• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Iran Super Thread- Merged

Where's the folks that said the American public would rally to this?


I think higher support would have been possible with a more competent plan.

You could almost write a song about it ...

Every time I look at you
I don't understand
Why you let the things you did
Get so out of hand
You'd have managed better
If you'd had it planned
 
Let's recap. 5 weeks, $50B spent, and a dozen casualties. To give Iran control of the Strait. And that's exactly how the rest of the world, notably people and governments in the region see this.
And they might be mistaken or overwrought or just trying to make their problems the US's problems. As I've written, the US and Israel have (probably only temporarily) eased their "Iran problems". Now some other people have "Iran problems" of their own. Perhaps they will come around to the view that everyone should work together to solve everyone's "Iran problem". Anyone who understands the idea of letting something break in order to get it fixed can see what's going on, regardless that it was not likely done consciously.
The administration can define whatever criteria they want. If the war leaves everybody else worse off, those other parties will not see it as success. And that's aside from the difference between tactical and strategic victory.
Each party defines its own victory conditions. Outsiders don't get to impose conditions; they could join in and set their own for themselves. The conditions need not be mutually exclusive. I wrote earlier that neither side really "wins", but consider a contrary view: Iran defines regime survival as its war aim; the US and Israel define destruction of Iran's air/navy/missile/nuclear capabilities (and for Israel, selected members of the government and military leadership) to some arbitrary thresholds as their war aims. Each party's aims are achievable without denying the others', and, as given, will probably all be reasonably achieved.

If the US (Trump administration) and Israel truly don't care about whether Iran claims and tolls the Strait, that's not a loss for them. If they don't care that the US exerts less power over fewer parts of the world and expends fewer resources defending and securing others, that's not a loss for them. Those are losses for other people.
Question. Do you think the US and NATO won in Afghanistan?
The US eventually got bin Laden. They didn't democratize Afghanistan, and eventually ceded the country back to the Taliban. I'd say the juice wasn't worth the squeeze, so "no". Good example, though. Proves that a deliberate diplomatic and military work-up by competent people working in systematically built coalitions is no assurance of preventing outcomes orders of magnitude worse than a spontaneous few weeks' war by incompetents. Libya is another example of what sober serious competent coalitions can do; the country's still a mess. Apparently really good strategic thinking is hard and all the best minds are somewhere else - probably criticizing on the internet.
 
Remember when Trump said people who go into the military are "suckers and losers" or that John McCain was no hero because he got shot down?

How's that hitting now?
Let’s maybe wait to learn the fate of the crew before too directly and blatantly politicizing this. With nothing heard from CENTCOM on the pilot and WSO, right now we have an active CSAR, or next of kin notifications, or crew recovered but maybe in rough medical shape, or some combination thereof, with a lot of further people still at high risk if the CSAR crews are still over land. Lots of time for ‘gotchas’ later.
 
Let’s maybe wait to learn the fate of the crew before too directly and blatantly politicizing this. With nothing heard from CENTCOM on the pilot and WSO, right now we have an active CSAR, or next of kin notifications, or crew recovered but maybe in rough medical shape, or some combination thereof, with a lot of further people still at high risk if the CSAR crews are still over land. Lots of time for ‘gotchas’ later.

This is not "gotcha". Those comments hit particularly hard when you think of the airmen fighting for their lives right now.

The reason they went in without a real plan is because lives are disposable to them.
 
This is not "gotcha". Those comments hit particularly hard when you think of the airmen fighting for their lives right now.

The reason they went in without a real plan is because lives are disposable to them.
Cool. I stand by what I said, just as a respect thing right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ytz
Each party defines its own victory conditions. Outsiders don't get to impose conditions; they could join in and set their own for themselves. The conditions need not be mutually exclusive. I wrote earlier that neither side really "wins", but consider a contrary view: Iran defines regime survival as its war aim; the US and Israel define destruction of Iran's air/navy/missile/nuclear capabilities (and for Israel, selected members of the government and military leadership) to some arbitrary thresholds as their war aims. Each party's aims are achievable without denying the others', and, as given, will probably all be reasonably achieved.

Apparently we're at the point where we should ignore POTUS own words:


I want to say you're making it up as you go, like he is. I think it's actually worse. You just regurgitate.
 
The same way the U.S. and it's partners dominated in Vietnam
Vietnam demonstrates that a long war with interruptions is really just one war with a clear initiator.

There seem to be basically 3 CoAs for dealing with aggressive nations: put up with their trouble-making (hard on the targets, easy to endure for those not in the lines of fire); occasionally smack the troublemaker down; occupy it as long as it takes.
 
I want to say you're making it up as you go, like he is. I think it's actually worse. You just regurgitate.
I've already written in effect that "regime change" was unrealistic irrespective of what Trump says, and also that it's plausibly a "stretch" aim, not a "core" aim. I've repeatedly written that I don't pay much attention to what Trump says and that he is too self-contradictory to make much sense of what he says. There's a camp of people who pick and choose from Trump's blatherings as if they know which ones ought to be taken seriously, but I'm not in it. I don't expect you to read everything I write, so your error is understandable.

I don't care how much some people want to make "regime change" a core aim that the US isn't going to achieve.
 
Vietnam demonstrates that a long war with interruptions is really just one war with a clear initiator.

There seem to be basically 3 CoAs for dealing with aggressive nations: put up with their trouble-making (hard on the targets, easy to endure for those not in the lines of fire); occasionally smack the troublemaker down; occupy it as long as it takes.

#2 was what the US did last summer. So what's this CoA now?

The US could easily simply mow the lawn to prevent the development nukes with the odd strike. This war is definitely not that.
 
An Israeli reporter with N12 is reporting a ‘western source’ says one crew member rescued. Tough to put much weight to this one way or another.


Let's hope the second is close behind.

I'm really curious what's going on and why they are getting into manpads range.

The one theory I've heard is that they are trying to get Shaheds close to launch. And since the Shaheds aren't flying high that creates risk.
 

Reportedly F-15 shot down over Iran.

CSAR PR ops underway.

FYI...

US F-15E jet confirmed shot down over Iran as Tehran releases wreckage images​

Downing of fighter plane – the first shot down over Iran since start of war – prompts frantic US rescue effort

A US F-15E fighter has been shot down over Iran, prompting a frantic US search and rescue effort for its two-strong crew, in the first such incident since the start of the war.

Iranian state media released images of a tail fin and other debris early on Friday accompanied by an initial claim that a US F-35 had been hit by a new air defence system over central Iran and the pilot probably killed.

Aviation experts said the wreckage pictured was in fact from a F-15E, from the US air force’s 494th squadron, based at RAF Lakenheath in the UK, though it could not at first be confirmed when and where the pictures were taken.

US officials familiar with the situation later confirmed off the record that an F-15E had been brought down and the Pentagon was scrambling to find the crew. There was no official comment from the US military about the incident.

Subsequent footage filmed in Iran showed a US C-130 Hercules and HH-60 Pavehawk helicopters flying low and at one point refuelling together, amid fresh Iranian speculation that the plane crew may have ejected and survived.

 
FYI...

US F-15E jet confirmed shot down over Iran as Tehran releases wreckage images​

Downing of fighter plane – the first shot down over Iran since start of war – prompts frantic US rescue effort

Yeah I missed the updates (stupid phone) until I posted.
 
Back
Top