been spending hundreds of billions to "enrich" uranium to build an atomic bomb. As anyone who knows fuck-all about WW2 knows, two atom bombs ended the war with Japan.
Democrat: "Don't worry, citizen! Even if Iran got an atomic bomb, they don't have a missile able to get a bomb to the U.S. SEE? So ain't no threat! Orange Hitler is jus' tryin' t' get ya scared about nuffin' so he can seize mo' power! Really!"
People who know almost everything about atomic bombs (me, seriously): If Iran got atomic bombs, they'll soon claim "groups unknown" stole one or two.
Democrats: "So? Why dat a problem, deplorable?"
You're idiots. You've seen "container ships," right? A bomb hidden in one of the 8,000 to 12,000 containers on such a ship, slowly moving up-river past NYC--would take out most of Manhattan. It would make 9/11 look like a picnic.
Democrats: "Iran wud nevah doodat, cuz we could wipe that country off the map!"
Yeah, but here's the question: Would Democrats retaliate?
No. Not even close, because the Left and Media would wail "Even if we could prove dis was one of Iran's bombs, how can we possibly justify retaliating? Cuz dey tol' us it wuz stolen, SEE? So Iran din' doo dis! Nope nope nope! It wuz some mysterious third-party! SEE? So we can't possibly retaliate against dis innocent nation, killin' all doze innocent pipo! We just have to accept the cleverness of the attackers, as we did wif 9/11."
Of course we did NOT accept 9/11, but we also didn't mercilously bomb the hell out of Afghanistan. Or Saudi Arabia. So...no deterrence at all against future attacks.
If you think the Muslims didn't notice that, you're too dumb to breathe without assistance.
If Iran gets a bomb, the scenario above is almost inevitable--because the mullahs know Dems won't retaliate! (But just to be safe, the top mullahs would be out of the country for a few weeks.)
Let's review: If you're under 60 you know nothing at all about nuclear weapons. By contrast, I entered college just 16 years after the end of WW2, when most Americans knew about the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But to almost all Americans under about 60, atomic bombs are an "abstraction"--a concept as alien as neutrinos or black holes. You have only a vague idea about 'em--and that's perfectly understandable.
I can't fix your lack of understanding. I can tell you the truth, but you won't believe it. The only thing that can make you understand it is viewing dozens of hours of the two devastated Japanese cities. But you won't. And I get it. Cuz dat beez 'ancient history,' eh?
"Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history..."
If you're under 60 that's almost certainly you.
SO...where does that leave us?
You have no idea. This is as alien to you as space travel, or quarks, or flying a jet, solo, at age 22. And as a result, you think no one else could possibly know either. I get it. Really.
"Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history..."
Of course you don't believe that. Leftists and Dems: "Nonsense! We haz free will! So even if history says X, we don't haz to learn the lessons. Doze pipo weren't us, so we kin choose to do somethin' different!"
Of course you could. But leftists and Democrats won't let us--which is the whole point of refusing to learn the lessons of history, eh?
Short answer: If Iran gets an atomic bomb, they'll claim one or two were stolen, and put one on a container-ship bound for New York, after several intermediate stops. A fair chunk of lower Manhattan will be vaporized. Dems will block ANY retaliation--"Cuz we can't be sure Iran is responsible!"
And I get it, really. We can't in good conscience kill tens of thousands of innocent Iranians who had no say in killing tens of thousands of Americans, eh? Except that's exactly what we did to end WW2, and it worked. Sucks, I know, but it also likely saved 400,000 lives--250,000 Americans and another 150,000 Japanese.
Is that worth doing? Depends on your party.
"Dat atom bomb on NYC wuz NOT an attack by Iran, citizen! Instead some unknown group stole one of dere bombs! Reeeeally!"
"Those who refuse to learn from the lessons of history..." eh?
Because that won't be the end of it: If the Iranians get away with one bomb, there won't be any end to it.
Here's the hoot: I don't care.
I'm an old guy, and don't have any kids. So if it happens exactly as I've laid out above, it won't affect me a bit. And if you live far from NYC you'll think it doesn't affect YOU, cuz all the destruction was in NYC, right? And the Lying Dem-fellating Mainstream Media and the Dems will repeat that endlessly, to justify the Dems refusing to retaliate. And in some ways that's true: If you don't own real estate in Manhattan, why should you care if much of it was destroyed, eh?
Are ya starting to see why Trump bombed Iran's enrichment cascades?
No, probably not, cuz not one American out of a thousand knows what that means.
"Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it."
Either we destroy the mullahs, or NYC will be destroyed. Frankly I don't care either way.