Best Of

KHARG ISLAND

"You have the watches, we have the time" as the Taliban apparently used to say about the US.



Javier Blas
@JavierBlas
·
2h
But Iran has weathered long periods of ultra-low oil exports. Back in 2020-22, Iran endured American "maximum pressure" on its petroleum industry, with exports at times down 90% from today's levels. And Iran didn't buckle then. Thus, it's unlikely to do so now.


Javier Blas
@JavierBlas
·
2h
Unlike the Islamic Republic, Trump doesn’t have the benefit of time. He needs to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in days or, at most, weeks or oil prices would rally. He doesn’t have months to crank up the pressure on Iran via Kharg to accept a deal. Time favours Tehran.

🧵10/10

https://x.com/JavierBlas/status/2035764762294747449

Presumably all the analysts that could have appraised the current goons in the Oval Room of this have been fired.

I suspect Hegseth is going to take the fall for this clusterfuck.

The really interesting one will be whether Rubio also gets the axe in order to try and save the midterms.

He has high hopes of 2028.

If I was a Trumpite defence aide, I would think this:

America now has no choice but to

1. Seize Kharg island with actual troops

then

2. Nuke a couple of small Iranian cities, or military bases, with the clear message that the USA will destroy the entire country unless the mullahs submit

That brings a swift victory, which Trump loves, it reopens the Straits, and it sends a brutal message to Putin and Xi

(NB I am personally not in favour of this, but I am trying to see this through the lens of the Trump admin)

Alternatively they could sail a few tankers through Hormuz and see if Iran actually has any capability to stop them.

If Iran can rain down missilies on Israel's nuclear weapons site, I am pretty sure they can hit some massive clumsy tankers a few km off the Iranian coast. Or, at least, come sufficiently close to doing so, that no ship will risk it

This is becoming a final, existential war between Israel and Theocratic Iran. It very possibly ends with one or the other obliterated

So how many ships has Iran sunk so far ?

And how many ships has Iran hit with a missile so far ?

And how many ships has Iran hit with anything in the last ten days ?

For that matter how much damage has Iran managed with the 300+ missiles it has fired at Israel ?

The answers are a mix of zeros and sod alls.

Meanwhile you want to escalate from 13 US military deaths in 23 days to using nuclear weapons without taking any steps in between.

What? I specifically said:

"(NB I am personally not in favour of this, but I am trying to see this through the lens of the Trump admin)"

I am not in favour of any of this, it's a fucking disaster, and is especially menacing to some seriously enjoyable travel plans I had lined up. Really delicious freebies. I'd quite like the war to end tomorrow, with apologies to the poor brave Iranians, who would have to continue their miserable lives enslaved by arguably the nastiest regime on earth

What I am trying to do is EXTRAPOLATE, to war game, and I don't see a way that Trump avoids a fatally wounding defeat which he can't really handwave away as a "victory", unless he commits vast numbers of US ground troops. (which he sensibly will not do), OR he uses the totally dominant US air power to do the ultimate damage and humiliate Tehran, with either total carpet bombing. Or nukes

Meanwhile, Israel is cheering on the USA, and encouraging it to go all out on the Mullahs

But, pray, tell us how YOU see this panning out?

I've no idea but then I'm not one of the egomaniacs having a tantrum in any of the three countries.

I can confidently say though that going from 13 dead in 23 days to use of nuclear weapons without any intervening steps is not something any previous US administration would have ever contemplated or any US military command would have advocated.

"America now has no choice but to

1. Seize Kharg island with actual troops

then

2. Nuke a couple of small Iranian cities, or military bases, with the clear message that the USA will destroy the entire country unless the mullahs submit"

Not sure why you would have to do item 1 if you were doing item 2

AIUI that would give them tactical control of the Straits, making the nuking much more speedily effective; but also please note that I am a slightly drunk flint sex toy knapper, not a professional geopolitical MENA expert

Kharg does not give control of the Straits.

Stick to the drinking.

Yes, in effect, it does. Drink more


"Kharg island: The tiny oil hub in Persian Gulf that Trump could seize in major escalation of war against Iran"

"Kharg island holds 94 per cent of Iran’s oil exports and could choke off the country’s economy for years"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-kharg-island-oil-size-trump-ground-troops-b2943072.html

That doesn’t give control of the Strait of Hormuz .

Watch Newsnight on Friday and Tim Marshall explaining how complicated opening that up will be .

Kharg gives control of Iranian exports (although not as much as many news reports cite) but does not give control of the Straits.

If kharg is invaded then there will be even less reason for Iran to give up on fucking the world via the Straits.

If I was a Trumpite defence aide, I would think this:

America now has no choice but to

1. Seize Kharg island with actual troops

then

2. Nuke a couple of small Iranian cities, or military bases, with the clear message that the USA will destroy the entire country unless the mullahs submit

That brings a swift victory, which Trump loves, it reopens the Straits, and it sends a brutal message to Putin and Xi

(NB I am personally not in favour of this, but I am trying to see this through the lens of the Trump admin)

Alternatively they could sail a few tankers through Hormuz and see if Iran actually has any capability to stop them.

If Iran can rain down missilies on Israel's nuclear weapons site, I am pretty sure they can hit some massive clumsy tankers a few km off the Iranian coast. Or, at least, come sufficiently close to doing so, that no ship will risk it

This is becoming a final, existential war between Israel and Theocratic Iran. It very possibly ends with one or the other obliterated

So how many ships has Iran sunk so far ?

And how many ships has Iran hit with a missile so far ?

And how many ships has Iran hit with anything in the last ten days ?

For that matter how much damage has Iran managed with the 300+ missiles it has fired at Israel ?

The answers are a mix of zeros and sod alls.

Meanwhile you want to escalate from 13 US military deaths in 23 days to using nuclear weapons without taking any steps in between.

What? I specifically said:

"(NB I am personally not in favour of this, but I am trying to see this through the lens of the Trump admin)"

I am not in favour of any of this, it's a fucking disaster, and is especially menacing to some seriously enjoyable travel plans I had lined up. Really delicious freebies. I'd quite like the war to end tomorrow, with apologies to the poor brave Iranians, who would have to continue their miserable lives enslaved by arguably the nastiest regime on earth

What I am trying to do is EXTRAPOLATE, to war game, and I don't see a way that Trump avoids a fatally wounding defeat which he can't really handwave away as a "victory", unless he commits vast numbers of US ground troops. (which he sensibly will not do), OR he uses the totally dominant US air power to do the ultimate damage and humiliate Tehran, with either total carpet bombing. Or nukes

Meanwhile, Israel is cheering on the USA, and encouraging it to go all out on the Mullahs

But, pray, tell us how YOU see this panning out?

I've no idea but then I'm not one of the egomaniacs having a tantrum in any of the three countries.

I can confidently say though that going from 13 dead in 23 days to use of nuclear weapons without any intervening steps is not something any previous US administration would have ever contemplated or any US military command would have advocated.

"America now has no choice but to

1. Seize Kharg island with actual troops

then

2. Nuke a couple of small Iranian cities, or military bases, with the clear message that the USA will destroy the entire country unless the mullahs submit"

Not sure why you would have to do item 1 if you were doing item 2

AIUI that would give them tactical control of the Straits, making the nuking much more speedily effective; but also please note that I am a slightly drunk flint sex toy knapper, not a professional geopolitical MENA expert

Kharg does not give control of the Straits.

Stick to the drinking.

Yes, in effect, it does. Drink more


"Kharg island: The tiny oil hub in Persian Gulf that Trump could seize in major escalation of war against Iran"

"Kharg island holds 94 per cent of Iran’s oil exports and could choke off the country’s economy for years"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-kharg-island-oil-size-trump-ground-troops-b2943072.html

Karg Island is a *long* way from the Straits of Hormuz.

Rutte should be sacked.
Maybe Trump will give him a job. If he's short a bootlicker.

BRENNAN: Doesn't this benefit Putin?

MARK RUTTE: I know the president and his team -- Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, Marco Rubio -- they are constantly working to put maximum pressure on the Russians to come to a deal..
https://x.com/atrupar/status/2035731950694998025

Desperate times, desperate measures. Since Rutte doesn't have an electorate to worry about, he's free to try bootlicking max to get anything out of Trump, presumably with backing from Merz, Macron and Starmer.

Stubb admits that Trump’s actions — tariffs, easing Russia sanctions, and acting without allies — have shifted the US policy away from Europe.

He's either very slow, or diplomatic nicities have made for a very late admission to what was already obvious for some time.