This is not AI or some satirical mash-up.
I don’t often agree with him, but when he’s right, he’s right.
You know what? Another of my illusions has been shattered. I’m starting to feel that the prestigious FIFA Peace Prize might not be legit.
To tell the truth, I find it hard to follow this new war. Under normal circumstances, whenever there is a difference between Trump’s story and somebody else’s, you can just assume that the other side’s story is the correct one. That works nearly 100% of the time. But this war is different. The leaders of Iran lie and boast just as much as Trump, so how do you read it? If they agree, for example, does that mean they are both lying, and therefore the Ayatollah is still alive? Or should we assume that they are both telling the truth? But by the rules of logic, if all sides are telling the truth, and Trump is speaking for one of the sides, therefore Trump is telling the truth. But Trump never tells the truth.
See what I mean? It’s the Mudd’s Robots Dilemma!
Where is Captain Kirk to sort this out?
Also, this makes Sonny Bush look not bad in comparison {entire logic module explodes in a hail of metal and silicon}.
To be fair, at least Trump attacked the right enemy: (1) Those mofos are straight-up evil; (2) What comes after the Islamic Republic can’t be any worse.
In contrast, Bush the Lesser got into Iraq for no reason at all, and proceeded to create ISIS in the aftermath.
The downside is that Iran has a greater ability to inflict pain on civilian populations before collapsing, militarily with their missiles, and also through their network of proxies and sleeper cells. That was not as significant a risk with Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan.
To quote General Buford, “The devil’s to pay.”
Let’s cross our fingers that Trump can be smart enough not to put boots on the ground over there.
Oh, jeez, how bad are things when we have to rely on Trump to be smart?
“What comes after the Islamic Republic can’t be any worse” . We’ll see. Has real “hold my beer” potential.
And Trump didn’t attack them out of any sense of good vs evil. He attacked to deflect from the Epstein files.
Maybe. But at least he attacked the bad guys, not Denmark or Canada.
Yet. He’s got three more years of distracting to do.
No different than the Monica missiles from the 90s and Bush wanting to avenge his daddy in Iraq.
Bush Jr. claimed WMDs in Iraq. Trump and Israel claim nuclear weapons are weeks away. Netanyahu has wanted this war and has been saying the same thing for decades, and there was no evidence that it’s been any closer than before. Just like the non-existent evidence for WMDs in Iraq with Sadaam. Sadaam oppressed dissent and killed his own citizens just like the Ayatollah in Iran.
It’s nearly the exact same thing: manufacture consent out of thin air based on a threat that hasn’t changed fundamentally in decades. And lets not forget, Trump tore up the agreement with Iran in his first term. He fell into Netanyahu’s propaganda who must keep wars ongoing to delay his own corruption trial.
The only difference for now is no boots on the ground, which lessens deaths but greatly increases the likelihood this drags on much longer if Iran’s remaining structure continues to mount attacks.
For a President who promised peace and bitched about money being spent in Ukraine for aid, he’s just emptied a cache of hundreds of millions of dollars on this project, probably more, dating back to the expensive MOAB bunker busters, to the immense amount of interceptors, to the three F-15Es lost already to friendly fire. Where is this money coming from???
There’s quite a bit of difference.
After the defeat in Kuwait, Saddam was benign. He was not pursuing nukes, and he had nothing to do with 9-11 or Al Qaeda.
Iran, on the other hand, is pursuing nukes, and is actively evil, supporting terror by proxy. Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, and many other terrorist groups are clients of Iran.
There was no reason at all to invade Iraq. American intelligence knew that the WMDs were pretextual. Although Bush and Cheney never admitted it, they had access to the intel, so they must have known they were lying about WMDs. Poor Colin Powell got suckered in, as they exploited his credibility with the international community. I have no feel for whether Bush personally knew that the yellowcake claim was false, but it was so obviously false that everyone in the intel community must have realized it. (It took about 30 seconds of fact-checking to establish that the documents were forged, but I don’t think the source of the forgery was ever identified.) Maybe Bush didn’t know it was a lie, but somebody who contributed to that speech did know, and the intel community must have known. In other words, the whole case against Iraq was a lie fabricated by somebody in the Bush camp.
The case against Iran, in contrast, is not a lie, although it has been exaggerated. They clearly are pursuing nuclear weapons. They have amassed a half-ton of 60% enriched uranium. There is no other reason to have it. (They aren’t using it for medical research. When they made the Obama deal, they were perfectly happy with 3.7% before Trump nullified the deal.) Civilian power generation requires 3%. Sure, Trump and Israel have exaggerated how long it would take to enrich it to 90%, and what Iran could do with 1000 pounds, but there’s no doubt they are at least trying to brandish a nuclear sword.
The part that worries me is that Iran, unlike Iraq, is capable of causing a lot of death and destruction throughout the world.
They’ve been ‘pursing nukes’ for two decades plus now. They could have enriched to nuclear grade by now if they truly wanted to, obviously they’ve used it for leverage to reduce sanctions. Which there was an agreement in 2015 that Trump tore up.
Their reason for enrichment was a negotiation ploy to reduce sanctions, and that was about it, because they could have definitely become North Korea by now if they truly wished to. Israel has claimed over and over they were ‘weeks away’ for years.
Rest assured though, whatever remains of the regime now definitely won’t trust any negotiations led by the US going forward at this point and whatever militant leader takes over won’t hesitate to try to recoup the program. I sincerely doubt they capitulate from air superiority alone so this is going to continue to be an ongoing problem for Trump in the next three years.
I trust US intelligence and Mossad just as much as the lame ass WMD excuse two decades ago. Which is, any rationale should be treated as a lie. And based on the flailing depending on whether its Trump or another cabinet stooge, the narrative has constantly changed over and over even in the couple days since this started.
That is incredibly naive.
“There’s no possible reason to have 60% enriched uranium except nuclear weapons.”
“Oh, they just did that so they would have leverage”
Yeah, right. They just wanted to advertise that they were close and capable, to attract the attention of the world, which wants and needs to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons, headed by a vengeful and unstable American President who is not known to negotiate in good faith.
If that was their strategy, it was the single stupidest strategy in the history of mankind, possible excepting Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, as this week is now demonstrating.
“Nyah, nyah, Trumpy. We could get nukes if we wanted, and you can’t do anything about it, so you better negotiate with us.”
Israel’s intel capabilities are very impressive, as are our own. Consider this – the CIA knew about the Ayatollah’s meeting and Israel/USA adjusted their plans to target it. Then the Israelis knew exactly which Iranian officials were dead as soon as the rubble was sorted out. I’m pretty sure they knew before Iran did! And remember the Hezbollah pagers? The Israelis must have eyes everywhere. (And great hacking of phones.) I would trust their intel 100%. However, I would not trust them to communicate what they know to us. They spin what they reveal, just like everyone else.
But it’s not just Israel that has caught Iran sneaking around. German intelligence has reported that Iranian entities have sought to acquire technologies for both nuclear and missile programs from German companies. Their prosecutors have previously investigated German companies suspected of illegally selling equipment, such as cables, pumps, and transformers, that could be used in nuclear programs. Suspiciously, Iran had attempted (and apparently succeeded occasionally) to procure these by having German companies sell them to cooperative third countries to evade detection. Ah, capitalism!
— Of course, Trump created the whole problem in his first term. He just needed to stick with the Obama deal, but tighten up the inspections. The problem was just that it was Obama’s deal.
I believe the CIA and Mossad just as much as Iran’s propaganda. You’re talking about with the CIA the same group that overthrew their democratically elected leader for the Shah that led down this path to begin with – all for the name of foreign oil. The same intelligence competence that allowed 9-11 to happen then turned around and claimed WMD’s to start a followup war in Iraq.
The fact we’re here in 2026 parroting the same threat that existed with Bush’s axis of evil speech in 2002, 24 years ago, is what I think is naive. I’m not saying their strategy makes sense to try to leverage enrichment for concessions but there’s plenty political scientists out there saying the same thing. Really, it took 24 years for Iran’s will and/or expertise to hit a breakthrough?
As always, before it happens there’s never a threat and then when it happens the threat is justified. Why wasn’t this an issue for the past 24 years and suddenly is now, did Iran suddenly just become adept at the thing they really wanted to achieve out of the blue in 2026?
If Trump didn’t do this and found some other distraction to amplify, then THAT would be the story. It’s only a story and a way because he used military might to make it one. If he chose this weekend to invade Cuba, and amplified we were fine with Iran, then that would be the cover story and consent would be manufactured for liberating Cuba.
We’re only here because Trump chose it to be, and then after the fact justification is compiled to justify a threat that’s been at the same levels for two decades plus.
These’s a big difference between what Mossad knows and what it tells us. You shouldn’t believe their propaganda, but they definitely have the eyes and ears in Iran, as demonstrated by the things I cited. Between the USA and Iran, they knew where every Iranian official was and when. In my opinion, it must be that they have completely hacked everybody’s mobile phones, beepers and walkies – the same way they were able to pull off Operation Grim Beeper.
On the other hand, no intelligence is perfect. They didn’t see October 7th coming.
Remember that Iran nearly doubled its stockpile of HEU with a sudden surge in just two or three months going into last May. They were obviously moving as quickly as they could to a bomb at that point. (Thus the June attacks)
But now? Who knows? The June attacks had to have set them back some. People don’t agree on how much.
That “leverage” explanation is ridiculous, but maybe they were deliberately provoking this war, because if you are near a bull, there’s no other reason to wave a cape. You don’t wave it to air-dry it. If you argue that Iran’s leaders created HEU to provoke Trump into war, thinking the attack would ignite a firestorm to unite all of the Muslim world against the USA and Israel, that I can believe. If so, they badly underestimated the ability of USA/Israel to know their whereabouts during that war.
Was there an immediate threat? No
Was the attack necessary? No
Was the attack wise? No
Could Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been tamped down by negotiations? Maybe. I think so, others do not. The negotiators said they were close to a deal on Friday, then the attack came the next day. Given that, I assume the entire negotiation was merely a feint to get them to lower their guard. Trump has been around Putin long enough to learn his tricks.
Even assuming proper intel, should the USA have gotten involved? I don’t think so. The Israelis have shown they can take care of themselves.
This war will cost … what? Trillions? It will deplete the weapons stockpile. It will cause many people to die, eventually including many Americans. And it’s the very sort of war that Trump promised to end.
Meanwhile, in addressing the public, given his FDR opportunity to make a case for war, Trump was dithering about, once again distracted by his curtains and ballroom.
I just don’t get why neither Congress nor the cabinet takes action. They can see the same senility we see, but they just completely lack any backbone.
As I understand it, enriching from directly below weapons grade around 60% to getting to 90% is negligible effort from that point. Lots of statements can be found stating it takes as little as a week. If you go back and look at the timeline of IAEA assessments, it’s been consistently around 60% enrichment for years now. If it’s negligible to go from 60% to 90%, then why haven’t they done it? They clearly have had ample time and opportunity to.
I don’t think it’s naive to say Iran moved to this point as a response to persistent external military tit for tat intervention by the Israelis. When their scientists get blown up in car bombs or various targeted attacks over the years, I don’t know of any state actor who ever said, ‘you know what, lets not poke the bear, they have a point, lets ramp enrichment back down’.
In my opinion, they went up to that line out of provocation and hoped to gain leverage out of it, as well as doing it to dig in from all the intervention. If they were really intent on weapon grade enrichment though, it seems pretty simple they could have hit that point for all the moments they stopped right below it. You can look back four years, likely even longer, and there are persistent reports of Iran hitting 60% consistently.
Something doesn’t add up when Iran stays at 60% for years, but constantly being told when an Israeli or US attack happens that we’re at the red line that they’re a week away from 90% weapon grade if we don’t act *NOW*. What about the 200 plus or more other weeks we’ve been at this red line?
The answer to your question is that have not yet acquired the other components they need, like the items they were trying to acquire surreptitiously from German companies.
Again, why did they suddenly enrich a massive amount last year in April and May. That’s what prompted the June attacks.
So, suddenly enriching vast quantities and secretly trying to acquire the other bomb-making technology. It was not at all unreasonable to assume they were making a bomb, especially since they were perfectly happy to agree to maximize their enrichment at 3.67% as part of the Obama deal.
Sorry, dude. I know you really, really want to find fault with Trump and Bibi, but no matter how hard you try to rationalize Iran’s actions, there is no other reason to possess HEU and to surreptitiously acquire bomb-making technology.
(And I don’t blame them. They want them not just to create more terror in the world, as is their objective, but as a deterrent. Trump would not now be attacking them if he knew the response was going to be nuclear. You and I would also want a bomb in their position. We would not have any interest in the terror angle, but the deterrent angle would prevent what is happening right now.)
I’m not trying to justify the war, and I’m not trying to suggest diplomacy would not have worked. I’m just saying there’s no doubt at all, not a shred, that those evil fuckers wanted nuclear weapons.
Scoopy, I agree with you on this.
There are some Canadians who are trying to claim that the Liberal government’s response to this attack on Iran shows that Prime Minister Mark Carney wasn’t serious about his ‘middle powers’ speech. Even that if The United States can attack Iran, why can’t it invade Canada?
Canada and Iran may both be middle powers, but the comparison stops there, everything else is absurd. Iran is destabilizing (to its region) terror state that is trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
The United States may not have legal authority from either the U.N or from the U.S Congress to do this, but Iran is a signatory to the nuclear non proliferation treaty, so it is not allowed to have nuclear weapons.
The problem with this bombing campaign is that the only thing it’s guaranteed to do is to kill innocent Iranian civilians. Trump clearly doesn’t want to put boots on the ground, and, as I said here earlier, even if he might, I don’t think Israel wants regime change, just a significantly weakened Iran.
So, it’s easy to see why this very compromised military campaign isn’t worth backing, even if it might delay Iran from getting nuclear weapons for a few more years.
Trump is already at war with Canada. There’s the trade war, and the Gordie Howe Bridge War. Fortunately, he’s not ready to start bombing you yet, but if I were you, I’d start naming a whole bunch of stuff after him, giving him some shiny golden awards, and maybe placing his image on some of your pretty pastel money.
Renaming Toronto’s CN Tower to the Trump Tower / Tour de Trump, would be a good start.
They needed German components to get from 60% to 90%? I’m not understanding. I’m not talking about the components of delivery, I’m referring to what is considered weapon grade plutonium:
“Here’s what one of Trump’s cronies Steve Witkoff said recently: A further angle of threat is that 60% enriched uranium can be further enriched to 90% weapons grade in roughly one week, “maybe 10 days,” at the longest, Witkoff noted.”
Why is this line touted again and again for years – its always been weeks away if you listen to Israel. How can it be weeks away for several years straight? Again, I have no doubt they enriched more and they lived in the gray area of what Trump pulled out of in the 2015 agreement up to a bomb, I’m asking if they wanted a bomb why they didn’t enrich to 90%? I’ve heard the week or two imminent threat thing parroted time and time again for years by Israel.
Maybe they have escalated to the point of deciding to build a bomb after Israel unleashed upon Gaza, or Trump heading back into office. I just know that negotiations were reported as going well and suddenly stopped. Just like the first agreement, suddenly stopped by Trump – to get a better ‘deal’ with his name on it. And they’ve had ample time to enrich to weapons grade and never seemed to do it regardless of if they had delivery systems available.
Either way, it was a problem caused and escalated by Trump, and now it’s looking like with the son taking charge of Iran that they’re guaranteed to become at least as hardline as before with no negotiations possible.
Its all a moot point now, because of Trump I have no doubt they’ll definitely be moving towards a bomb given the chance, because they saw what an agreement did. North Korea isn’t messed with for a reason now, and this just emboldens Iran and other countries who may have the capabilities to do so in the future to take it all the way as a deterrent.
No. There is no point in going from 60 to 90 without the other components that they need to created the bombs. Once they have those, they can go to 90 at will. (I should use the past tense. I don’t know what is left of their HEU, their nuclear scientists, or any of their infrastructure or technologies.)
Remember, there are only two key points:
1) The only reason to have HEU at that level is to create weapons, and they have not really stopped at 60. In fact, the IAEA has reported the existence of Iranian uranium enriched to 84%! Circulated accounts indicate the existence of an ultra-secret enrichment program at one of Iran’s covert nuclear sites, to which the IAEA has not been given access, and may already include 90% enrichment.
2) They have secretly been trying to get the other components and technologies necessary to build those weapons, and they have been exposed with undeclared nuclear activities at multiple sites.
Oftentimes in a debate there is room for a certain likelihood of either option being true. This is not such a case. There is precisely a 100% likelihood that they were/are seeking nuclear weapons.
If they were intent on creating a bomb at all cost, why would have made an agreement to begin with? Why would they even go to the negotiation table last week? Obviously they used their standing as a threat before 2015 as leverage to get sanctions off of them and they were willing to do so once again. If at a point they determined to go full bore to get a bomb, then it’s solely on Trump for causing it for pulling out of the agreement and Israel for attacks inside the country, so it’s a moot point for me.
I think they were still willing to use it as leverage and not as committed as you make it seem, otherwise they wouldn’t have made an agreement much less gone to the negotiation table. We only have slanted intelligence framing of Mossad and CIA which has been known to lie for their own ends. Iran lies, so do the ‘good guys’ in the framing of activity.
Whether Iran said after getting attacked by Israel or Trump coming into office to become more dedicated to a weapon still doesn’t change the original escalation when this was resolved in 2015.
They can’t even get their story straight on the chain of events that happened – first it was the nuclear program, then they wanted Iran to abandon any ballistic missiles period. Now Rubio is tripping over the entire narrative of needing to attack because they were going to attack Israel, or Israel were going to attack them and in turn attack out bases so we preemptively decided to attack?
If we had to attack because they really were intent upon building a bomb, it only came about because of the series of escalations by the US and Israel over time. There’s no one else to blame except Trump for pulling out of the agreement, and there’s no one else to blame except CIA’s intervention for installing the Shah for corporate interests decades ago. And it’s all moot now, because I’m sure they’ll NEVER negotiate again, especially under a leader who’s entire family has been killed.
At the risk of repeating myself, that’s just a bunch of suppositions
Here are the facts:
1. They have 60% HEU
2. They were increasing their stockpile of it dramatically just before the June bombing
3. There is no other purpose for that other than weapons.
4. They have been caught with 84% HEU
5. They have been caught secretly trying to purchase bomb-making technology.
6. They have been caught hiding undisclosed nuclear locations.
As long as you stick to facts, not speculation and what-ifs, there’s only one conclusion you can draw.
Even reaching 90% enriched uranium does not automatically mean having a nuclear weapon. Weaponization requires:
Converting UF₆ gas into metal
Metallurgy and shaping
Explosive lens systems
Triggering systems
Delivery systems
Those steps are separate and technically demanding.
See my comments above about German intelligence.
Well, there went that (doomed) hope. Today’s headline in the WaPo:
U.S. won’t rule out sending ground troops into Iran
what nonsense post… as we know these things in this region always end up going well… hilarious
Precisely.
Everyone’s opinions aside, he did exactly the right thing. Consider this fanatic theological government in possession of refined radioactive material and a shit ton of missiles. Joke if you all must, but this is Cuban missile crisis level stuff. This has to be seen thru to the end where the theocracy is put out to pasture completely. A democratic government needs to be allowed to rise and it needs to be safe-guarded for the fore see-able future. If not, we may as well make some nuclear tipped ICBMs available to the Taliban, just to see what happens. You know, just for shits and giggles.
PR
Really? If that’s the case, what’s the plan for North Korea then?
This is little more than the same flimsy ‘Weapons of mass destruction’ claim Bush made – and even then he got congressional approval. This isn’t about protecting America, this is about installing a more amenable administration.
This is about keeping the Epstein case off the proverbial front page. God help us all.
PhoneRanger, I agree with you about the danger of having Trump’s fanatic theological government having nuclear weapons and a wide variety of delivery systems. (The “theological” throws me a bit, but to an atheist, I suppose Trump’s pandering to the Christian Right makes it seem that way.) As you say, a Democratic government very much needs to be allowed to rise again!
No. Isreal has had Iran ‘two weeks out” from a nuclear missile for years and years. It’s as real as Bush’s Nigerian yellowcake. Even if they had the uranium, building a missile is literally rocket science. It would take Iran years to build up (or steal) the engineering and manufacturing base.
The last time a democratic government rose there, they decided they wanted to keep their own oil. We overthrew them and put in the shah; that ended well.
This is all to suppress the mental image of that fat bastard getting his lil dick almost bitten off by a 13-year-old.
We are going to hell, with a guy who made major in the reserves telling real soldiers what to do.
Israel. This is all about Israel. Until someone I trust actually shows me evidence that Iran was actually remotely close to any of this, I won’t believe it. There is a supercut online of Bibi saying over and over for the last 30+ years that Iran is just months from having nuclear ICBM’s.
There are generations of younger people in Iran and other middle east countries, that are waking up to the evil of their own govts and asking themselves why they need to hate another country. They’re actually fairly ambivalent towards the west. And then Israel does what Israel does, and they’re either killed, or turned into hateful fanatics, due almost solely to Israels actions and words.
Israel has become it’s own worst enemy, with regards to it’s own survival. They could have chilled, kept an an objective eye on things, with an attitude towards letting the older fanatics die off, and I’ll bet they could have at least achieved indifference in the eyes of Iran.
Honest question – I see everyone blaming Israel for everything lately.
When did this become a mainstream thing? Is it just antisemitism, or do you actually believe that the only Democracy in the middle east is somehow WORSE than the oppressive dictatorship of Iran?
Two things can be true at the same time.
Yes there are a lot of anti-semites out there whining about the same thing as they have been for centuries.
Yes its also a shit hole conservative country that mistreats its residents, is actively engaging in warfare with its neighbours and exhibits an unusual amount of control outside of its borders via aggressive espionage and monetary manipulation.
PS Israel isn’t the only ME democracy.
Because Israel is indiscriminately bombing innocent civilians across the Gaza strip and other areas without any regard for human life and lies about it. At the very least in the strip they could have evacuated the elderly, children, women, and disabled who virtually none of which would have been Hamas, and moved them to an humanitarian enclave next to Gaza and attacked Hamas inside the strip.
That doesn’t mean Iran or Hamas are better, but its tough to call upon moral superiority by not giving a damn who is killed or not. And it’s not much of a democracy when Netanyahu can postpone his corruption trial indefinitely by continually waging war.
Us doing Israel’s bidding will get Muslims to believe – rightly or not – that Bibi has his hand up Trump; we are the big satan, they are the little satan. Eventually this will blow back on us (see 9/11).
And just in hope that the umpteenth time’s the charm: disagreement with Israel’s policies and actions is different from anti-Semitism.
I could be wrong about this, but I think one complicating factor (the other being that Trump obviously doesn’t want ‘boots on the ground’, which is the only way to actually win a war, air power is very powerful but has significant limits) is that I don’t think Netanyahu wants regime change in Iran.
In addition to as has been mentioned here that he can keep Iran as the bogeyman (not that it hasn’t done genuine horrible things in paying terrorists and having proxy armies) it allows Israel to remain in alliances with the other Arab nations that are anti Iran.
A significantly weakened Iran that the Mullah’s still control I think is in Netanyahu’s strategic interest. And Netanyahu has shown that he has no problem playing with fire, for example, allowing Iran to secretly prop up Hamas’ terrorist wing.
If Iran has a new government that is peaceful, can Netanyahu be sure that Saudi Arabia or Egypt, for example, would remain an ally of Israel?
The CIA overthrew Iran’s democratic government for the Shah after WW2 so the US could get oil. Then the people of Iran eventually revolted against the Shah and brought in a hardline Islamic terrorist organization. The US backed Iraq and Sadaam against them in the 80s, just like the US backed Afghanistan and the Taliban against the Soviet Union.
Let me ask: since when have ANY of these interventions made things better? I don’t disagree the Ayatollah was a bad dude and so are the remnants of his government, but to say they couldn’t get worse is naive. They absolutely could. They were close to enriched uranium and could have had it for years if they truly wanted – who’s to say if the new regime doesn’t covertly enrich uranium now and decide to sell it on the black market for vengeance in a decade? No one predicted 9-11 after backing the Taliban in the 80s. The trickle down effect of trying to eradicate an enemy by overthrowing a regime and making the situation worse has happened over and over again.
Iraq was dismantled, then ISIS took over in the vacuum, and then they had to be taken out. We’re back with the Taliban controlling Afghanistan. Whoever fills the vacuum in Iran I doubt is going to be a peaceful ally, and probably will lead to unforeseen consequences years down the line on top of the ever expanding deficit paid to the executives and shareholders of the military industrial complex – who are the one ones that seem to come out ahead in this game. Funny how that works.
Plenty of room for things to get much, much worse.
All good points. And another thing to consider is that the current, admittedly evil, regime in Iran is deeply embedded with its tentacles all over the country. It will not necessarily fall just because its leader has been killed and airstrikes are continuing. There was an informative article about this today in the Globe and Mail. Also, while the regime is widely hated within Iran, it has its supporters as well among the common people – it is not just fear keeping it in power, albeit fear plays a big part. The airstrikes may actually galvanize support as bombing people does not necessarily inspire support for those who are doing the bombing, but may cause people to see their government, as awful as it is, as engaging in heroic resistance against an outside enemy. The core involvement of Israel in the bombing campaign may especially cause this reaction, as the current Israeli regime is liked by nobody in the Iran or elsewhere, aside from hardliners in Israel itself and in the United States.
Well it’s not just fear, its the systemic approach to crushing dissent which is 101 in the authoritarian playbook. Imprison or kill any protestors or organized dissent so there’s no connected entity that could rise up. Prevent citizens from having access to arms where they would be able to potentially utilize guerrilla warfare or mount a strategic attack. Take control of the means of communication by utilizing state-run internet and telephony capabilities.
Asking Iran to rise up when they have no framework or organized opposition to do so is idiotic. Also, expecting a military overthrow who has naturally selected for brutality and heavy authoritarian theocracy would only make their regime more insane. The ones killing protestors and wishing for a religious war moreso than the existing regime are the only ones with arms.
There’s no realistic solution to this that makes anything better. Lots of lives lost and money spent when the most hopeful solution is a failed state hoping that even more zealous factions don’t take over. It’s why this strategy has failed time and time again.
I believe that had we kept Iran’s democracy in place, Iran would be a valued NATO member by now.
To this day, I have still never heard a good justification for that.
We are so fucked.
Off topic from this but on politics, for those who remember the infomercials, the Sham Wow (Vince Shlomi) guy’s primary in Texas is today. Offer “Vince” Shlomi is running against octogenarian Republican incumbent John Carter in the Texas 31st U.S House district today, although Carter is expected to win renomination easily.
Also in Texas though is the Democratic Primary for the U.S Senate nomination that is apparently very heated though I haven’t followed it and the 2nd district U.S House race between Republican incumbent Dan Crenshaw (the guy with the eye patch) and state representate Steve Toth. Apparently there is a very good probability that Toth will defeat Crenshaw.
Crenshaw has always struck me as kind of interesting in that he seems to be quite knowledgeable on a lot of issues and he generally doesn’t believe in or make conspiratorial claims, and yet he’s still entirely performative and phony.
$4.6 billion in munition spent the first two days last week in this war. Not to mention the radar stations and infrastructure that’s been destroyed. I would mention the lives lost as being most important, but that’s least important to the MAGA crew.
It’s oddly quiet for the MAGA/right-wing crew here. Are they waiting for Dear Leader to tell them what to turn their brains off and believe now, or trying to latch onto the latest conspiracy now that the DOJ has released accounts of victims that implicate Trump?
I’m guessing they are not sure where to go from here on this. Maybe time to break out the circa 2012 rolodex with Killary and Benghazi? Maybe there’s an illegal Mexican roofer trying to survive working on a house down the street 12 hours a day that they can bitch about and spend 100K a head to arrest and deport for the good of the country?
Just remember, Trump will be golfing this week on your votes and dime, while he spends your money paying executives and investors at Lockheed to raise the price of your gas and groceries.
A job well done geniuses.
The biggest problem of all is that there is no definition of success. Trump can’t put up a “Mission Accomplished” banner because nobody knows what the mission is. Trump has said various things at various times. It appears regime change ain’t in the cards, and I don’t see “unconditional surrender” coming. Is it to take out all their missile sites, destroy all their reactors, and sink all their ships? Or what? How exactly will we know when the operation is complete?
I don’t think the MAGA faithful are all that happy with this development, but I never underestimate Trump’s ability to bluff and bullshit his way through anything.
Trump’s propaganda mistress Leavitt says what qualifies as unconditional surrender will be determined by Trump alone, so the groundwork is already being laid to believe only Trump’s doublething as truth.
Meanwhile Iran is starting to mine the waters in the Strait of Hormuz and seemingly isn’t conceding anything. When his approval ratings start to sink under 30% at around Dubya levels, I’ll start to believe his cult of personality is cracking.
We’ll see