Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
3
😺
This is a really dumb take.
The US destroyed the Iranian navy... Of course they did. The US is thousands of times more powerful than the Iranian government ever was, and it would be a total embarrassment if the US wasn't able to do that in a matter of hours.
The threat was never Iran's government, the real threat was that Iran's government would *collapse*. Because once they collapse, there's no one left who can call for peace, and it's just chaotic loose knit bands of militants fighting to the death, with (importantly) long range missiles that can hit anything trying to cross the strait of Hormuz - a very very VERY important trade route.
So the only way to secure global trade and 20% of the world's oil supply is a ground invasion. You can't bomb missiles, they're hidden in the mountains where they're impossible to see from the air. The only way to clear the country of missiles is with a ground invasion, and US invading Iran would be like China invading Appalachia. Same geography, same friendly locals.
The Japanese considered an invasion of the US in WW2, and one Japanese general famously quipped "There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".
This is a loser's war, plain and simple. There's no winning move here. But none of it has anything to do with whether or not the US can topple the Iranian government.
The US destroyed the Iranian navy... Of course they did. The US is thousands of times more powerful than the Iranian government ever was, and it would be a total embarrassment if the US wasn't able to do that in a matter of hours.
The threat was never Iran's government, the real threat was that Iran's government would *collapse*. Because once they collapse, there's no one left who can call for peace, and it's just chaotic loose knit bands of militants fighting to the death, with (importantly) long range missiles that can hit anything trying to cross the strait of Hormuz - a very very VERY important trade route.
So the only way to secure global trade and 20% of the world's oil supply is a ground invasion. You can't bomb missiles, they're hidden in the mountains where they're impossible to see from the air. The only way to clear the country of missiles is with a ground invasion, and US invading Iran would be like China invading Appalachia. Same geography, same friendly locals.
The Japanese considered an invasion of the US in WW2, and one Japanese general famously quipped "There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".
This is a loser's war, plain and simple. There's no winning move here. But none of it has anything to do with whether or not the US can topple the Iranian government.
Okay. I've read many POV's.
So you know, I'm not a Jew and I'm not a Muslim. I don't have a side in this. I was born in the US but lived my whole adult life in France so I'm more aligned w/ French than anyone.
What you're hearing from me is just raw analysis, and my analysis is that everybody loses. Iranians lose their country, their home, their lives. Americans lose in a war that cannot be won against mountain rednecks.
What you're hearing from me is just raw analysis, and my analysis is that everybody loses. Iranians lose their country, their home, their lives. Americans lose in a war that cannot be won against mountain rednecks.
Replies
11Thank you. I am an American born and raised over 65. Lived in the Midwest, West and now South. I don't know exactly what Trump wants. I read and listen, definitely no decision where I fall on all of this.
@cjd @Bleukitty America does not need Middle East oil any more. China does, and these recent moves appear designed to block China as well as protect Israel.
If China and/or Europe need Middle East oil, they are going to have to deal with the missile threat. The USA will lose interest, as it always does.
> America does not need Middle East oil any more. China does
Oil markets don't work like that.
Imagine a big auction and every country is bidding on oil. If China posts the highest bid, then every oil company in the world will happily send oil their way - even from America.
So while America might be "energy self sufficient" in the sense of producing more oil than they use, it doesn't mean you won't be seeing this at the gas pump.
Energy self-sufficiency just means that while you're paying more for fuel (and everything, because fuel is used to make everything), somebody who owns some oil pumps in America is earning more.
The biggest winner here is going to be Russia, because the MAJORITY of their economy is oil export.
Oil markets don't work like that.
Imagine a big auction and every country is bidding on oil. If China posts the highest bid, then every oil company in the world will happily send oil their way - even from America.
So while America might be "energy self sufficient" in the sense of producing more oil than they use, it doesn't mean you won't be seeing this at the gas pump.
Energy self-sufficiency just means that while you're paying more for fuel (and everything, because fuel is used to make everything), somebody who owns some oil pumps in America is earning more.
The biggest winner here is going to be Russia, because the MAJORITY of their economy is oil export.
@cjd @Bleukitty saying you don't have a side is chicken shit
you're passively siding with the aggressors by not calling them out
If I was to pass judgement, I'd state the obvious - Israel attacked Iran unprovoked and that's not nice. Russia attacked Ukraine unprovoked and that's not nice either. But I'm not gonna do anything about it. If you're braver than me, go fight.
But you had better not be a boomer that thinks his couch is his horse and his phone is his rifle because that is the depths of cringe.
But you had better not be a boomer that thinks his couch is his horse and his phone is his rifle because that is the depths of cringe.
@cjd @Bleukitty Russia was very much provoked. If you're not aware of that by now then geopolitics is probably not your thing.
From: You need to take a side or else it's chickenshit
To: Geopolitics is probably not your thing
That's a hell of a pivot
To: Geopolitics is probably not your thing
That's a hell of a pivot
But at least its now obvious to everyone that no amount of money is too much for maintaining Israel's capacity for flanking manouvers. Yo can never rely on what the other Arab (NOT muslim, ARAB STATES) will do, but you can always rely on Israel to ACT.
Iran has no ally in the Russians or in the Chinese. The US has and ally in the people and in the state of Israel.
IF - and only if - boots go to ground, it will be Israel first.
Iran has no ally in the Russians or in the Chinese. The US has and ally in the people and in the state of Israel.
IF - and only if - boots go to ground, it will be Israel first.
> no amount of money is too much for maintaining Israel's capacity for flanking manouvers
Here you go: https://www.gov.il/en/pages/donate-to-israel
Here you go: https://www.gov.il/en/pages/donate-to-israel
The craziest shit I came across in a long time - how did you find this gem?!
Negative on the donation, I do not donate time, blood or organs let alone money.
Negative on the donation, I do not donate time, blood or organs let alone money.
But you said "no amount of money is too much"...
So what you really mean is there's no limit on how much of Other People's Money you would spend to defend Israel, but the amount of your own money you're willing to spend is $0.00.
I never knew you were such a socialist...
So what you really mean is there's no limit on how much of Other People's Money you would spend to defend Israel, but the amount of your own money you're willing to spend is $0.00.
I never knew you were such a socialist...