The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Someone knows exactly where they were fired from.
And by whom.
Be astonished if the CIA don't know.
Be surprised if 5 Eyes don't.
The reaction in "Eabhal's local facebook groups" has been instructive (and funny). The reduction from 45 minutes to 20 minutes has been noted in terms of making and drinking a cup of tea in time. Concerns about the size of the pothole it would leave, and whether the council would commit to fixing it quickly.
This kind of tabloid sensationalism just doesn't work any more. Doesn't help that the timing was remarkably fortuitous for the Israeli position, so nutters of all stripes have formed a detente around the latest conspiracy.
"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.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
I don't believe you will find a post where I have cheered on the Mullahs. I would love to see regime change and if it were possible a secular democracy. That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
Quite. The US already dealt out serious damage to Iran's nuclear ambitions. There was no immediate need for this attack if preventing bomb development was the aim (and that's far from clear). And the attack was launched in the middle of nuclear negotiations.
Against that, Trump and Netanyahu are taking enormous risks for the world economy, in return for an outcome which is highly uncertain.
I sometimes wonder if Trump is on a commission from Russia to f*** up the World order in their favour.
Why would they pay him a commission? The blackmail material they have is likely ample.
The mad part is we all.know about the kompromat. The two way mirrors, the golden showers, the teenage Russian girls. So by rights he should just tell Putin to do one. Unless of course there is something far worse than wee-wee and minors.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
China has been an Empire for ages and Empires do heinous things to enforce Imperial hegemony over their reluctant subjects, as critics of the shorter-lived British Empire are wont to point out (me included). I think there's essentially only been about a century when China wasn't imposing Imperial control, in more than two millennia of its history.
To say that China was, "more sinned against than sinning," is such an incuriously Eurocentric view of history.
We should all should aspire to a restlessly curious nothing-centric view of history, LP. With you there. I will try and up my game.
The China centric view might be that their geography is a significant factor ?
We mentioned famines and cannibalism upthread. That's a recurrent feature of their history. Irrigation on a massive scale allowed extremely large populations (by the standards of the time) to be supported, but when that failed, millions died.
Maintaining that system required order - historically, famines seem as likely to have been manmade, when that broke down from either war or large scale banditry, as they were from climate conditions.
The areas of rich production also made very tempting targets for less well endowed regions.
Put that all together and you have a highly repressive social order, punctuated by times of huge and deadly disorder.
That's a highly simplistic description, but it's undeniably a quite different dynamic to early western societies.
Today too that applies. They are trying to meet the material aspirations of a billion people coming from a low base not so long ago. I get the 'strategic threat' idea, but one meaning of strategic is 'looking well ahead' and as for 'threat', well yes, threats are everywhere, and the future is inherently unpredictable, so ok China is a big power to be related to and dealt with carefully, but the fact is we have Russia invading Europe and we have America in the hands of an imbecilic psychopath, so I think China can join the queue.
On the history, I'm into it but I'm no expert and that's putting it mildly. I'm more a 'know what a slide rule is for' person 🙂
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
Or alternatively, it is the Yanks that are lying. After all the effect of these "missiles" seems to be to rope us into the war, which is exactly what Trump wants...
"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.
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
I w Ouldnt be surprised if the US did it to tip Starmer into Hormuz.
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
Or alternatively, it is the Yanks that are lying. After all the effect of these "missiles" seems to be to rope us into the war, which is exactly what Trump wants...
The Iranian government doesn’t seem to be 100% on message either.
Perfectly possible that the chunk that was in charge of extended range missile development decided to flip their best toy at the Chagos. Use or lose might have been part of that.
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
We started off with the noble intention that everyone should be a proper candidate. With a commitment to campaigning, and all that sort of thing. But as there weren't 90 coming forward, barrels had to be scraped, and paper candidates such as yours truly will be appearing in no-hope wards.
Yeah, I've played that game. A long day in a target Ward then off to the Count where you don't look at the votes in your own patch but are watching what's happening in the important Wards.
One time, I almost missed my own declaration as I was watching the ballots in another Count so had to run across the hall to get on stage and discover I had got 150 votes and finished stone bonking last.
You still have to do all the paperwork of nominations but the expenses return was very easy.
I mentioned to my wife that a lot of paper Reform and Green candidates were likely to be elected as councillors in May and she said the very existence of paper candidates was the clearest indicator of the bankruptcy of FPTP as an electoral system.
Much as I've criticised FPTP over the years it was interesting what a vehement reaction she had against it, when I'm used to it as just one of those things that is inevitable in FPTP.
Councillors have been unexpectedly elected in Scotland, under STV, when parties under-nominate. Typically a party gets enough votes for 2 councillors in a ward but they only field one candidate and another candidate, who may or not have wanted to, is elected.
"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.
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
Or alternatively, it is the Yanks that are lying. After all the effect of these "missiles" seems to be to rope us into the war, which is exactly what Trump wants...
Nobody gives a toss about missiles which don't hit places they cannot even find on a map.
WarMonitor🇺🇦🇬🇧 @WarMonitor3 I have a feeling the Americans are going to land in Iran on strategic islands once assets are in place, Israeli media seems to also think so...
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
Or alternatively, it is the Yanks that are lying. After all the effect of these "missiles" seems to be to rope us into the war, which is exactly what Trump wants...
Nobody gives a toss about missiles which don't hit places they cannot even find on a map.
It seems our government and official opposition do.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Kharg Island has to be an air assault unless the surface navy has a death wish I’m not aware of, and I’m not sure the keyboard warriors have taken out a ruler for some time/distance/range math that would show what a challenging lift that will be for the aviation involved.
"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.
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.
Free and fair mid terms won't happen. They may not happen at all. It's quite possible that by then their existence or otherwise would only make about 5th item on the news, after war, radiation fallout, desalination water shortage and energy availability/cost. The 6th item would be that Starmer is PM because he offered to resign but no-one else wanted the job.
I am sadly unsurprised by this, but it is quite disgraceful.
Aping Trump, Netanyahu endorses Viktor Orbán in remarks to CPAC: "You need leaders who can protect against this rising tide & can also ensure safety & stability for their own countries. This is what he has in abundance." https://x.com/NTarnopolsky/status/2035779785050268122
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
Of course lots of nasty stuff. But what I mean is on the whole and relative to other great nations, empires and powers.
I disagree. China's imperial history is easily as brutal as anything in the west - or the Mughals or Ottomans
What makes it less visible is
1. It feels culturally remote to us, we don't instantly grasp who or what the "Dzungar" are
and
2. Chinese imperialism has been land-based and contiguous (like Russian and American imperialism). ie they invade and conquer neighbouring lands and expand thereby. That *feels* less aggressive than oceanic imperialism as done by the Brits and French, but the feeling is an illusion
I think that's essentially true, though warring states, and subsequent struggles for control of empire (which is a lot of that history) is really quite different from the building of the Russian and American empires.
Genghis Khan is obviously a massive and brutal exception/anomaly to that dynamic (and not Chinese).
Whoever upthread suggested over history the Chinese empire is 'more sinned against than sinning' is breathtakingly wrong. For thousands of years they have dished out brutality on the scale of the Romans. The bit of history for which they were on the receiving end was in the general scheme of things, pretty brief and comparatively mild.
Yes, but we're assessing relative to others. All empires are net abusers. People will tend to view it depending on where they're standing. In China, for example, they'll speak none too kindly (historically) of the British and the Japanese.
Can't recall anything especially vicious from the Iranians, in their previous incarnation as Persians, but I'm happy to be informed otherwise.
The ancient Jews might disagree - as might the Greeks. And both Valerian and Marcus Crassus
The Jews were saved from slavery in Babylon by the Persians.
Those saying that Iran toughed out two years of sanctions and 90% sales reductions previously are missing a big point. This time they are lobbing missiles at their own bank accounts. Their money in UAE, in Bahrain, in Saudi, in Qatar, in Kuwait - it could be expropriated within hours.
It would be interesting to do a list of people who worked for Trump and came out with their reputations enhanced.
A few of the people from the first term? Bolton for example “I may be crazy but I’m not that crazy”? Nikki Haley (she suffered a little - “why did she work for him”? - but not hugely)
Jared?
Nah he’s demonstrably corrupt and everyone knows it. Ivana however has been forgiven it appears
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
I am sadly unsurprised by this, but it is quite disgraceful.
Aping Trump, Netanyahu endorses Viktor Orbán in remarks to CPAC: "You need leaders who can protect against this rising tide & can also ensure safety & stability for their own countries. This is what he has in abundance." https://x.com/NTarnopolsky/status/2035779785050268122
Hmmm. There was an attempt to set up a Hay Festival type event in Hungary.
Their only stipulations? No gay stuff, no Jewish stuff.
Racism and anti-semitism is what Orban has in abundance.
Is Israel really prepared to debase itself to this degree?
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
The only things Kushner and Witkoff have ever worked towards is the next grift.
I am sadly unsurprised by this, but it is quite disgraceful.
Aping Trump, Netanyahu endorses Viktor Orbán in remarks to CPAC: "You need leaders who can protect against this rising tide & can also ensure safety & stability for their own countries. This is what he has in abundance." https://x.com/NTarnopolsky/status/2035779785050268122
Hmmm. There was an attempt to set up a Hay Festival type event in Hungary.
Their only stipulations? No gay stuff, no Jewish stuff.
Racism and anti-semitism is what Orban has in abundance.
Is Israel really prepared to debase itself to this degree?
I am sadly unsurprised by this, but it is quite disgraceful.
Aping Trump, Netanyahu endorses Viktor Orbán in remarks to CPAC: "You need leaders who can protect against this rising tide & can also ensure safety & stability for their own countries. This is what he has in abundance." https://x.com/NTarnopolsky/status/2035779785050268122
Hmmm. There was an attempt to set up a Hay Festival type event in Hungary.
Their only stipulations? No gay stuff, no Jewish stuff.
Racism and anti-semitism is what Orban has in abundance.
Is Israel really prepared to debase itself to this degree?
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)
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 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
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.
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
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
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.
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
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
The only things Kushner and Witkoff have ever worked towards is the next grift.
There are dozens, or even hundreds, of scandals that a Democratic House should investigate after November.
But Kushner's and Witkoff's business deals since 2016 should be near the top of their list.
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.
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
When the stakes are high then risks need to be taken and losses accepted.
Alternatively we could skip straight to the economic disaster and/or use of nuclear weapons as other PBers are casually discussing.
Actually in WW2 after the initial fights almost all the German ships stayed in port for exactly that reason. Same for the German fleet after Jutland in WW1. Oh and my grandfather was sunk (but survived) during Operation Pedastal. I have posted up a picture of him on here before.
The point being that you are not risking anything. You are asking for others - mostly sailors from countries completely uninvolved in this conflict - to risk their lives on your behalf because a couple of lunatics decided to start a war that no one else wanted.
If Trump is so worried about the Straits of Hormuz then let him send US warships through there guarding US crewed tankers.
You are the perfect example of an armchar warrior happy to send others to die so that you don't get inconvenienced.
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
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
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.
Well yes, but this is Trump. Which was my whole point
Whether he's demented or not, we know he is a massive narcissist. He will LOATHE the idea of a strategic defeat inflicted by Iran, and he's gone in so deep (perhaps dragged by Bibi) that it is becoming emotionally and literally difficult for him to engineer some face-saving "victory" out of this mess. And with every escalation more of his enormous ego is invested, which makes any compromise even harder for him to swallow
Who knows? Maybe Vance and the US DoD will step up and say "Trump is mad" and dethrone him. Maybe the Tehran regime is much shakier than we realise and there will be a coup in Iran (ins'allah)
Or the escalation continues and we see nukes threatened, then maybe used
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
When the stakes are high then risks need to be taken and losses accepted.
Alternatively we could skip straight to the economic disaster and/or use of nuclear weapons as other PBers are casually discussing.
Actually in WW2 after the initial fights almost all the German ships stayed in port for exactly that reason. Same for the German fleet after Jutland in WW1. Oh and my grandfather was sunk (but survived) during Operation Pedastal. I have posted up a picture of him on here before.
The point being that you are not risking anything. You are asking for others - mostly sailors from countries completely uninvolved in this conflict - to risk their lives on your behalf because a couple of lunatics decided to start a war that no one else wanted.
If Trump is so worried about the Straits of Hormuz then let him send US warships through there guarding US crewed tankers.
You are the perfect example of an armchar warrior happy to send others to die so that you don't get inconvenienced.
They are miserable enough as it is - quite a few trapped in the Gulf. I've got one friend who is a former RN minesweeper and now works in O&G, and another who works on cable layers - their biggest fear is getting stuck somewhere for months rather than the slim chance of getting droned.
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
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)
Nice try with the "If", this feels like a stealth admission of already being a defence aide for administration.
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
"For heaven's sake, yes, we will retroactively give you the Nobel Peace Prize, happy now?"
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.
“We must face reality — the West has split.”
Finland’s President Stubb: “Salvage what you can” of the trans-Atlantic alliance as Trump’s policies fracture relations with Europe and weaken pressure on Russia
Stubb: “I’m more pessimistic now, in that sense, more realistic.”
Stubb admits that Trump’s actions — tariffs, easing Russia sanctions, and acting without allies — have shifted the US policy away from Europe.
Stubb: “Ukraine today is much better on the battlefield than it was a year ago. In the past 3 months, Ukraine has killed over 90,000 Russian soldiers.
Russians aren't able to recruit soldiers at the same pace they are losing them. 80% of the deaths come through drones.”
Stubb: “Before the Iran war started, Russia was looking at zero growth, zero reserves, 16% interest rate, high inflation. Budget deficit rose from $83B to $130B.
But now, with the rising oil price, lifting of the sanctions, we don’t know. It will have a negative effect.”
Stubb on easing US sanctions against Russia: “It’s very damaging for Ukraine, because it basically feeds the Russian war machine.”
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.
Is there evidence - as opposed to blind hope - that the bootlicking helps?
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.
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)
Nice try with the "If", this feels like a stealth admission of already being a defence aide for administration.
lol. I wish, I imagine it must be really fun and also very well paid
And the Trump admin is stuffed with lots of those oddly pretty, petite, blonde, very right wing American women. I like that type
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.
24 ships hit in total by Iran since the start of the US/Israeli attacks.
Hit is not sunk.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
When the stakes are high then risks need to be taken and losses accepted.
Alternatively we could skip straight to the economic disaster and/or use of nuclear weapons as other PBers are casually discussing.
Actually in WW2 after the initial fights almost all the German ships stayed in port for exactly that reason. Same for the German fleet after Jutland in WW1. Oh and my grandfather was sunk (but survived) during Operation Pedastal. I have posted up a picture of him on here before.
The point being that you are not risking anything. You are asking for others - mostly sailors from countries completely uninvolved in this conflict - to risk their lives on your behalf because a couple of lunatics decided to start a war that no one else wanted.
If Trump is so worried about the Straits of Hormuz then let him send US warships through there guarding US crewed tankers.
You are the perfect example of an armchar warrior happy to send others to die so that you don't get inconvenienced.
I'm quite happy for the military to be used in a conflict, that they might have to risk their lives was known when they joined up.
I'm also quite happy for any non-military to be given suitable compensation for any extra risks the situation entails.
What I'm not happy about is the possibility of going straight to the economic catastrophe and/or use of nuclear weapons without anyone trying to do something beforehand.
By the way you're wrong about the German fleet staying in port in the latter halves of the world wars.
The German surface fleet mostly stayed in port (with exceptions such as the Scharnhorst at North Cape) but the German U boat fleets continued to operate aggressively and suffered huge casualties.
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
"Has no choice but to ..." is how this orgy of nonsensical violence started.
If nobody breaks that way of thinking it's a runway train to disastersville.
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
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"
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)
Nice try with the "If", this feels like a stealth admission of already being a defence aide for administration.
lol. I wish, I imagine it must be really fun and also very well paid
And the Trump admin is stuffed with lots of those oddly pretty, petite, blonde, very right wing American women. I like that type
I believe the term from the West Wing days was 'Blonde Republican Sex Kitten', so it goes back a long way.
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
"For heaven's sake, yes, we will retroactively give you the Nobel Peace Prize, happy now?"
I don't know who has influence with him. If it's nobody, or only fools, sycophants and warmongerers who don't understand war, then this is a huge problem.
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.
How could we expect Leon to know where Kharg island is - there are no posho hotels there.
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)
Nice try with the "If", this feels like a stealth admission of already being a defence aide for administration.
lol. I wish, I imagine it must be really fun and also very well paid
And the Trump admin is stuffed with lots of those oddly pretty, petite, blonde, very right wing American women. I like that type
I believe the term from the West Wing days was 'Blonde Republican Sex Kitten'.
Is that a thing? Coz it should be if it isn't
My ex wife the onetime Corbynite is a bit like this. Very pretty and petite, and highly sexed. The only difference is that she's auburn haired not blonde
She was Corbynite until I gave her Jung Chang's Wild Swans to read, which she devoured in about a day. Then she shifted to being very rightwing, anti mass immigration, fiercely anti Left, and much further to the right than me (yes). She's still there. At one point she was considering marrying an Israeli West Bank Settler just so she could carry an Uzi in her daily life, and kill Islamists
She's also incredibly smart and funny. Indeed, the funniest person I have ever known, and she gave me TWO kundalini orgasms
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"
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"
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
"For heaven's sake, yes, we will retroactively give you the Nobel Peace Prize, happy now?"
I don't know who has influence with him. If it's nobody, or only fools, sycophants and warmongerers who don't understand war, then this is a huge problem.
I doubt anyone has influence on Trump for long.
He doesn't have enough attention span or patience for that to be possible.
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"
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
"For heaven's sake, yes, we will retroactively give you the Nobel Peace Prize, happy now?"
I don't know who has influence with him. If it's nobody, or only fools, sycophants and warmongerers who don't understand war, then this is a huge problem.
I doubt anyone has influence on Trump for long.
He doesn't have enough attention span or patience for that to be possible.
Which is why family and long term friends have more influence on some major official matters than political allies, who may be discarded tomorrow.
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.
He's been pretty clear about Trump for quite a while. This series of quotes is from a Telegraoh article.
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"
Karg Island is a *long* way from the Straits of Hormuz.
But it means Iranian oil exports can never even reach the Straits, or the world. that's my point
For all the stupid people on PB, which is everyone but me, here is what I said, from the perspective of a bellicose Trump aide
"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"
If the USA takes Kharg island that means Iran's entire oil based economy is fucked and controlled by Trump. Then drop a couple of nukes on, say, Qom and Shiraz, the latter just because of the annoying wine name thing, then America has a double vice grip on Tehran, and Iran will surrender
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"
That only works if the IRGC is controlled by centrist dads (accountants etc) , rather than a group pf religious fanatics led by a man whose entire family has been wiped out.
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"
Karg Island is a *long* way from the Straits of Hormuz.
Its not even necessary to seize (or bomb) Kharg to block Iranian exports.
Hormuz can be blocked from the south side as easily as from the north - perhaps more so as the gulf states still have functioning navies and air forces.
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
"obliterated" ... oh no too much Donald Trump exposure. Let's say destroyed if you don't mind.
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
"For heaven's sake, yes, we will retroactively give you the Nobel Peace Prize, happy now?"
I don't know who has influence with him. If it's nobody, or only fools, sycophants and warmongerers who don't understand war, then this is a huge problem.
I doubt anyone has influence on Trump for long.
He doesn't have enough attention span or patience for that to be possible.
Jeez, I wonder why these cities, which have been hugely changed by mass immigration, in a quite astonishing and speedy way, are not voting for the Hard Right
Can you have a guess? Have you perhaps heard of Sadiq Khan and Zohran Mamdani?
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"
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.
It should also on be noted that Iran has gone through a period before, as a result of sanctions, when its oil revenue dropped by around 90%, from 2018 to 2020.
The regime survived that.
It might well make them try something even more stupid.
Comments
This kind of tabloid sensationalism just doesn't work any more. Doesn't help that the timing was remarkably fortuitous for the Israeli position, so nutters of all stripes have formed a detente around the latest conspiracy.
If I was a bounder I would blame auto correct.
On the history, I'm into it but I'm no expert and that's putting it mildly. I'm more a 'know what a slide rule is for' person 🙂
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.
Ouldnt be surprised if the US did it to tip Starmer into Hormuz.
Perfectly possible that the chunk that was in charge of extended range missile development decided to flip their best toy at the Chagos. Use or lose might have been part of that.
Typically a party gets enough votes for 2 councillors in a ward but they only field one candidate and another candidate, who may or not have wanted to, is elected.
Night Conspirators :
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0216032/
Kessler:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_(TV_series)
Iran's military (IRGC) spokesman to Trump moments ago:
“You're Fired”
You can't make this shit up...
@leahmcelrath.bsky.social
Trolling our way into WWIII…
https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3mhohla2m2c2g
Owen Jones
@owenjonesjourno
·
25m
Millions of people are carrying on their everyday lives, totally unaware of what's about to hit them.
If Trump blows up Iran's power stations, Iran will destroy energy infrastructure across the Gulf.
This would be one of the major "before-and-after" events of human history.
Owen Jones
@owenjonesjourno
·
25m
The global shock triggered by this looming escalation will have ramifications for generations.
https://x.com/owenjonesjourno/status/2035823573810487438
===
For once he is correct.
WarMonitor🇺🇦🇬🇧
@WarMonitor3
I have a feeling the Americans are going to land in Iran on strategic islands once assets are in place, Israeli media seems to also think so...
If it's a bit of water near Iran however, then... 'no'.
Kharg Island has to be an air assault unless the surface navy has a death wish I’m not aware of, and I’m not sure the keyboard warriors have taken out a ruler for some time/distance/range math that would show what a challenging lift that will be for the aviation involved.
https://bsky.app/profile/henrymance.ft.com/post/3mhoivo2jvc2p
Meaning the economic effects escalation is proceeding infinitely faster than that of military casualties.
Aping Trump, Netanyahu endorses Viktor Orbán in remarks to CPAC: "You need leaders who can protect against this rising tide & can also ensure safety & stability for their own countries. This is what he has in abundance."
https://x.com/NTarnopolsky/status/2035779785050268122
Look at the story of Esther for example
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
https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/app/summaryData/deaths/byYearManner
Their only stipulations? No gay stuff, no Jewish stuff.
Racism and anti-semitism is what Orban has in abundance.
Is Israel really prepared to debase itself to this degree?
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)
This is becoming a final, existential war between Israel and Theocratic Iran. It very possibly ends with one or the other obliterated
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.
"(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?
· 16m
And we’re off
*BRENT OIL RISES 1.6% TO $114/BBL ON TRUMP, IRAN WAR THREATS
*S&P 500 FUTURES DROP AS MUCH AS 0.8%
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/talking-with-robin-brooks
He seems to think the elevated oil price has already priced the negative scenarios in, unless I'm mis-reading it.
Did every ship stay in port between 1939 and 1945 for fear of being hit ?
Should Malta have been told to surrender in 1942 rather than accept these casualties:
In 2003, Ian Malcolm listed 160 men killed on Eagle, 132 on Manchester, 52 on Nigeria, 50 on Indomitable, 24 on Cairo, five on Foresight and three men on Kenya. Merchant Navy casualties were 83 on Waimarama, eighteen on Clan Ferguson, seven on Glenorchy, five on Melbourne Star, four on Santa Elisa, one each on Deucalion, Ohio and Brisbane Star.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pedestal
When the stakes are high then risks need to be taken and losses accepted.
Alternatively we could skip straight to the economic disaster and/or use of nuclear weapons as other PBers are casually discussing.
Try harder
But Kushner's and Witkoff's business deals since 2016 should be near the top of their list.
IAN HISLOP vs BORIS JOHNSON! | ROUND 1
Such an innocent time.
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.
The point being that you are not risking anything. You are asking for others - mostly sailors from countries completely uninvolved in this conflict - to risk their lives on your behalf because a couple of lunatics decided to start a war that no one else wanted.
If Trump is so worried about the Straits of Hormuz then let him send US warships through there guarding US crewed tankers.
You are the perfect example of an armchar warrior happy to send others to die so that you don't get inconvenienced.
But whatever it is, it is too tedious to enquire further.
https://x.com/ABZayed/status/2035794203863863626
We will never be blackmailed by terrorists
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
Whether he's demented or not, we know he is a massive narcissist. He will LOATHE the idea of a strategic defeat inflicted by Iran, and he's gone in so deep (perhaps dragged by Bibi) that it is becoming emotionally and literally difficult for him to engineer some face-saving "victory" out of this mess. And with every escalation more of his enormous ego is invested, which makes any compromise even harder for him to swallow
Who knows? Maybe Vance and the US DoD will step up and say "Trump is mad" and dethrone him. Maybe the Tehran regime is much shakier than we realise and there will be a coup in Iran (ins'allah)
Or the escalation continues and we see nukes threatened, then maybe used
Seriously though, anything other than deescalate and negotiate something is primitive braindead madness.
It can't be ruled out, given who the main players are, Iran being marginally the most level headed telling us all we need to know there, but I hope and pray not.
Perhaps monstrous yet malleable DJT can be persuaded a 1962 JFK style 'back from the brink, world heaves a sigh of relief' moment will buttress his legend.
Which would be harsh but fair.
Finland’s President Stubb: “Salvage what you can” of the trans-Atlantic alliance as Trump’s policies fracture relations with Europe and weaken pressure on Russia
Stubb: “I’m more pessimistic now, in that sense, more realistic.”
Stubb admits that Trump’s actions — tariffs, easing Russia sanctions, and acting without allies — have shifted the US policy away from Europe.
Stubb: “Ukraine today is much better on the battlefield than it was a year ago. In the past 3 months, Ukraine has killed over 90,000 Russian soldiers.
Russians aren't able to recruit soldiers at the same pace they are losing them. 80% of the deaths come through drones.”
Stubb: “Before the Iran war started, Russia was looking at zero growth, zero reserves, 16% interest rate, high inflation. Budget deficit rose from $83B to $130B.
But now, with the rising oil price, lifting of the sanctions, we don’t know. It will have a negative effect.”
Stubb on easing US sanctions against Russia: “It’s very damaging for Ukraine, because it basically feeds the Russian war machine.”
On reports that Russia gains up to $150M a day from higher oil prices: “Wouldn’t surprise me at all.”..
https://x.com/Mylovanov/status/2035726513794900338
And the Trump admin is stuffed with lots of those oddly pretty, petite, blonde, very right wing American women. I like that type
I'm also quite happy for any non-military to be given suitable compensation for any extra risks the situation entails.
What I'm not happy about is the possibility of going straight to the economic catastrophe and/or use of nuclear weapons without anyone trying to do something beforehand.
By the way you're wrong about the German fleet staying in port in the latter halves of the world wars.
The German surface fleet mostly stayed in port (with exceptions such as the Scharnhorst at North Cape) but the German U boat fleets continued to operate aggressively and suffered huge casualties.
https://uboat.net/wwi/fates/losses.html
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/chart.htm
If nobody breaks that way of thinking it's a runway train to disastersville.
Stick to the drinking.
"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
My ex wife the onetime Corbynite is a bit like this. Very pretty and petite, and highly sexed. The only difference is that she's auburn haired not blonde
She was Corbynite until I gave her Jung Chang's Wild Swans to read, which she devoured in about a day. Then she shifted to being very rightwing, anti mass immigration, fiercely anti Left, and much further to the right than me (yes). She's still there. At one point she was considering marrying an Israeli West Bank Settler just so she could carry an Uzi in her daily life, and kill Islamists
She's also incredibly smart and funny. Indeed, the funniest person I have ever known, and she gave me TWO kundalini orgasms
Ach, sigh......
Watch Newsnight on Friday and Tim Marshall explaining how complicated opening that up will be .
He doesn't have enough attention span or patience for that to be possible.
If kharg is invaded then there will be even less reason for Iran to give up on fucking the world via the Straits.
This series of quotes is from a Telegraoh article.
For all the stupid people on PB, which is everyone but me, here is what I said, from the perspective of a bellicose Trump aide
"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"
If the USA takes Kharg island that means Iran's entire oil based economy is fucked and controlled by Trump. Then drop a couple of nukes on, say, Qom and Shiraz, the latter just because of the annoying wine name thing, then America has a double vice grip on Tehran, and Iran will surrender
Hormuz can be blocked from the south side as easily as from the north - perhaps more so as the gulf states still have functioning navies and air forces.
The French left wins all three metropolitan cities
Paris, Lyon, Marseille
https://x.com/nassreddin2002/status/2035806273891954946?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Can you have a guess? Have you perhaps heard of Sadiq Khan and Zohran Mamdani?
The regime survived that.
It might well make them try something even more stupid.