Tweet
Originally posted by wally
View Post
I liked operation 'midnight hammer' because i think we can all agree that a nuclear Iran is a 'no-go' zone (put aside the discussion of whether Iran was close to nukes or not, they were still going there ultimately)
This operation I am way more concerned about, obviously, but I don't feel I know enough yet to have a defensible opinion on it. I feel like we have been on a collision course with Iran for a while. I also feel like diplomacy and/or economic sanctions are not going to work with the current regime, and maybe even any future regime that springs out of the same extremist theocracy. Is the solution to force this conflict now, when it looks like the Iranian regime is showing some weakness and hope that Iran selects a leader that will focus more on domestic issues within Iran? Seems like we are just rolling the dice on a new regime, unless there is a more secret plan that is not out there in the public discourse right now. Maybe the solution (outside of a full-scale war, which I am very opposed to) is just "Hey Iran, pick a new leader, and BTW if we don't like that guy we'll just go ahead and kill 'em too! Peace out!"
I have heard that the strikes so far are very specifically targeted. Have specifically avoided any infrastructure like power and water. I have heard that the US gave Israel a 'no kill' list of current Iranian leadership, where Israel just wants to take them all out, Implying that our side seems to have a tiered list of preferred new leadership. I have also heard that this operation might have further-reaching implications regarding supply chain disruptions, access to oil, delaying or precluding any potential action by China toward Taiwan, and Iranian-made drones that make up the majority of what Russia is using in Ukraine. These two examples maybe suggesting that this action on Iran is not necessarily targeted at a wholesale regime change to 'westernize Iran' but just to maybe set them back and hinder other actors a little bit? I do think that Trump wants this done and over soon so that hopefully it can be claimed as a victory going into the midterms. If for whatever reason, this draws us into a more protracted conflict with a negative perception, then Trump has got to know he'll lose the House and battle impeachment hearings in the Senate for the final two years of his presidency.
I have been able to find some 'unbiased' discussions on this conflict where people with differing opinions are discussing objective geopolitical merits or demerits of taking these actions, but it as usual, most discussions start rational and then quickly devolve into "orange man: bad." slop.
This operation I am way more concerned about, obviously, but I don't feel I know enough yet to have a defensible opinion on it. I feel like we have been on a collision course with Iran for a while. I also feel like diplomacy and/or economic sanctions are not going to work with the current regime, and maybe even any future regime that springs out of the same extremist theocracy. Is the solution to force this conflict now, when it looks like the Iranian regime is showing some weakness and hope that Iran selects a leader that will focus more on domestic issues within Iran? Seems like we are just rolling the dice on a new regime, unless there is a more secret plan that is not out there in the public discourse right now. Maybe the solution (outside of a full-scale war, which I am very opposed to) is just "Hey Iran, pick a new leader, and BTW if we don't like that guy we'll just go ahead and kill 'em too! Peace out!"
I have heard that the strikes so far are very specifically targeted. Have specifically avoided any infrastructure like power and water. I have heard that the US gave Israel a 'no kill' list of current Iranian leadership, where Israel just wants to take them all out, Implying that our side seems to have a tiered list of preferred new leadership. I have also heard that this operation might have further-reaching implications regarding supply chain disruptions, access to oil, delaying or precluding any potential action by China toward Taiwan, and Iranian-made drones that make up the majority of what Russia is using in Ukraine. These two examples maybe suggesting that this action on Iran is not necessarily targeted at a wholesale regime change to 'westernize Iran' but just to maybe set them back and hinder other actors a little bit? I do think that Trump wants this done and over soon so that hopefully it can be claimed as a victory going into the midterms. If for whatever reason, this draws us into a more protracted conflict with a negative perception, then Trump has got to know he'll lose the House and battle impeachment hearings in the Senate for the final two years of his presidency.
I have been able to find some 'unbiased' discussions on this conflict where people with differing opinions are discussing objective geopolitical merits or demerits of taking these actions, but it as usual, most discussions start rational and then quickly devolve into "orange man: bad." slop.
Comment