USA Goes to War Against Iran
Time for a dedicated thread to the war.
How long will it last and what will be the probable outcome?
Iran paid attention in Ukraine, and also likely got a lot of intel and knowledge from Russia in return from their arms sales. Then they adopted this into their own situation, because unlike Ukraine they would not be getting a lot of equipment and money from outside partners. Their bet would have to be a war of quick economical and political attrition, made easier by geography a
--I think the one thing this analysis is missing is the role all of Trump's other "allies" (Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan) play in the timeline. I think he was getting a lot of pressure from these other nations not to take more aggressive lines. And in the case of Qatar probably directly bribed not too. Qatar seems to have been playing both sides the whole time and bribing IRGC AND Trump to have the war end without escalating.
For good or bad, the rest of the region (and China) probably greatly prefer a weakened, corrupt IRGC they can deal with then the unknown of taking a more aggressive stance.
--I think the one thing this analysis is missing is the role all of Trump's other "allies" (Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan) play in the timeline. I think he was getting a lot of pressure from these other nations not to take more aggressive lines. And in the case of Qatar probably directly bribed not too. Qatar seems to have been playing both sides the whole time and bribing IRGC AN
That seems likely enough. Their worst nightmare would be a war breaking out, and a US that is unwilling to fight it. I certainly would not want to rely on the armed forces of the Gulf states in a war with Iran, due to problems I mentioned in an earlier post about cohesion, training and doctrine.
At the minimum we would likely be looking at a collapse of the wealthy economies these countries enjoy these days.
There is also the unknown of what happens should the regime fall. There are a lot of scenarios that branch out from that, and there are plenty of them that do not necessarily lead to peace (chief of which would be Junta-regime, civil war, or faction states).
Like Europe tangling with an increasingly aggressive Russia, the local states might have to bite the bullet and greatly increase their military capacity. However, they face the added problem of lack of cohesion necessary for that capacity to actually work - these countries are still young as nationstates.
I will also say IMO how this eventually breaks out is going to depend on Iran's future behavior. IF the IRGC decides to turn Iran into a normal country, even a sucky authoritarian one like Pakistan or NK, I think this could be the end.
IF it continues with its Revolutionary ideology and funding destabilizing proxies around the ME there will be more war.
As I have said before, focusing so much on nuclear weapons is missing the forest for the trees IMO. The JCPOA was ultimately just kicking the can down the road because it didnt address the ideology and the proxies. If the MOU ends with this same non address of the real issues, we will get a similar outcome.
The JCPOA was ultimately just kicking the can down the road
agreed. and Obama pretty much said so. the point was to cripple Iran and keep them trapped until the US and Israel were strong enough to win a war. the Deep State Epstein class pedophile cannibal ghouls have always planned for this. they lost this round, but they wont ever stop.
agreed. and Obama pretty much said so. the point was to cripple Iran and keep them trapped until the US and Israel were strong enough to win a war. the Deep State Epstein class pedophile cannibal ghouls have always planned for this. they lost this round, but they wont ever stop.
In all seriousness, like most liberals of his day Obama believed that liberalism was inevitable. So if we just kicked the can down the road long enough Iran would eventually modulate its behavior and join the fold.
Now I think liberals are waking up to the reality is that not only is liberalism not inevitable, it may not even work at all on a long enough time scale. Especially with ethnic cleansing and demographic replacement in the West of Westerners by groups of people who dont believe in liberalism.
Trump Admin seem really shitty negotiators. $300 billion for Iran and all sanctions lifted in return for Iran giving a trust me bro pinkie promise not to build a nuke lol.
These agreements don't hold any weight no matter what. Trump tore up the one they had. I doubt Iran abides by anything.
He was a superstar athlete in a prominent America sport.
In 1941, he was the last person to hit over .400 and had an OPS which has only been surpassed by Babe Ruth and steroid era Barry Bonds. A person with stats like that today would be considered societal royalty.
He gave up the equivalent of 5 seasons to the US military.
1941 was one of the most interesting years in MLB History. Williams hit .406 (the last person to do it, as you note) and DiMaggio had a 56 game hitting streak. It is pretty much agreed upon now that when DiMaggio won the 1941 MVP, it should have gone to Williams.
Not only did Williams hit .406 for the year (DiMaggio hit .357), he had a higher batting ave than DiMaggio did during DiMaggio's streak. Williams also beat DiMaggio in every offensive stat except RBI's. Using modern day Wins Above Replacement (WAR) Williams has 8.7WAR to DiMaggio's 6.6WAR.
I am a little bias because these hitting "streaks" are odd. You can go 1 for 4 one game, and 1 for 5 the next, and have 6 or 7 at bats in a row with no hits, yet keep some "consecutive" streak going. Rant over.
I think the most interesting year for baseball in my lifetime (born in 1957) was 1973:
1. First year of the DH
2. Nolan Ryan pitched two no-hitters and struck out 383 batters for the all-time record that still stands.
3. Crazy NL East pennant race in which five of the six teams were in the hunt for the division title until the last week of the season.
4. Incredible seven-game World Series in which the A's players wore armbands during batting practice with Mike Andrew's uniform number after A's owner Charlie Finley booted him from the roster after committing two errors in a game.
5. Atlanta Braves were the first team to have three players hit 40+ home runs (Darrell Evans, Davey Johnson and Hank Aaron).
I could list more interesting factoids, but this is the P&S Forum.
They only have to not produce nuclear weapons and keep the strait open which was the pre war status quo.
That's about as good as it can be considering the alternative at least guarantees a years + long war with 100s of thousands of dead to quite possibly leading right back to those two things.
There was never a war LB. They traded missiles for a month from miles away and blew up some expensive ****
interesting tweets from the new Supreme Leader (or, if Mohjtaba is dead, then whoever is running this).
so he straight up says that he does not agree with the MOU but allowed the liberal leaders to proceed due to his trust in them.
so this ofc directly contradicts some of the common (and lazy/ignorant) notions in this thread. firstly that Iran is controlled by the hardliners. and secondly that the Supreme Leader is some despotic authoritarian leader.
interesting tweets from the new Supreme Leader (or, if Mohjtaba is dead, then whoever is running this).so he straight up says that he does not agree with the MOU but allowed the liberal leaders to proceed due to his trust in them.so this ofc directly contradicts some of the common (and lazy/ignorant) notions in this thread. firstly that Iran is controlled by the hardliners. a
Every Iranian leader in the last 45+ years was a hardliner and authoritarian as well. That's a feature, not a bug, or ANY theocracy, whether Muslim or Christian or any other religion.
the current govt is liberal. the govt that signed the JCPOA was even more liberal.
if they are so hardline, then why are they able to override the objections of the current Supreme Leader?
the current govt is liberal. the govt that signed the JCPOA was even more liberal.
if they are so hardline, then why are they able to override the objections of the current Supreme Leader?
My understanding based even on the message your posted is that the Supreme Leader CHOSE to accept the counsel of the leader of theSupreme security council. Am I wrong in assuming that ultimately the Supreme Leader has the final say? If not, he wouldn't the 'supreme' leader, now would he?
if we are to take his words as truthful, then obv he doesnt have final say since he preferred a different course.
if we are to take his words as truthful, then obv he doesnt have final say since he preferred a different course.
I doubt that he "preferred a different course." Although I would agree he didn't talk hard enough against it out of the other side of his mouth and that would appear to me to be a mistake if I were on that team. But the man is getting paid, sanction relief and a stabilized economy that might just be too sweet in the short term. Or it's just buying time. Or he's dead. Who the hell knows. But then the prez is in on it because he supposedly claimed to have spoken with him.
Or maybe he just isn't not too keen on his new job title. But if he cared at all about the economy or his people, he sure as hell is going to do what he did.
But he clearly hasn't taken any of Kim Jong Un's acting seminars because he could of said something like ... We only accept this deal to show how pitiful the Americans are, but make no mistake that Hell will fall down on America very soon" ... and please everyone.
But it did look low energy at best.
They only have to not produce nuclear weapons and keep the strait open which was the pre war status quo.
That being said, due to having the majority of their military infrastructure destroyed, and no real air defense remaining, they have no real capabilities to manipulate things to their will other than threatening/attacking civilian infrastructure in the Persian Gulf and neighboring Arab states. So the expectation is they will continue to use these levers to get their way.
They are already stating their interpretation for the very vague wording of the MOU is that Israel must completely leave Lebanon, and they consider the US in violation of terms until that happens. Of course they dont count the kinetic actions of Hezbollah against themselves.
Trump always tells you what’s going on because he’s stupid. The US runs out of oil reserves in four weeks, that’s why he capitulated to Iran now.
I doubt that he "preferred a different course." Although I would agree he didn't talk hard enough against it out of the other side of his mouth and that would appear to me to be a mistake if I were on that team. But the man is getting paid, sanction relief and a stabilized economy that might just be too sweet in the short term. Or it's just buying time. Or he's dead. Who t
I agree that its complicated. I guess my main problem with a lot of the analysis in this thread is that no one really knows what "hardline" means, or how Iranian govt works (I sure dont lol), or what many of the people want. fwiw there were large demonstrations against the MOU before the signing.
and there is still a good chance that it all falls apart. even if it doesnt fall apart, its higly unlikely Iran ever sees a dime from the US too.
