The Iran War (was Nuclear Program) thread
-
That’s not to say I think they’d ever be successful in taking over the world, but their strategy of creating armed proxies in many neighboring states can be globalized, and there’s evidence they are trying or have tried to do it in Europe and Latin America.
-
I think there’s much more of a case for regime change in Iran than there was for Iraq in 2003. And it comes down to its jihadist nature and ambitions. I don’t think we (the civilized world) can coexist long term with that regime.
So yeah, regime change must be the goal.
My fear is that Trump will leave them intact but wounded and very pissed off and all the more determined, in the fullness of time, to take over the world for Shia Islam in which case it would have been better to not have attempted it at all.
I was cautiously hopeful on March 1st. Now I’m more pessimistic.
Agree. Unless there is regime change in Iran, I do not see any of the stated objectives being realized in the long term. As I have already stated back in March, the Israelis understand that regime change is fundamental to achieving any of the short term military and long term political objectives. Likewise, I would think, in the US but that realisation is subordinated to other factors related to personalities and limited competencies at the very top of its civilian chain of command.
-
-
the fear is that may come bcak to bite them in the ass, and then there will be breast beating saying how did we not see it
-
In the US, the general population also does not support regime change as the ultimate goal, regardless of who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress.
I suspect that is true also for most EU and NATO countries.
In the US, the general population also does not support regime change as the ultimate goal, regardless of who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress.
I suspect that is true also for most EU and NATO countries.
Don’t get me wrong, the ultimate goal is to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons and wage war abroad through proxies. Regime change is fundamental to achieving both those objectives. If the general population of Western democracies can’t wrap their head around that, their respective governments aren’t doing their job effectively.
-
The United States will launch an effort on Monday to “guide” stranded ships from the Iran-gripped Strait of Hormuz , President Donald Trump said, giving few details about what could be a sweeping effort to help hundreds of vessels and some 20,000 seafarers.
Trump said in a social media post on Sunday that “neutral and innocent” countries have been affected by the Iran war , and “we have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business.”
“Project Freedom” would begin on Monday morning in the Middle East, Trump said, adding that his representatives are having discussions with Iran that could lead to something “very positive for all.”
U.S. Central Command said the initiative would involve guided-missile destroyers, more than 100 aircraft and 15,000 service members. The Pentagon did not immediately answer questions about how they would be deployed.
-
The U.S. and Iran are teetering on the brink of a dangerous new phase of the war, as both turn to military force to break a standoff in the Strait of Hormuz that has paralyzed shipping and imposed costs on both sides.
Fighting flared for the first time in about a month Monday, with the U.S. Navy trying to open the waterway and Iran hitting commercial ships to keep it closed.
The U.S. said it used Apache helicopters to sink Iranian speedboats harassing traffic in the strait. Iran hit a critical oil port in the United Arab Emirates and several vessels around the strategic waterway.
The return to a more openly violent chapter will test both sides. Each has reason to try to force an end to the current paralysis in the strait. But they also face substantial risks if the skirmishing escalates out of control—for Iran, greater damage to its economy and leadership, and for President Trump, deeper involvement in a war that is unpopular at home.
-
From Greg Brew:
Imagine you are Iran's leadership. You fought the US to a draw. You control the Strait of Hormuz. Trump's advisors are telling reporters that he is desperate for a deal, unwilling to return to bombing, and eager to move on.
Do you accept US demands on the nuclear program...or do you keep negotiating, in the hopes of securing an even better deal?
-
When this is all over, things will pretty much the way they were before this started. (Yes, there will be some talk on nuclear, but definitely Iran will have some sort of program, whether for civilian or military use.)
-
Maybe they have others whispering about possible concessions just enough to string him along.
Via the good offices of the Kremlin and the FSB, the Iranians are passing negotiation points and concessions to Steve “Dim Philby” Witkoff during his nightly sleeps. Then the next day, Dim then passes them to Trump during breakfast or work hours or if it’s a weekend, at the golf course.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login