Which option do you think is actually going to play out?or, directly target the IRGC it's leaders and personnel.
Which option do you think is actually going to play out?or, directly target the IRGC it's leaders and personnel.
And better organized and probably hate us more.I’m sure they are doing this. But Iran is riddled with hardened cave systems. The IRGC is organized like terrorist cells with some level of operational autonomy distributed across the troops.
Imagine taking on the Taliban once again, except this time they are armed to the teeth.
Please don’t take my critique to mean I somehow think you support being in this sh*tshow. You are on the right side of history IMO.Well, yeah, that’s why I said it goes well beyond oil.
In my view, when Mango Mussolini committed to this war, there was no turning back. In principle, I agree with every point you made, which is why 1) I voted for Kamala and 2) opposed this war from the beginning.
None of that matters now. The question is, how do we best try to make chicken salad out of chicken sh*t? No matter how you slice it, we are going to be spending billions on Iran for the foreseeable future. The Tangerine Tyrant made sure of that.
So, and I am guessing you agree with me on this, the issue now is what course of action will, or is most likely to, produce the best possible outcome for the United States. Fair?
For argument’s sake, suppose Team Trump decides tomorrow to cut its losses and end all missile strikes, etc., against Iran. Now what? Again, I was against Trump and this bullsh*t from the beginning. But the hornet’s nest has been stirred up. How does cutting our losses now produce the most favorable outcome? Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan.
I’m not advocating for boots on the ground.You know that you are advocating for hundreds of thousands of US troops on the ground and all that entails?
Weapons of mass destruction fears took us down that path vs Sadamn Hussein.
You want to repeat that,really?
Not buying.
Could you elaborate on why you believe extensive, intense missile strikes in Iran would ostensibly be akin to genocide? For me, the best hope is to cause enough pain and damage to be able to negotiate peace terms from a position of strength. Right now, it’s clear 1) Iran does not respect/fear us and 2) is not “begging” for a peace deal. In other words, we do not hold a very good hand to negotiate with at the present time.Please don’t take my critique to mean I somehow think you support being in this sh*tshow. You are on the right side of history IMO.
Here’s how I would see it playing out. We leave. Then what happens…Iran charges their $2M/ship toll right? That causes a permanent <5% increase in the cost of crude. Ok, so be it. Then what? Sure Iran gets a lot more money. If they try to use it on nukes we destroy the sites working on them. There doesn’t have to be an existential crisis here. It is a marginal increase on the price of oil. Meanwhile the world scrambles to figure out alternatives over time. New pipelines to the Mediterranean/Black Sea. Increased use of renewables, etc. Iran essentially turns into a Saudi Arabia. Not great, but not existential either.
Now do it the genocide way. The US gets absolutely isolated. We lose trading lose influence, we lose markets. There is no world where the cost of that is less than my way.
I know...rock and hard place due to trump.I’m not advocating for boots on the ground.
I’m advocating for “total obliteration.”
Seriously, though, there is no good answer. No matter what course of action we take at this point, it’s producing a sh*t outcome. My only hope—as grim as it may be—is to try to find a way to negotiate from a position of strength where Iran has to, at some level, capitulate. What that looks like is a total mystery to me, but no one on Team Trump asked my opinion before going to war, because my answer would look a lot different than what I am typing now.
What I can say for sure is this—Iran is clearly not “begging” for a peace deal, the Marmalade Moron is, as usual, way over his head and out of his f#cking mind, and it is well past time to remove Trump from office (if only anyone in the GOP had a moral compass and a spine).
Let me ask this: If we wash our hands of this now, what do you think will happen with a now emboldened Iran?
I guess I don’t see how more of the same bombing gets them to capitulate without destroying critical civilian infrastructure. To force capitulation I think you have to either put troops on the ground or go the genocide path.Could you elaborate on why you believe extensive, intense missile strikes in Iran would ostensibly be akin to genocide? For me, the best hope is to cause enough pain and damage to be able to negotiate peace terms from a position of strength. Right now, it’s clear 1) Iran does not respect/fear us and 2) is not “begging” for a peace deal. In other words, we do not hold a very good hand to negotiate with at the present time.
Also, do you think I am advocating for intentionally targeting civilians or using our own WMDs? I can promise you I am not.
Last, I am going to reiterate my concerns go well beyond the temporary price of oil. We stirred up a hornet’s nest, and clearly Iran’s military capabilities are not as defunct as Trump and the MIB like to boast. Far from it. Also, as to the Strait of Hormuz, there is a lot more commerce that goes through there than oil. We’re talking over $4 trillion. At any point in time, Iran can choose to hold the world’s economy hostage if it suits them. Not only that, but Iran is from here on out going to retaliate every chance they get against (i.e.) US military bases in the region as well as against other US interests.
In short, we are going to be in conflict with Iran ad infinitum from here on out regardless of whether we go your route or mine. This genie is forever out of the bottle thanks to Team Trump’s incompetence. It’s not that I don’t understand what you’re saying or where you’re coming from, it’s that I fear your route emboldens Iran to the point of being even more dangerous than before. And, yes, I understand the rhetoric that has been handed down since Vietnam to justify continuing to fight losing causes. I just, f#ck, man, I just don’t think we can do the aw, shucks, I guess we shouldn’t of shrug like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and expect no repercussions beyond lives and money lost that are past tense. Our losses are going to extend well beyond that which is in the rearview, which is why I am saying what I am.
IMO, the worst is yet to come. (Godd*mn Trump and the MIB!)
(FTR, I will be thrilled if you are proven right.)
How do you see it working?
Not to speak for Traveler, but if we are to believe that we have made the boom boom of Iran's military, what else is left but to target civilian sites of interest - government buildings, hospitals, bridges, power plants....Could you elaborate on why you believe extensive, intense missile strikes in Iran would ostensibly be akin to genocide? For me, the best hope is to cause enough pain and damage to be able to negotiate peace terms from a position of strength. Right now, it’s clear 1) Iran does not respect/fear us and 2) is not “begging” for a peace deal. In other words, we do not hold a very good hand to negotiate with at the present time.
Also, do you think I am advocating for intentionally targeting civilians or using our own WMDs? I can promise you I am not.
Last, I am going to reiterate my concerns go well beyond the temporary price of oil. We stirred up a hornet’s nest, and clearly Iran’s military capabilities are not as defunct as Trump and the MIB like to boast. Far from it. Also, as to the Strait of Hormuz, there is a lot more commerce that goes through there than oil. We’re talking over $4 trillion. At any point in time, Iran can choose to hold the world’s economy hostage if it suits them. Not only that, but Iran is from here on out going to retaliate every chance they get against (i.e.) US military bases in the region as well as against other US interests.
In short, we are going to be in conflict with Iran ad infinitum from here on out regardless of whether we go your route or mine. This genie is forever out of the bottle thanks to Team Trump’s incompetence. It’s not that I don’t understand what you’re saying or where you’re coming from, it’s that I fear your route emboldens Iran to the point of being even more dangerous than before. And, yes, I understand the rhetoric that has been handed down since Vietnam to justify continuing to fight losing causes. I just, f#ck, man, I just don’t think we can do the aw, shucks, I guess we shouldn’t of shrug like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and expect no repercussions beyond lives and money lost that are past tense. Our losses are going to extend well beyond that which is in the rearview, which is why I am saying what I am.
IMO, the worst is yet to come. (Godd*mn Trump and the MIB!)
(FTR, I will be thrilled if you are proven right.)
We gave them back $25 billion for just waving from across the table. We have lifted all oil sanctions. Guess which tankers are making it through? There is more money in that country right now than in the last 2 decades.I know...rock and hard place due to trump.
If we go back to sanctioning their oil and have experienced considerable damage , maybe not any more emboldened than pre-war.
I doubt their economy is humming.
history is full of examples of military conflict. The question right now is how do you make continuing the war so painful for Iran that they have to "beg" for a negotiated settlement? I don't know what that point is, and apparently neither does the trump administration. I do know one thing, this on again, off again, conflict is not the right way. In fact, IMO, it's counterproductive to a successful conclusion. If you (meaning trump admin) want to win, you win through power...embargo/blockade the strait, cut off all oil flows that benefit Iran, squeeze them economically as hard as you can, and for god's sake don't fall for this "ceasefire while we negotiate" ploy again.Could you elaborate on why you believe extensive, intense missile strikes in Iran would ostensibly be akin to genocide? For me, the best hope is to cause enough pain and damage to be able to negotiate peace terms from a position of strength. Right now, it’s clear 1) Iran does not respect/fear us and 2) is not “begging” for a peace deal. In other words, we do not hold a very good hand to negotiate with at the present time.
Also, do you think I am advocating for intentionally targeting civilians or using our own WMDs? I can promise you I am not.
Last, I am going to reiterate my concerns go well beyond the temporary price of oil. We stirred up a hornet’s nest, and clearly Iran’s military capabilities are not as defunct as Trump and the MIB like to boast. Far from it. Also, as to the Strait of Hormuz, there is a lot more commerce that goes through there than oil. We’re talking over $4 trillion. At any point in time, Iran can choose to hold the world’s economy hostage if it suits them. Not only that, but Iran is from here on out going to retaliate every chance they get against (i.e.) US military bases in the region as well as against other US interests.
In short, we are going to be in conflict with Iran ad infinitum from here on out regardless of whether we go your route or mine. This genie is forever out of the bottle thanks to Team Trump’s incompetence. It’s not that I don’t understand what you’re saying or where you’re coming from, it’s that I fear your route emboldens Iran to the point of being even more dangerous than before. And, yes, I understand the rhetoric that has been handed down since Vietnam to justify continuing to fight losing causes. I just, f#ck, man, I just don’t think we can do the aw, shucks, I guess we shouldn’t of shrug like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and expect no repercussions beyond lives and money lost that are past tense. Our losses are going to extend well beyond that which is in the rearview, which is why I am saying what I am.
IMO, the worst is yet to come. (Godd*mn Trump and the MIB!)
(FTR, I will be thrilled if you are proven right.)
I agreehistory is full of examples of military conflict. The question right now is how do you make continuing the war so painful for Iran that they have to "beg" for a negotiated settlement? I don't know what that point is, and apparently neither does the trump administration. I do know one thing, this on again, off again, conflict is not the right way. In fact, IMO, it's counterproductive to a successful conclusion. If you (meaning trump admin) want to win, you win through power...embargo/blockade the strait, cut off all oil flows that benefit Iran, squeeze them economically as hard as you can, and for god's sake don't fall for this "ceasefire while we negotiate" ploy again.
If troops on the ground option is off the table, than you have little choice but to continue air strikes against leadership, military targets and ultimately infrastructure targets which are meaningful to Iranian military, and that includes power plants, infrastructure, etc.
Otherwise, if you are not intent on winning, then get out now.
HOLY CRAP! President Trump just MIC DROPPED a reporter at the White House
Q: How is it taking care of the Iranian people if you're bombing?
TRUMP: Yeah, who are you with?
REPORTER: PBS.
TRUMP: "Well, that's a radical left group of lunatics if you will. Let me just tell you, let me just tell you. The Iranian people, when they DON'T hear bombs go off, they're UPSET!"
"They want to hear bombs because they want to be free."
"And the only reason they're not out protesting, you know that, is because they were informed that if they protest, like the wrestler and his friends, if they protest they will be shot immediately!"