War with...Iran?

[NervousEnergy]

Just wait until the strategic reserves run out and Americans get to compete with the rest of the world for that oil.

Some people may make out like bandits but most will loose and will hopefully vote accordingly later this year.

IMHO, this is a very positive outcome in many ways. The US is a net exporter of crude, but we import a massive amount of heavy crude for refining so we'll get hit with the price increases. If this sells renewable projects to a greater degree then that's a very good thing. And of course the 'vote accordingly' due to high prices.

 

[Shavano]

IMHO, this is a very positive outcome in many ways. The US is a net exporter of crude, but we import a massive amount of heavy crude for refining so we'll get hit with the price increases. If this sells renewable projects to a greater degree then that's a very good thing. And of course the 'vote accordingly' due to high prices.

It really doesn't matter that much that the US is a net exporter of crude. Crude oil is a global commodity. The producers are going to export it if they can get a higher price elsewhere than they can in the US (less shipping costs). We are not insulated from global market conditions.

 

[NervousEnergy]

It really doesn't matter that much that the US is a net exporter of crude. Crude oil is a global commodity. The producers are going to export it if they can get a higher price elsewhere than they can in the US (less shipping costs). We are not insulated from global market conditions.

True, but without the reliance on heavy crude for coastal refining you could see a lot more shenanigans proposed on nationalizing the US crude market to insulate US consumers. It wouldn't be a good idea at all, but it would be something to worry about if domestic refiners were set up for WTI light sweet. Fortunately it's simply not possible. OTOH, Trump could get the brilliant idea to fully invade Venezuela and nationalize the output of their market. An even worse idea, of course.

Consumers have shown tepid enthusiasm for electric cars as mainstream, mass-market commuting vehicles. Pushing gas to $6+ a gallon will help that enthusiasm quite a bit.

 

[Doomlord_uk]

Trump could get the brilliant idea to fully invade Venezuela

I'm sure he gets excited about it every time he remembers. Which will be less and less... in any case, the US has more or less run out of bombs and missiles and is currently stuck in the middle of an ill-planned war elsewere. He might have a better chance with a small island nation like Cuba, or maybe the Falkland Islands.... or perhaps it's time to go after those tariff-dodging Penguins

 

[m0nckywrench]

You don't defeat an ideology. You make it irrelevant.

Doesn't work on superstitions. People are not rational actors.

Pushing gas to $6+ a gallon will help that enthusiasm quite a bit.

So would importing cheaper vehicles instead of rewarding the parasitic US auto industry. Scrap regulations which increase vehicle price and production/maintenance complexity everyone pays for (because insurance) then let the buyer decide. Individual lives are not infinitely valuable such that everyone should be burdened by making every possible effort to extend them a few years.

We allow personal freedom to ride motorcycles because people belong to themselves first and society second, yet automobiles etc are heavily and expensively regulated (including nonsense like bumper impact standards which even after reduction have nothing to do with safety or reducing crash repair costs).

Rich techbros are welcome to buy what they like but new vehicle prices have become absurd. Transportation is economic necessity.

 

[Yaoshi]

At this point I keep telling myself that the one silver lining in this shitshow is that it may finally be where the world turns the corner on renewable adoption, because the economics are so undeniably in its favor.

We should have done it already in a saner, less destructive way, but people being what they are maybe this is what allows us to escape the worst outcome for climate change down the line.

 

[rainynight65]

IMHO, this is a very positive outcome in many ways. The US is a net exporter of crude, but we import a massive amount of heavy crude for refining so we'll get hit with the price increases. If this sells renewable projects to a greater degree then that's a very good thing. And of course the 'vote accordingly' due to high prices.

The US is not a net exporter of crude oil, but a net importer, to the tune of roughly 2.2m barrels per day in 2025 (EIA source).

To my knowledge, the US imports heavy crude because that's what the majority of its refineries are built for, and the majority of US wells produce light sweet crude, which is more suited to European and Asian refineries. Word is that upgrading a refinery to handle the lighter crude can cost between $100m and $1bn for a single facility, so nobody is in a hurry to do that.

 

[NervousEnergy]

Ahh... I mis-read the chart. We are a net exporter of total petroleum products, but import more crude than we export. Sorry about that - my mistake.

Yes, I worked for years in coastal Texas chemicals - the problem isn't that the large US coastal refineries can't process LTO, it's that it's inefficient in terms of the fractional byproduct mix and optimization. Margins are lower. The big coker-based plants produce a lot more than just gasoline, and a lot of that business gets reduced or sidelined if you're not cracking heavy crude.

 

[hrpanjwani]

I think that the pattern of this conflict is now established. Routine escalation and deescalation without any real possibility of US ground invasion. Trump thought this would be another Venezuela and now that he has seen that it’s most decidedly not, he has lost interest. The issue now is how little can US/Israel give away on the negotiating table so that it can be domestically sold as a “win”. That is not going to get decided in a jiffy. I would punt for 4 months.

I think this also gives us time to talk about broader geopolitical events rather than talking mostly about daily news.

The two main reasons for the war are essentially US desire to control oil and Israeli desire to enhance its security.

The US tries to exert control over a lot of goods but I would argue that it has been most successful when it comes to oil.

There are around 70 oil producing countries in the world but most of them are very minor producers so don’t really matter to the geopolitical picture as oil producers. For example, India drills a bit but imports most of it. China drills for a lot more than India but has much higher energy needs as well so is also a big importer. They are important geopolitically but not as oil producers.

Through formal and informal alliances the US exerts a mixture of control and influence over a large fraction of the worlds oil. The only big producers somewhat outside of this orbit were Russia, Iran, Iraq and Venezuela.

The US lied to start a war with Iraq and essentially grabbed one of them. Iraq's oil revenues are a very huge part of their budget and have been held in a Central Bank of Iraq account at the New York Fed since 2003 under a standing U.S. executive order. This gives Washington leverage, including recent threats to restrict money flows over Iran-linked politics. The money remains Iraq's on paper, but access runs through the U.S. system. So, in essence, the US has been holding Iraq hostage financially for the last two decades.

I expect the US will repeat the same pattern with Venezuela. In theory, oil money is Venezuela’s, in practice, not so much.

Iran has long been under sanctions but has not crumbled. Russian sanctions are only a decade old and they are also fighting to not fall under US control.

While Russia, China and Iran (new axis) are not paragons of democracy (and let’s admit it, neither is the US), they do have the right to fight for an existence that does not make them American vassals. Many countries have remained studiously neutral so far but the illegal and unnecessary war on Iran has the potential to shift a lot of countries more towards the new axis rather than towards the US led order. The Iran PR effort in social media might be a game changer in this regard as popular sentiment in many countries has seen a shift towards Iran as a victim of US overreach.

Israel’s main interest in the region is enhancing its own security. The recent rightward shift in Israeli politics has given rise to the tactic of annexing land that does not belong to Israel currently but that can potentially be justified as a historical claim. To this end, Israel has carried out a genocide in Gaza and significant harms in West Bank. They have also grabbed a fair chunk of Lebanon.

Israel has a successful history of capturing territory in its wars. When they fought Egypt they managed to grab the Sinai. It was eventually restored to Egypt in exchange for Egypt formally recognising Israel.

Given the Abraham accords, I think that Israel is unlikely to return captured territories this time around. They have established economic and security norms with most of the Gulf countries and continue to enjoy US protection. The EU seems to be distancing itself from Israel somewhat but things are complicated by different countries wanting to do different things. I doubt the EU will manage to develop a coherent policy towards Israel anytime soon.

What Israel may gain in land they may end up losing in influence. Israel has pursued a very sophisticated PR effort to keep the countries in the US-led order on its side. It is rare to see a newspaper headline in many of these countries ever mention Israel by name when they carry out atrocities. While sophisticated geopolitical observers are aware of such nuances, many in the broader public remain unaware. However the Iranian PR push has started impacting this slightly.

Israel may think that changing borders is desirable domestically but they must also be calculating how it will be seen by the world and what will it end up costing them on the global stage. I doubt the far right groups in Israel will care too much about the latter and will be pushing hard for expansion. Hopefully the other political parties may be able to blunt their desires and keep the captured territories in a state of limbo rather than outright annex them. I expect this to exacerbate humanitarian issues in the region.

Ultimately the end of this war remains unclear and that is because this war was essentially started without any clear goals. It was pure and naked opportunism that has gone horribly wrong.

 

[karolus]

The two main reasons for the war are essentially US desire to control oil and Israeli desire to enhance its security.

What's left out of this assessment is the Trump Administration's desire to shift the discussion from the Epstein Affair by creating a diversion. They assumed a quick win on this front, and a feather in the cap by collapsing an adversarial government in Tehran.

Neither has come to pass.

Had the US a coherent policy, there would have been a massive buildup of military assets in the region, as well as diplomatic efforts to bring more allied nations in to share the burden. Due to the sheer recklessness of the action, the former wasn't even on the table, and the latter isn't helped by Trump's actions, which have alienated more than brought nations together. He's truly living up to his promise of America First. As a result, nations reliant on petroleum imports know they can't trust a capricious and unpredictable Washington to ensure energy security in the near and long term, so have to make their own arrangements. Trump's steadfast belief in American primacy has probably caused significant harm to the nation's ability to project influence—as well jeopardizing the petrodollar.

The amateurish actions at negotiations in Pakistan further shows Washington has no real plan or strategy, basically winging it. This is what Trump has done for most of his career. It may have worked in the milieu of a New York real estate developer—where he had the odds staked highly in his favor. This isn't the case on the world stage—where he's burning just about every bridge he can lay his hands on.

 

[Doomlord_uk]

The issue now is how little can US/Israel give away on the negotiating table

Israel won't give away anything. Why would they?

The two main reasons for the war are essentially US desire to control oil

How so? I mean you must be aware this is the most beaten-to-death dead-horse tired worn-out trope in anti-american politics. So how does regime change and/or ending Iran's WMD program give the US any more control of oil??? What does that even mean? It's a global market. Other than pricing it in dollars, the US has no influence. It's not even in OPEC. I would admit I don't know Trump's reasons but I've got at least one foot in the 'deflecting from Epstein files camp and one foot in the 'wants a nobel peace prize so thought he'd run a 3-day special military operation (part 2)' camp. I seriously doubt Trump cares about the oil business, much less understands it.

While Russia, China and Iran (new axis) are not paragons of democracy (and let’s admit it, neither is the US)

Let's see. In China, there is no democracy, in Russia they assassinate opposition candidates or put them in prison and in Iran they murder tens of thousands of anyone who pushes for change. As corrupt as American government is, it's lightyears better than the three anti-democratic hellholes you just listed it alongside. The US is NOTHING LIKE those countries.

Israel’s main interest in the region is enhancing its own security. The recent rightward shift in Israeli politics has given rise to the tactic of annexing land that does not belong to Israel currently but that can potentially be justified as a historical claim. To this end, Israel has carried out a genocide in Gaza and significant harms in West Bank. They have also grabbed a fair chunk of Lebanon.

Utterly false. Israel's entire interest is it's own peace and security. It hasn't annexed land, it's occupied it (in both Gaza and now in southern Lebanon - one at best a 'terrorist administration', the other a literal failed state) to destroy the armies of Iranian-funded and directed terrorists who daily demand the genocide of the entirety of Israel (for political and religious reasons, not 'justice for stolen land'). It has also not remotely carried out a genocide. I know that's a popular leftwing sentiment, but it is not reality. Israel wants to exist, Iran and its allies and armies of terrorists want it do be genocided. Let's be clear about that.

Israel may think that changing borders is desirable domestically but they must also be calculating how it will be seen by the world and what will it end up costing them on the global stage.

It's not seeking to change borders. It's stopping people outside its borders from attacking it. If Iran-backed Hamas and Hezbollah ended their crusade for genocide tomorrow, the IDF would go home in an instant, the Lebanese could go back to governing their own country (rather than Hezbollah) and the Palestinians could fully integrate into Israel.

And look at your point - of course Israel is calculating how it looks. But they don't have any choice? Do you think they really want to be accused of genocide or any other bullshit? Doesn't exactly look good for them does it? And yet... they still fight. They've no choice. If they want peace inside their own borders and the basic right to live then Iran has made sure they have no choice but to kill all their enemies.

Ultimately the end of this war remains unclear and that is because this war was essentially started without any clear goal

I think Israel is super-clear about the end of its war. When the arab-muslim world in the ME abandon's its desire to turn Israel into part of a jew-free caliphate. When Iran stops baying for the death of the little satan. And when nukes no longer point at it. That's their endgoal - peace with its neighbours, because they no longer call for Israel's extermination.

The US? Yeah, Trump doesn't have a clue how he's getting out of this. Like Putin, he thought he could wave a magic wand and pull off a 3-day special military operation (or a 40 day one, doesn't really matter). Everything I'm hearing/reading says he has no clear idea of what he, the President and CinC, wants to actually accomplish, and no ability to listen to any actual advice from anyone around or under him. Very likely he either TACO's or - if only! - Congress remembers its constitutional rights and obligations and impeaches Trump. I'm not putting money on that one...

My main point here though is that Iran is fighting TWO wars with two VERY different adversaries. One laser-focused on its own survival, one focused on public adulation and a Norwegian gong - neither of which are materialising.

 

[DarthSlack]

Well, the Germans are not impressed. Merz went on the record saying that the Iranians are humiliating the US:

"The Iranians are obviously very skilled ⁠at negotiating, or rather, very skilful at not negotiating, letting the Americans travel to Islamabad and then leave again without any result," he said during a talk to students in the town of Marsberg.
"An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, especially by these so-called Revolutionary Guards. And so I hope that this ends as quickly as possible,"

With any luck, leaders are catching on to the fact that the best way to fight Trump is to hit back.

 

[Doomlord_uk]

I mean, it's not that the US is bad at negotiating it's that, well, yeah, it's that they are bad at negotiating. Trump won't or can't go back to attacking Iran, and the Iranians know this and mock him. Plan B - talks in Islamabad - aren't working? Drop another 10,000 JDAMs and MOPs on Iran. That's what makes the Iranians not only actually negotiate, but concede. I mean, the whole idea of negotiations is slightly obscene, when you consider who the US wants to "negotiate" with. Capitulation is the only outcome. And there's only one way to get that.

 

[Doomlord_uk]

Also Merz is a dumbass. "and so I hope that this ends as quickly as possible" Why, because the IRGC should be left to go back to mass-murdering its own citizens in the tens of thousands, whilst it holds the world economy hostage and it works endlessly to acquire nukes it will 'lose' to its terrorist proxies in the ME and NA? Yes! Sounds like a great plan!

However dumb the way this war was started, it now has to be finished properly. THAT is the reason the rest of the Western powers (and hell, China too for that matter) should double-down on the war with Iran. Concession now by the US (and the West, and yes, China..) leaves things even worse than when it started.

 

[Thank You and Best of Luck!]

Why, because the IRGC should be left to go back to mass-murdering its own citizens

Yeah! Come on guys. Save some for the Israelis and Americans to murder.

whilst it holds the world economy hostage

Exactly! That's supposed to be the job of tariffs decreed from Truth Social posts.

 

[Lt_Storm]

Utterly false. Israel's entire interest is it's own peace and security. It hasn't annexed land, it's occupied it (in both Gaza and now in southern Lebanon - one at best a 'terrorist administration', the other a literal failed state) to destroy the armies of Iranian-funded and directed terrorists who daily demand the genocide of the entirety of Israel (for political and religious reasons, not 'justice for stolen land'). It has also not remotely carried out a genocide. I know that's a popular leftwing sentiment, but it is not reality. Israel wants to exist, Iran and its allies and armies of terrorists want it do be genocided. Let's be clear about that.

You know, for a country supposedly interested in peace and security, it's very odd that they would pour so much fuel onto every cycle of violence that prevent them from enjoying either peace or security. It's almost like the decision makers don't care particularly much about peace, security, or safety. As for annexation, well, sending settlers into occupied lands is pretty good evidence that occupation isn't intended to be temporary. I mean, the de-facto status of those settlements is that those lands have already been annexed, they just haven't issued the proclamation yet. So, nope, don't buy that excuse. As for genocide, I'm not sure how else to describe what they have done in Gaza; that's certainly the word that the UN is using for it. So, no, that line doesn't work particularly well either. It seems that you are zero for three.

 

[hrpanjwani]

What's left out of this assessment is the Trump Administration's desire to shift the discussion from the Epstein Affair by creating a diversion. They assumed a quick win on this front, and a feather in the cap by collapsing an adversarial government in Tehran.

True. I forgot to include that one. Thanks for adding it to the conversation.

The people involved in the Epstein affair have clearly thrown Andrew Windsor to the wolves, hoping he would be a big enough scalp that the rest of them can get away with things. I hope American/Brit public remember enough to not let that happen.

Also, I had started a thread last year when the news about Andrew losing his titles broke which got locked as someone tried to defend Andrew in it.

@Gub posed this info in the thread before it was locked.

Andrew Lownie, the former prince's biographer, recent said on the Daily Beast podcast that he expects Andrew will head to a country in the middle east without an extradition treaty with the UK, since there may be criminal charges yet to come.

 

[m0nckywrench]

What's left out of this assessment is the Trump Administration's desire to shift the discussion from the Epstein Affair by creating a diversion.

The diversion can last the rest of his administration, longer if a GOP POTUS replaces him.

Why, because the IRGC should be left to go back to mass-murdering its own citizens in the tens of thousands, whilst it holds the world economy hostage and it works endlessly to acquire nukes it will 'lose' to its terrorist proxies in the ME and NA? Yes! Sounds like a great plan!

Invasion and occupation would (as usual in previous strategic mistakes) simply offer Iranian radicals more targets.

No amount of internal homicide strategically justifies yet another foredoomed constabulary operation. Those just prolong the bloodshed while energizing local patriots against invaders. Iranian proxy forces can be killed on location should the will to do so exist. War isn't free and the Iranian economy which supports it via money, weapons, logistics and troops can be broken at far less human cost than a foolish ground invasion.

Iran has limited assets, something spectators tend to ignore. Lack of surrender does not mean those assets are not being consumed or destroyed. Should Iran not yield there is much more to destroy and unlike North Korea during the Korean conflict Iran lacks a China-sized benefactor willing to send ground troops. To control Iran the regime must be visible on the ground which offers key personnel as targets.

Invasion and occupation are strategic mistakes no amount of good intentions can turn into something else or different. That's because they bring occupation forces into prolonged intimate contact with locals. Said locals are not going to greet invaders with flowers unless those conceal IEDs.

 

[hrpanjwani]

You know, for a country supposedly interested in peace and security, it's very odd that they would pour so much fuel onto every cycle of violence that prevent them from enjoying either peace or security. It's almost like the decision makers don't care particularly much about peace, security, or safety. As for annexation, well, sending settlers into occupied lands is pretty good evidence that occupation isn't intended to be temporary. I mean, the de-facto status of those settlements is that those lands have already been annexed, they just haven't issued the proclamation yet. So, nope, don't buy that excuse. As for genocide, I'm not sure how else to describe what they have done in Gaza; that's certainly the word that the UN is using for it. So, no, that line doesn't work particularly well either. It seems that you are zero for three.

Well said. There is also the issue of Bibi’s trial for corruption, when it will actually resume and what its eventual verdict will be. There are already sharp divisions in the Israeli electorate over the whole affair. The verdict has potential to cause significant unrest in the country. I strongly doubt it will become a civil war, but then I did not have US attacking Iran (and so incompetently) on my bingo card either. So more uncertainty for the world to deal with.

 

[Tijger]

What's left out of this assessment is the Trump Administration's desire to shift the discussion from the Epstein Affair by creating a diversion. They assumed a quick win on this front, and a feather in the cap by collapsing an adversarial government in Tehran.

Neither has come to pass.

The highlight for me was rolling out Melania Trump to distract from the Iran War by wading into the Epstein affair.

 

[Technarch]

I mean, it's not that the US is bad at negotiating it's that, well, yeah, it's that they are bad at negotiating. Trump won't or can't go back to attacking Iran, and the Iranians know this and mock him. Plan B - talks in Islamabad - aren't working? Drop another 10,000 JDAMs and MOPs on Iran. That's what makes the Iranians not only actually negotiate, but concede. I mean, the whole idea of negotiations is slightly obscene, when you consider who the US wants to "negotiate" with. Capitulation is the only outcome. And there's only one way to get that.

Negotiations are unlikely to succeed before 2028 given that Trump has already stabbed Iran in the back three times. He might be less trustworthy than Putin.

Unfortunately dropping 10000 more munitions is also unlikely to succeed any more than it would have succeeded in Afghanistan or Vietnam. This is not a winnable war for the U.S. The remaining Iranian military is too dug in, and the running costs are too large. This is the largest force buildup in the Middle East since 1991, it was costing $2B a day before a second MEU and a third CVBG were sent in theater. This is a trillion dollar per year war. Trump and Hegseth are already asking for hundreds of billions of dollars and it won’t be enough.

It would be far cheaper to go home and pay the toll. Nothing prevents that but ego.

 

[karolus]

Perhaps a deal could be hammered out where the Strait of Hormuz gets renamed to the Strait of Trump, but Iran keeps all the toll revenue.

 

[karolus]

Also Merz is a dumbass. "and so I hope that this ends as quickly as possible" Why, because the IRGC should be left to go back to mass-murdering its own citizens in the tens of thousands, whilst it holds the world economy hostage and it works endlessly to acquire nukes it will 'lose' to its terrorist proxies in the ME and NA? Yes! Sounds like a great plan!

However dumb the way this war was started, it now has to be finished properly. THAT is the reason the rest of the Western powers (and hell, China too for that matter) should double-down on the war with Iran. Concession now by the US (and the West, and yes, China..) leaves things even worse than when it started.

Trump started this conflict without consultation with (possibly former) allies, and now seems to believe they are obligated to bail him out of his self-created mess. Probably similar to his dealings with banks in some of his real estate deals.

If you think other nations—such as your homeland—ought to step up, are you planning to be the change you want to see in the world and volunteer for front line combat service?

 

[Shavano]

He's truly living up to his promise of America First.

Except the people who thought they knew what America First meant seem to disagree. They didn't want more middle east wars that only seem to drive up inflation.

Utterly false. Israel's entire interest is it's own peace and security. It hasn't annexed land, it's occupied it (in both Gaza and now in southern Lebanon - one at best a 'terrorist administration', the other a literal failed state) to destroy the armies of Iranian-funded and directed terrorists who daily demand the genocide of the entirety of Israel (for political and religious reasons, not 'justice for stolen land'). It has also not remotely carried out a genocide. I know that's a popular leftwing sentiment, but it is not reality. Israel wants to exist, Iran and its allies and armies of terrorists want it do be genocided. Let's be clear about that.

I disagree with that on a several counts. It's interested in security as they see it but not in peace. It has definitely annexed land in the West Bank, and now in Gaza (moving the "yellow line") and encroaching in East Jerusalem, in Syria, and is now openly discussing taking permanent control of part of Lebanon. Sure, it's ostensibly about security but you don't make Israelis secure on occupied land unless the long term plan is to never leave. And maybe not then either.

It's not seeking to change borders.

Sure, de-facto control is good enough. For now.

It's stopping people outside its borders from attacking it. If Iran-backed Hamas and Hezbollah ended their crusade for genocide tomorrow, the IDF would go home in an instant, the Lebanese could go back to governing their own country (rather than Hezbollah) and the Palestinians could fully integrate into Israel.

Sure, the IDF would go home in an instant just like they didn't in Syria and the West Bank. As long as you occupy somebody else's country, you ensure that there can never be peace, because you are creating a perpetual provocation.

 

[herko]

I mean, it's not that the US is bad at negotiating it's that, well, yeah, it's that they are bad at negotiating. Trump won't or can't go back to attacking Iran, and the Iranians know this and mock him. Plan B - talks in Islamabad - aren't working? Drop another 10,000 JDAMs and MOPs on Iran. That's what makes the Iranians not only actually negotiate, but concede. I mean, the whole idea of negotiations is slightly obscene, when you consider who the US wants to "negotiate" with. Capitulation is the only outcome. And there's only one way to get that.

/// OFFICIAL MODERATION NOTICE ///

---

You just can’t help it, can you? You just have to dehumanize people in the Middle East and keep advocating for blowing them all up. We get it already, you dislike them. Fine. Just don’t do it here.

 

[Shavano]

Trump started this conflict without consultation with (possibly former) allies, and now seems to believe they are obligated to bail him out of his self-created mess. Probably similar to his dealings with banks in some of his real estate deals.

If you think other nations—such as your homeland—ought to step up, are you planning to be the change you want to see in the world and volunteer for front line combat service?

Well that's not a completely insane expectation. There are other major economies that need a return to something like the status quo ante more than the US does.

The risk is that they see the US as the main obstacle and identify it as an enemy that must be fought.

 

[karolus]

The status quo ante is no more. Trump has embarked the global community into a brave new world. Whether expected or not, the Iran conflict is the crystallizing event. It’s the Rubicon of this era.

 

[NervousEnergy]

Iran has limited assets, something spectators tend to ignore. Lack of surrender does not mean those assets are not being consumed or destroyed. Should Iran not yield there is much more to destroy and unlike North Korea during the Korean conflict Iran lacks a China-sized benefactor willing to send ground troops. To control Iran the regime must be visible on the ground which offers key personnel as targets.

This doesn't get enough attention. The current US cease fire is counter-productive as long as Iran is targeting ships in the strait or other nations around them. If the oil and economic hits are happening anyway, then continuing to destabilize the Iranian theocratic regime, the IRGC, SAVAK, etc is in both our and the world's interest, even if they protest it.

 

[Slothur the Hasty]

I was kind of reading @Doomlord_uk post above as a possible current US tactic, but figuring out the why of the current US administration and its decisions has never made much sense.

This doesn't get enough attention. The current US cease fire is counter-productive as long as Iran is targeting ships in the strait or other nations around them. If the oil and economic hits are happening anyway, then continuing to destabilize the Iranian theocratic regime, the IRGC, SAVAK, etc is in both our and the world's interest, even if they protest it.

Which will still lead to countless deaths I imagine.

 

[cgo_12345]

Trump has embarked the global community into a brave new world

I don't know if "brave" is the mot juste here. Maybe "dunderheaded". Or "murderously unstable".

 

[Technarch]

I was kind of reading @Doomlord_uk post above as a possible current US tactic, but figuring out the why of the current US administration and its decisions has never made much sense.

Sometimes the mask slips:

https://nitter.net/XNewsGlobalEn/status/2048899881507635311#m

Rubio: 'Iran cannot be the sole beneficiary of an illegal toll system.'

"Sole"

 

[hrpanjwani]

It would be far cheaper to go home and pay the toll. Nothing prevents that but ego.

Clarification request: Do you mean Trump’s ego or the collective ego of the US establishment?

 

[VividVerism]

Sure, it's ostensibly about security but you don't make Israelis secure on occupied land unless the long term plan is to never leave. And maybe not then either.

We need a buffer zone to keep Israelis safe!

Conquers a bunch of land for buffer zone.

Hardline settlers move into buffer zone.

We need a buffer zone to keep Israelis safe!

 

[hrpanjwani]

Iran has limited assets, something spectators tend to ignore.

Sure they are limited compared to someone like the US. But they are still large in absolute terms right? I mean, it’s a big country. Comparable in size to Alaska, I believe.

 

[Technarch]

Clarification request: Do you mean Trump’s ego or the collective ego of the US establishment?

Yes.

Seriously though, elements of the GOP have had blue balls for attacking Iran for decades, and they finally got their chance. Naysayers are only being purged. Trump, meanwhile, obviously wants out but cannot be perceived as a loser in this situation, only Iran is unlikely to give him a face-saving offramp.

 

[VividVerism]

This doesn't get enough attention. The current US cease fire is counter-productive as long as Iran is targeting ships in the strait or other nations around them. If the oil and economic hits are happening anyway, then continuing to destabilize the Iranian theocratic regime, the IRGC, SAVAK, etc is in both our and the world's interest, even if they protest it.

Or we can leave, and then Iran has no reason to keep shooting.

 

[hrpanjwani]

Yes.

Seriously though, elements of the GOP have had blue balls for attacking Iran for decades, and they finally got their chance. Naysayers are only being purged. Trump, meanwhile, obviously wants out but cannot be perceived as a loser in this situation, only Iran is unlikely to give him a face-saving offramp.

You mean there is an actual possibility of Trump actually facing consequences for his actions? Someone please check if hell has frozen over.

 

[Technarch]

You mean there is an actual possibility of Trump actually facing consequences for his actions? Someone please check if hell has frozen over.

Maybe, although he is currently profiting from the war. If he faces consequences for this it'll be because he committed the single biggest geopolitical mistake of the 21st century, thus taking that honor from Putin.

 

[hrpanjwani]

Maybe, although he is currently profiting from the war. If he faces consequences for this it'll be because he committed the single biggest geopolitical mistake of the 21st century, thus taking that honor from Putin.

Can the international community start giving out a prize for that one?

I mean Nobel arguably acknowledges the best of us.

Maybe doing that for the worst of us will finally bring balance to the universe.

 

[SuperDave]

You mean there is an actual possibility of Trump actually facing consequences for his actions? Someone please check if hell has frozen over.

It's my belief that the IRS might have some minor interest in this matter, as well as others, into the future, which can best be discerned by looking into the past.