I think this plan falls apart on its assumption that the Gulf monarchies can supply troops to hold the occupied territory. The GCC is not Ukraine: Arabs are not Europeans, in competence or morale; the GCC's worker population (your conscription base) is largely subcontinental foreigners rather than natives; and many of the Gulf monarchies are hanging on by a thread already. Holding foreign territory at the behest of a hated religious enemy is also not the same as defending your own territory. The Gulf monarchies would be far more likely to leave the American alliance and make up with Iran … or to be overthrown and replaced with leaders who will do so.
Strangely, this is the exact war plan I laid out on my podcast something like two years ago as what would be necessary to defeat Iran in a war, then said it was impossible with the military we had, and so we shouldn’t get into this war to begin with. My cohosts were skeptical then and are still under the delusion that Iran is going to magically surrender unconditionally today. I’ll wait a few weeks to send them this article, but you nailed it 100%.
Oh, also, enriched uranium doesn’t get you a modern bomb. It’s gets you a breeder reactor in which you can breed plutonium for a real modern bomb. Which is a whole new series of steps that the Iranians haven’t taken. If the Iranians did use their uranium stupidly to produce a Little Boy bomb (a very dangerous 10,000 pounds), how would they deliver it? Reinforced B-29s and air supremacy are such rare things nowadays. In other words, the “nuclear bomb” scare is not real and has never been real. Sure, the Iranians are enriching uranium far beyond any peaceful purpose (to 60% rather than the generous 15% that usual peaceful purposes max out at), but they did so not because they were interested in building a nuke, but because doing so would poke Israel in the eye, highly satisfying if you are the mullahs. “Iran getting the bomb” is just as fake as the Iraqi “weapons of mass destruction” and it’s being pushed by the same people for the same reason: to scare Americans into war. These obvious facts don’t take years to learn—an hour on Wikipedia gives you all the information you need. But fake intelligence reports marked Top Secret, handed over by breathless Israelis to ignorant fools in the USG who trust everything, even nonsense, that is classified, sometimes even over their own eyes, has caused far too much trouble in the past that you’d think our people would learn. Alas no.
They have tunnels, america is an ocean away and I bet every airport has several layers of radiation detection, some of which may even have been spared from dei. Israel on the other hand, they are trying to close all of tunnels, but maybe you have the nuclear tunnel dug with people who don't own pagers and only used for this one task.
I don’t think oil/lng flowing is necessarily a win condition for the USA.
Both the USA and Russia are top sellers of fossil fuels and removing the gulf states as competition will only strengthen the position of both.
This lets Russia claw its way out of the subservient client state status to China that has been inflicted by the Ukraine invasion’s cost in treasure and war material.
USA gets to gird Chinese expansion and have India/SE Asia/Western Europe as client states.
This is assuming that trump has some manner of plan and isn’t just following orders from bibi so it could be incorrect.
Arguably Iran is already winning simply by forcing the gulf states to accept payments for oil in currencies other than USD. I believe at least one ship has already transited through the straits by paying in Yuan.
> Both the USA and Russia are top sellers of fossil fuels and removing the gulf states as competition will only strengthen the position of both.
Viewed purely in terms of the oil industry you're correct, but US interests as a whole are very dependent on the steady flow of middle eastern oil. Without it there is no petro-dollar to speak of and without the petro-dollar the USD will start to nosedive under the weight of all the inflation they've built up over the years. And then they can't even print their way out of a crisis like they normally do.
Lol they’re gonna just sit there and let us assemble a force large enough to do this. Look at Ukraine. ANY concentration of troops is destroyed in minutes. And who says they don’t invade Kuwait and Bahrain in response? Or just go for broke on infrastructure to make sure that even if the strait is open there’s nothing to ship through it.
I asked Grok about your economic claims. It agreed with them, but said they're quite exaggerated:
The US runs large deficits (recently around $1.7–$1.9 trillion annually, with FY2025 at ~$1.8T and early FY2026 trends similar). These are financed by selling Treasury bonds to a mix of domestic buyers (Fed, banks, funds), foreign governments, and investors. Petrodollar recycling (oil exporters investing surpluses in US assets like Treasuries) does contribute to demand for dollars and US debt, helping keep interest rates lower than otherwise and supporting the "exorbitant privilege" of running deficits more easily. Oil priced in dollars creates structural demand for USD globally.
However, the claim that this amounts to "about 1.6 trillion a year" (matching the deficit) via a "backdoor tax" on global oil transactions is not accurate. Global oil trade is worth trillions annually, but petrodollar inflows to US debt are only a fraction of that—not a 1:1 match to the deficit. Foreign holdings of US Treasuries are large (~$8–$9T total foreign, with oil exporters a subset), but the system isn't the sole or primary absorber of the deficit. The US benefits from broad reserve currency demand (trade, reserves, safe-haven flows), not just oil. The logic overstates the direct linkage: if Gulf states stopped selling oil for dollars tomorrow, it would pressure the dollar and raise borrowing costs over time, but it wouldn't instantly cause "runaway interest rates and inflation" collapsing the system. The petrodollar is important but eroding gradually (e.g., some non-dollar deals), and the US deficit persists due to many factors.
Flaw in the Logic: The deficit isn't solely "absorbed" by petrodollar flows at "below market rates." While oil trade creates structural USD demand (~$500B+ annual energy trade through Hormuz alone), the system is broader: Dollars are needed for global trade (U.S. is ~25% of world GDP), reserves, and safe-haven flows. The query's $1.6T "backdoor tax" on global oil is overstated—petrodollar inflows are a fraction (~$100-300B/year recycled into Treasuries), not a 1:1 deficit match.
The petrodollar system (post-1973 U.S.-Saudi pacts) ties oil pricing to USD, forcing buyers to hold dollars and exporters to recycle surpluses into U.S. assets. It does act as an implicit "tax" on global energy (~1-2% of transaction value via seigniorage), funding U.S. deficits and military spending. Gulf states' investments in U.S. tech and Treasuries (e.g., Saudi PIF's stakes) underpin this.
Hypothetical Collapse: If Gulf states halted USD oil sales (e.g., due to war-induced food security pressures, as some analysts warn), it could erode dollar demand, raising U.S. borrowing costs (e.g., +1-2pp on yields) and fueling inflation via a weaker USD. Extreme views label the U.S. economy a "Ponzi scheme" reliant on this inflow; a sudden shift could trigger "runaway interest rates" and crisis. In the current war, Iran's threats to "not allow one liter of oil" through Hormuz amplify this risk.
Why It's Exaggerated: De-dollarization is gradual (e.g., some China-Saudi deals in yuan), not sudden. The U.S. system wouldn't "collapse" overnight—domestic buyers (Fed, banks) absorb ~60% of Treasuries, and alternatives (euro, yuan) lack depth. Even in a prolonged Hormuz crisis, higher oil prices might increase short-term petrodollar flows (more USD per barrel for survivors like Saudi Arabia), though volumes drop. Triffin's dilemma (reserve currency requires deficits) persists, but the U.S. has muddled through worse (e.g., 1970s oil shocks).
My view is that the oil trade is used to keep commodity prices low, so that commodities stay stable. This is how the CPI/stock market split cones into being. Stocks are traded in NYC, commodities are traded in chicago.
When commodities start being proced like assets, you see what happened to gold. $2000 to $5000 in less than 2 years, $3000 to $5000 in less than one. If that happened to oil, it would happen to corn, soy, cattle, copper, andrhing that could be described as "futures," and worst of all, it would happen to wages.
So the western secularists, who structure their lives around the screeching comfort seeking of old women (your words) just played dirty pool and fucked up a fairly large country by doing some shit that you would normal think is kinda barbarian and cool? I’m confused as to when you think extreme violence is okay and when it’s not. I personally share your views on how to fix the west, and almost all of that is violent.
Generally I think you should commit violence when you have not very much and a lot to gain (young white men)
And Generally I think you should try to keep things peaceful and avoid the risk when you already have a lot and have way more to lose than gain (the aging heads of American Empire and Wealthy Zionists)
I don't think that's necessarily a moral thing (morality can demand a lot of different things)... But as a rule you shouldn't double down and risk it all when you're up and have way more than enough to be happy with your position.
We're in the opposite positions... People with nothing to lose are terrified and people with everything to lose are YOLOing away the empires they've built
"Wow i can't believe catgirl kulak isn't being all barbarian about this war, that's not vety bronze age of you" oh STFU. "Barbarians do stupid things for no reason" no they don't. That's how you get the empire running a punitive campaign against you, moron. This is how women plan wars when they're trying to get kidnapped and ravisged be strong foreign men because their men are a bunch of pussies.
I’m not very online so I’m not all together sure what you’re talking about.
The bit I thought that makes sense is that acting like a dickweed - like Iran has - will elicit a punitive revenge action.
I’m 62 and I’m thoroughly enjoying this bombardment of Iran because of my memories of the hostage taking in 1979+ all their bullshit ever since . It’s a wonderful comeuppance.
American should’ve done this in 1981 . The world would be a much better place if they had.
lol. You writing this from Tel Aviv? The issue isn't the violence, the issue is that our resorting to violence was ill-considered and has put *us* in an extremely precarious position from which there is no easy escape.
No. I expect them to screw it up. And even if done well, I expect it to go horribly.
I'm just laying out what the least bad option (aside from jettisoning Israel) would look like so we can judge them when they inevitably do something way more stupid.
The least bad option from Trump´s perspective is to leave the mess to his successor to sort it out. Which means he will try to keep the air war going on indecisively for another 2 1/2 years. He can´t afford to give up and he can´t afford to escalate further, so he is going to temporize.
He will play for time until the end of his term or until he is impeached.
Frankly i can't endorce any war plan that doesn't involve copious amounts of persian whores.
It has become clear that "iran is a nation of 1 million churd living under mountains, and the remaining 99m syrface-dwellers are just slaves." The oro-demicracy protestors can't do anything right, and they especially can't govern.
Covert action is needed. The IRGC will never surrender strategic assets, but they may agree to an infantry occupation for the purpose of enforcing public order. We send in our spies, our spies bring in mercenaries, and then our mercenaries bring in the kind of low-quality infantry that has to take public transportation.
Then america will simply oversee the "liberation"of the useless persian urban cattle, as the magicuans, sorry, the mullahs continue to rule then through superstition any magic, we will bring in fireign dollars and whore out their women until they learn to either participste in actual politics, not inpotent pro-democracy protest nonsense, or even better to simply shut up and go to work.
Bite me, you cultist. I'm more conservative than you are- which I grant isn't saying very much. I voted for Trump, in significant part because we were promised no new wars. And yet here we are, and here's you not understanding- STILL- that we've gotten ourselves into a bad situation in the Middle East for no good reason.
No, you fucking clown. "50 years." Don't you ever get tired of falling for obvious propaganda and shilling for it like a total simp? Hasn't the fact that we are currently carrying out military strikes in IRAQ dented your thick skull? Because I guarantee you were all fucking in for that war, too.
Shut the fuck up Tom you retard. You’re delusional if you think Iran doesn’t want to destroy us. Ummmm, they say so all the time. And Iran has proxies in Iraq. You’d know that had you ever been there or done something manly besides run your cum guzzler on the internet. Fuckin traitorous pussy.
I like that article. It certainly enlighten me on the complexity of opening the straight of Hormuz.
An omission in our goodly author’s calculus is the Iranian people themselves.
I am surrounded by Iranians at my work in Toronto. They’re all very happy with Trump’s actions. They say Iran has changed in 47 years. The population is not with the Mullahs. The population is ready to join the rest of planet Earth. It might not be so easy to get them to sacrifice their children for a leadership that they despise. This is to say they have the same problem as the Americans.
I think Trump‘s gambit was focussed on China while Bebe’s game was against Iran. I think it could still work.
Presumption that the Iranian people will fight back against the imperial power of America is an open question. The people of Iran want to join the empire. This is my interpretation of what the Iranians in my midst have told me. They are all very happy and mostly fear that Trump will stop short.
China was very much fortifying Iran as a forward base in the region. I think the trump administration moved on this belief.
Just be mindful that the Iranians who left Iran are most likely self-selected for being opposed to the regime. You probably have some sampling error going on there. I do agree though that a significant chunk, maybe even a majority, of Iranians are not with the mullahs.
Yes, sampling error with absolute certainty. It would be near impossible to find a single Pro-government Iranian in Canada They are very reactionary as pertains home.
I asked them what about the country bumpkins in Iran. They say gonzo: internet , movies, sports, empty mosques. They also get very animated when they talked about the epic miss rule of the authorities in Iran. Oil, oil, oil and poverty, poverty, poverty, all over some goofy religious ideology - twelve-ist crapola. They say even the religious ones are exhausted. This against a natural abundance that is almost impossible to mismanage.
RL, yes I agree with you, the possibility of civil war and failed state is very high: maybe as high as 2 to 1 that it goes haywire.
That said “death to America” is a provocation and declaration that was sooner or later going to elicit a response. It is justified that America has taken the actions that they have ( should have in 1981) and although unfortunate, the possibility of failed state in Iran is still justifiable and the mid-term outcome will be in the world’s favour.
There are 2 more reasons why War Plan C will not float:
1. The Gulf Rulers are more fickle AND more intelligent than you think. This means instead of drafting their people they will simply switch sides and openly (or not so openly, doesn´t matter) submit to Iran. Problem solved (for them)!
2. USA decline has been worse than you think. These skills that you attribute to the US are not there any more. They can´t go to the moon again and they can´t repeat the (relatively) impressive successes in the two Iraq wars, either, even at the engineering level.
There are really only 3 possible outcomes:
1. Best case scenario: USA and Israel both collapse into chaos and become ungovernable. Right now the chance is only 10% or so, but you can always dream.
2. Middling scenario: Both USA and Israel back down in the last minute, lose economically and prestige-wise tremendously, but politically survive -for now. I give this outcome a whopping 60% chance.
3. Worst case: The whole thing goes thermonuclear. Perhaps not the end of the world, but most likely the end of civilization as we know it. Welcome back to the Dark Age (at best). 30%.
They can't. Israel has massively more inflluence in the Gulf than it has in Iran, and Iran itself has a religious semi-democratic hatred of the Monarchs (the shaw was one of the Monarchs)
If the Gulf monarchs tried to switch sides, America would assassinate them, the Israelis would fund ISIS to destroy them... And Iran probably wouldn't even protect them from their own people
Their people would for the most part be happy with a realignment. ISIS has never tried and probably never been able to get into the Gulf States. And assassination is not that easy unless the USA want to own it, meaning they have to openly go full rogue state...
Your logic is sound from a game theory perspective, but the implicit portrayal of this regime is ridiculous. Iran IS the neighborhood bully, and a nasty one at that. They are just getting hit by a bigger bully.
This is poorly written and betrays a limited strategic and tactical understanding of modern warfare, as well as American & Iranian capabilities. This article is only marginally more well researched and useful than a conversation one would have with a drunk man at a bar.
That's not the worst take, but hear me out: We don't need to continue the war at all. We need the oil flowing, and the easiest, cheapest, quickest way to achieve that is to simply declare victory against Iran this afternoon and stop attacking Iran. If Israel gets froggy about it, we let them know any hint of a nuclear strike by them will result in us retaliating against them directly. We do not need to continue to have that millstone tied around our neck.
I don't think iran is going to let us declare victory. Israel *definitely* isn't going to let us declare victory. A deal is not on the table as long as we keep assassinating their leaders while leaving military assets only slightly degraded. The IRGC can go do ground while still deterring a conventional intervention by maintaining hardened assets as "armies-in-being" which, like fleets-in-being, can be organized swiftly enough to constitute operational area denial.
Even after this attack Iran is still showing restraint as they didn't release many anti-ship mines in the Strait.
Back in the eighties they had explosive population growth. Human waves were basically getting rid of the politically volatile youth bulge. Nowadays Iran has the worst TFR in the Middle East. Massive losses would be devastating long term.
And also, they are sitting on a VOLATILE population base that is a sneeze away from rebellion, ESPECIALLY in Baluchistan and the chunk of Kurdistan in Iran. You can bet your ass the CIA is stirring shit up in those regions, even if the Shahling is unhappy.
I think this plan falls apart on its assumption that the Gulf monarchies can supply troops to hold the occupied territory. The GCC is not Ukraine: Arabs are not Europeans, in competence or morale; the GCC's worker population (your conscription base) is largely subcontinental foreigners rather than natives; and many of the Gulf monarchies are hanging on by a thread already. Holding foreign territory at the behest of a hated religious enemy is also not the same as defending your own territory. The Gulf monarchies would be far more likely to leave the American alliance and make up with Iran … or to be overthrown and replaced with leaders who will do so.
Strangely, this is the exact war plan I laid out on my podcast something like two years ago as what would be necessary to defeat Iran in a war, then said it was impossible with the military we had, and so we shouldn’t get into this war to begin with. My cohosts were skeptical then and are still under the delusion that Iran is going to magically surrender unconditionally today. I’ll wait a few weeks to send them this article, but you nailed it 100%.
Link?
If we are doing best case planning, why not send future doctors and engineers from india to the front? They betrayed irans trust and hate pakistan.
I have a cheaper plan. The Iranians let the tankers through on payment of a toll. Toll goes when sanctions go.
Missed opportunity to call it Operation Catgirl.
Oh, also, enriched uranium doesn’t get you a modern bomb. It’s gets you a breeder reactor in which you can breed plutonium for a real modern bomb. Which is a whole new series of steps that the Iranians haven’t taken. If the Iranians did use their uranium stupidly to produce a Little Boy bomb (a very dangerous 10,000 pounds), how would they deliver it? Reinforced B-29s and air supremacy are such rare things nowadays. In other words, the “nuclear bomb” scare is not real and has never been real. Sure, the Iranians are enriching uranium far beyond any peaceful purpose (to 60% rather than the generous 15% that usual peaceful purposes max out at), but they did so not because they were interested in building a nuke, but because doing so would poke Israel in the eye, highly satisfying if you are the mullahs. “Iran getting the bomb” is just as fake as the Iraqi “weapons of mass destruction” and it’s being pushed by the same people for the same reason: to scare Americans into war. These obvious facts don’t take years to learn—an hour on Wikipedia gives you all the information you need. But fake intelligence reports marked Top Secret, handed over by breathless Israelis to ignorant fools in the USG who trust everything, even nonsense, that is classified, sometimes even over their own eyes, has caused far too much trouble in the past that you’d think our people would learn. Alas no.
> how would they deliver it?
They do have a fairly advanced missile program in which they share tech with the north koreans (and by now likely the chinese and russians)
They have tunnels, america is an ocean away and I bet every airport has several layers of radiation detection, some of which may even have been spared from dei. Israel on the other hand, they are trying to close all of tunnels, but maybe you have the nuclear tunnel dug with people who don't own pagers and only used for this one task.
I don’t think oil/lng flowing is necessarily a win condition for the USA.
Both the USA and Russia are top sellers of fossil fuels and removing the gulf states as competition will only strengthen the position of both.
This lets Russia claw its way out of the subservient client state status to China that has been inflicted by the Ukraine invasion’s cost in treasure and war material.
USA gets to gird Chinese expansion and have India/SE Asia/Western Europe as client states.
This is assuming that trump has some manner of plan and isn’t just following orders from bibi so it could be incorrect.
Good points and correct assuming the paradigm has not already or does not shift.
Arguably Iran is already winning simply by forcing the gulf states to accept payments for oil in currencies other than USD. I believe at least one ship has already transited through the straits by paying in Yuan.
> Both the USA and Russia are top sellers of fossil fuels and removing the gulf states as competition will only strengthen the position of both.
Viewed purely in terms of the oil industry you're correct, but US interests as a whole are very dependent on the steady flow of middle eastern oil. Without it there is no petro-dollar to speak of and without the petro-dollar the USD will start to nosedive under the weight of all the inflation they've built up over the years. And then they can't even print their way out of a crisis like they normally do.
Yeah the Israeli-American govs sure limited their options. The *most powerful* is to swat down the house of cards and not let anything in or out.
I’m not advocating for this mind you. It would be what ends Act I of WW3.
On a semi-related note, I saw this article and thought it excellent. Hope you enjoy it.
https://amuseonx.substack.com/p/irans-qatar-strike-exposed-chinas
Lol they’re gonna just sit there and let us assemble a force large enough to do this. Look at Ukraine. ANY concentration of troops is destroyed in minutes. And who says they don’t invade Kuwait and Bahrain in response? Or just go for broke on infrastructure to make sure that even if the strait is open there’s nothing to ship through it.
The concentration of force would happen out of their range.
Any attempt by them to invade Kuwait would be just as difficult for them as invading Iran would be for the US.
They no longer have a navy to invade Bahrain with.
Debatable whether they still have the capability to cripple oil infrastructure on the other side of the gulf.
I asked Grok about your economic claims. It agreed with them, but said they're quite exaggerated:
The US runs large deficits (recently around $1.7–$1.9 trillion annually, with FY2025 at ~$1.8T and early FY2026 trends similar). These are financed by selling Treasury bonds to a mix of domestic buyers (Fed, banks, funds), foreign governments, and investors. Petrodollar recycling (oil exporters investing surpluses in US assets like Treasuries) does contribute to demand for dollars and US debt, helping keep interest rates lower than otherwise and supporting the "exorbitant privilege" of running deficits more easily. Oil priced in dollars creates structural demand for USD globally.
However, the claim that this amounts to "about 1.6 trillion a year" (matching the deficit) via a "backdoor tax" on global oil transactions is not accurate. Global oil trade is worth trillions annually, but petrodollar inflows to US debt are only a fraction of that—not a 1:1 match to the deficit. Foreign holdings of US Treasuries are large (~$8–$9T total foreign, with oil exporters a subset), but the system isn't the sole or primary absorber of the deficit. The US benefits from broad reserve currency demand (trade, reserves, safe-haven flows), not just oil. The logic overstates the direct linkage: if Gulf states stopped selling oil for dollars tomorrow, it would pressure the dollar and raise borrowing costs over time, but it wouldn't instantly cause "runaway interest rates and inflation" collapsing the system. The petrodollar is important but eroding gradually (e.g., some non-dollar deals), and the US deficit persists due to many factors.
Flaw in the Logic: The deficit isn't solely "absorbed" by petrodollar flows at "below market rates." While oil trade creates structural USD demand (~$500B+ annual energy trade through Hormuz alone), the system is broader: Dollars are needed for global trade (U.S. is ~25% of world GDP), reserves, and safe-haven flows. The query's $1.6T "backdoor tax" on global oil is overstated—petrodollar inflows are a fraction (~$100-300B/year recycled into Treasuries), not a 1:1 deficit match.
The petrodollar system (post-1973 U.S.-Saudi pacts) ties oil pricing to USD, forcing buyers to hold dollars and exporters to recycle surpluses into U.S. assets. It does act as an implicit "tax" on global energy (~1-2% of transaction value via seigniorage), funding U.S. deficits and military spending. Gulf states' investments in U.S. tech and Treasuries (e.g., Saudi PIF's stakes) underpin this.
Hypothetical Collapse: If Gulf states halted USD oil sales (e.g., due to war-induced food security pressures, as some analysts warn), it could erode dollar demand, raising U.S. borrowing costs (e.g., +1-2pp on yields) and fueling inflation via a weaker USD. Extreme views label the U.S. economy a "Ponzi scheme" reliant on this inflow; a sudden shift could trigger "runaway interest rates" and crisis. In the current war, Iran's threats to "not allow one liter of oil" through Hormuz amplify this risk.
Why It's Exaggerated: De-dollarization is gradual (e.g., some China-Saudi deals in yuan), not sudden. The U.S. system wouldn't "collapse" overnight—domestic buyers (Fed, banks) absorb ~60% of Treasuries, and alternatives (euro, yuan) lack depth. Even in a prolonged Hormuz crisis, higher oil prices might increase short-term petrodollar flows (more USD per barrel for survivors like Saudi Arabia), though volumes drop. Triffin's dilemma (reserve currency requires deficits) persists, but the U.S. has muddled through worse (e.g., 1970s oil shocks).
“I asked Grok”
kek
My view is that the oil trade is used to keep commodity prices low, so that commodities stay stable. This is how the CPI/stock market split cones into being. Stocks are traded in NYC, commodities are traded in chicago.
When commodities start being proced like assets, you see what happened to gold. $2000 to $5000 in less than 2 years, $3000 to $5000 in less than one. If that happened to oil, it would happen to corn, soy, cattle, copper, andrhing that could be described as "futures," and worst of all, it would happen to wages.
So the western secularists, who structure their lives around the screeching comfort seeking of old women (your words) just played dirty pool and fucked up a fairly large country by doing some shit that you would normal think is kinda barbarian and cool? I’m confused as to when you think extreme violence is okay and when it’s not. I personally share your views on how to fix the west, and almost all of that is violent.
Generally I think you should commit violence when you have not very much and a lot to gain (young white men)
And Generally I think you should try to keep things peaceful and avoid the risk when you already have a lot and have way more to lose than gain (the aging heads of American Empire and Wealthy Zionists)
I don't think that's necessarily a moral thing (morality can demand a lot of different things)... But as a rule you shouldn't double down and risk it all when you're up and have way more than enough to be happy with your position.
We're in the opposite positions... People with nothing to lose are terrified and people with everything to lose are YOLOing away the empires they've built
Brilliantly explained my friend. You rarely disappoint. Thank you for what you do.
THIS comment is an excellent condensation of mot of your recent work.
And your work is excellent and pragmatic!
"Wow i can't believe catgirl kulak isn't being all barbarian about this war, that's not vety bronze age of you" oh STFU. "Barbarians do stupid things for no reason" no they don't. That's how you get the empire running a punitive campaign against you, moron. This is how women plan wars when they're trying to get kidnapped and ravisged be strong foreign men because their men are a bunch of pussies.
I found that funny Literalus.
I’m not very online so I’m not all together sure what you’re talking about.
The bit I thought that makes sense is that acting like a dickweed - like Iran has - will elicit a punitive revenge action.
I’m 62 and I’m thoroughly enjoying this bombardment of Iran because of my memories of the hostage taking in 1979+ all their bullshit ever since . It’s a wonderful comeuppance.
American should’ve done this in 1981 . The world would be a much better place if they had.
lol. You writing this from Tel Aviv? The issue isn't the violence, the issue is that our resorting to violence was ill-considered and has put *us* in an extremely precarious position from which there is no easy escape.
No. I expect them to screw it up. And even if done well, I expect it to go horribly.
I'm just laying out what the least bad option (aside from jettisoning Israel) would look like so we can judge them when they inevitably do something way more stupid.
The least bad option from Trump´s perspective is to leave the mess to his successor to sort it out. Which means he will try to keep the air war going on indecisively for another 2 1/2 years. He can´t afford to give up and he can´t afford to escalate further, so he is going to temporize.
He will play for time until the end of his term or until he is impeached.
Frankly i can't endorce any war plan that doesn't involve copious amounts of persian whores.
It has become clear that "iran is a nation of 1 million churd living under mountains, and the remaining 99m syrface-dwellers are just slaves." The oro-demicracy protestors can't do anything right, and they especially can't govern.
Covert action is needed. The IRGC will never surrender strategic assets, but they may agree to an infantry occupation for the purpose of enforcing public order. We send in our spies, our spies bring in mercenaries, and then our mercenaries bring in the kind of low-quality infantry that has to take public transportation.
Then america will simply oversee the "liberation"of the useless persian urban cattle, as the magicuans, sorry, the mullahs continue to rule then through superstition any magic, we will bring in fireign dollars and whore out their women until they learn to either participste in actual politics, not inpotent pro-democracy protest nonsense, or even better to simply shut up and go to work.
Banned for gooning in the warroom
Sure thing Tom. Unless Obama or Biden did it right? Fuck off.
Bite me, you cultist. I'm more conservative than you are- which I grant isn't saying very much. I voted for Trump, in significant part because we were promised no new wars. And yet here we are, and here's you not understanding- STILL- that we've gotten ourselves into a bad situation in the Middle East for no good reason.
Excuse the fuck you Tom. Too many liberals crying. You don’t think Iran had this coming from the last 50 years of their bullshit?
Two things can be true at once. Iran absolutely earned an epic asskicking AND we've gotten ourselves into a bad situation - yet again.
Ya Iran had it coming
No, you fucking clown. "50 years." Don't you ever get tired of falling for obvious propaganda and shilling for it like a total simp? Hasn't the fact that we are currently carrying out military strikes in IRAQ dented your thick skull? Because I guarantee you were all fucking in for that war, too.
Shut the fuck up Tom you retard. You’re delusional if you think Iran doesn’t want to destroy us. Ummmm, they say so all the time. And Iran has proxies in Iraq. You’d know that had you ever been there or done something manly besides run your cum guzzler on the internet. Fuckin traitorous pussy.
I like that article. It certainly enlighten me on the complexity of opening the straight of Hormuz.
An omission in our goodly author’s calculus is the Iranian people themselves.
I am surrounded by Iranians at my work in Toronto. They’re all very happy with Trump’s actions. They say Iran has changed in 47 years. The population is not with the Mullahs. The population is ready to join the rest of planet Earth. It might not be so easy to get them to sacrifice their children for a leadership that they despise. This is to say they have the same problem as the Americans.
I think Trump‘s gambit was focussed on China while Bebe’s game was against Iran. I think it could still work.
Presumption that the Iranian people will fight back against the imperial power of America is an open question. The people of Iran want to join the empire. This is my interpretation of what the Iranians in my midst have told me. They are all very happy and mostly fear that Trump will stop short.
China was very much fortifying Iran as a forward base in the region. I think the trump administration moved on this belief.
Just be mindful that the Iranians who left Iran are most likely self-selected for being opposed to the regime. You probably have some sampling error going on there. I do agree though that a significant chunk, maybe even a majority, of Iranians are not with the mullahs.
Yes, sampling error with absolute certainty. It would be near impossible to find a single Pro-government Iranian in Canada They are very reactionary as pertains home.
I asked them what about the country bumpkins in Iran. They say gonzo: internet , movies, sports, empty mosques. They also get very animated when they talked about the epic miss rule of the authorities in Iran. Oil, oil, oil and poverty, poverty, poverty, all over some goofy religious ideology - twelve-ist crapola. They say even the religious ones are exhausted. This against a natural abundance that is almost impossible to mismanage.
I hear the same talk from Persians in Commiefornia....but I remember how the USA was allegedly greeted as liberators in Iraq...and what came next.
RL, yes I agree with you, the possibility of civil war and failed state is very high: maybe as high as 2 to 1 that it goes haywire.
That said “death to America” is a provocation and declaration that was sooner or later going to elicit a response. It is justified that America has taken the actions that they have ( should have in 1981) and although unfortunate, the possibility of failed state in Iran is still justifiable and the mid-term outcome will be in the world’s favour.
There are 2 more reasons why War Plan C will not float:
1. The Gulf Rulers are more fickle AND more intelligent than you think. This means instead of drafting their people they will simply switch sides and openly (or not so openly, doesn´t matter) submit to Iran. Problem solved (for them)!
2. USA decline has been worse than you think. These skills that you attribute to the US are not there any more. They can´t go to the moon again and they can´t repeat the (relatively) impressive successes in the two Iraq wars, either, even at the engineering level.
There are really only 3 possible outcomes:
1. Best case scenario: USA and Israel both collapse into chaos and become ungovernable. Right now the chance is only 10% or so, but you can always dream.
2. Middling scenario: Both USA and Israel back down in the last minute, lose economically and prestige-wise tremendously, but politically survive -for now. I give this outcome a whopping 60% chance.
3. Worst case: The whole thing goes thermonuclear. Perhaps not the end of the world, but most likely the end of civilization as we know it. Welcome back to the Dark Age (at best). 30%.
They can't. Israel has massively more inflluence in the Gulf than it has in Iran, and Iran itself has a religious semi-democratic hatred of the Monarchs (the shaw was one of the Monarchs)
If the Gulf monarchs tried to switch sides, America would assassinate them, the Israelis would fund ISIS to destroy them... And Iran probably wouldn't even protect them from their own people
Their people would for the most part be happy with a realignment. ISIS has never tried and probably never been able to get into the Gulf States. And assassination is not that easy unless the USA want to own it, meaning they have to openly go full rogue state...
Your logic is sound from a game theory perspective, but the implicit portrayal of this regime is ridiculous. Iran IS the neighborhood bully, and a nasty one at that. They are just getting hit by a bigger bully.
Not my fight. I don't care.
Banned for gooning in the warroom.
Banned for joining in on gooner roleplay
Ok insane person/bot
This is poorly written and betrays a limited strategic and tactical understanding of modern warfare, as well as American & Iranian capabilities. This article is only marginally more well researched and useful than a conversation one would have with a drunk man at a bar.
Im not hearing an argument. Just a bunch of scare words and insinuations.
"That's not an argument" -Stephan Molyneux
There's no point to argue tactics from someone who gets his knowledge of capabilities from xeets. MOS or gtfo
If there's no point then why are you here?
That's better left as an exercise for the reader
Ie. You're just here to kvetch.
That's not the worst take, but hear me out: We don't need to continue the war at all. We need the oil flowing, and the easiest, cheapest, quickest way to achieve that is to simply declare victory against Iran this afternoon and stop attacking Iran. If Israel gets froggy about it, we let them know any hint of a nuclear strike by them will result in us retaliating against them directly. We do not need to continue to have that millstone tied around our neck.
I don't think iran is going to let us declare victory. Israel *definitely* isn't going to let us declare victory. A deal is not on the table as long as we keep assassinating their leaders while leaving military assets only slightly degraded. The IRGC can go do ground while still deterring a conventional intervention by maintaining hardened assets as "armies-in-being" which, like fleets-in-being, can be organized swiftly enough to constitute operational area denial.
Even after this attack Iran is still showing restraint as they didn't release many anti-ship mines in the Strait.
Back in the eighties they had explosive population growth. Human waves were basically getting rid of the politically volatile youth bulge. Nowadays Iran has the worst TFR in the Middle East. Massive losses would be devastating long term.
And also, they are sitting on a VOLATILE population base that is a sneeze away from rebellion, ESPECIALLY in Baluchistan and the chunk of Kurdistan in Iran. You can bet your ass the CIA is stirring shit up in those regions, even if the Shahling is unhappy.