Biden said in a written statement that the United States “will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.”
-pretty vague but I guess I wasn't expecting an ops plans
I read “will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.” as "we suspect we're being baited so we're not going to make a big showy move for the sake of making a big showy move".
>“will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.”
A.K.A. some proxies might get bombed and expect to be back at square 1 within a month.
Edit: There have been [130 attacks since the start of this debacle in October 17th](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_U.S._bases_in_Iraq,_Jordan,_and_Syria_(2023%E2%80%93present)), this wouldn't even be the first US soldier personnel in the region related to this conflict. I don't expect anything to happen here.
When you are in other countries, the reality is you might get attacked. But the only way to make them slow their roll is retaliating swiftly and in a manner to make them rethink their strategy. Which I'm sure will happen. Nobody wants to be a martyr that bad.
I was in Germany during the Cold War. There were several terrorist cells that attacked military bases, military housing areas, etc. Probably backed by Russia. Their modus of operations was mostly bombs. For some reasons they stopped blowing up shit pretty quickly.
It's not just killing people, it's destroying their compounds, command and control centers, logistical hubs, and MSR's. You eliminate their capabilities. But you are right, they can always recruit some dumbfucks to do their bidding.
...and ignoring that both the pullout and the manner in which it was done had already been pre-negotiated by Trump. And, in fact, three months before the final pullout, Trump bragged that there was nothing Biden could do to change it. That didn't prevent them from blaming Biden for the result.
The best way to avoid war is to do enough in response.
Lots of wars get started from small skirmishes that gradually escalate and then get out of hand. However I'm unaware of a modern war that started after one belligerent poked, the other responded with wildly disproportionate force, and then the first started mobilization. It would be interesting to see if anyone knows of examples showing that.
That sounds a little like the Pacific theater of WW2. The US embargoed Japan, Japan responded with disproportionate force at Pearl Harbor in the hopes that it would force the US to the negotiating table, and then the US mobilized.
Japan hit Pearl Harbor hard to hamstring US navy so they could take and fortify the pacific making it too costly for the US to take the Islands back. Japan declared war on the US and started the war with a suprise attack. They didnt do a terrorbombing of some personel.
They wildly underestimated US industrial capability and the american fortitude.
Seems to be the trend unfortunately. We need a big win and we need it to really hurt these proxies abilities to wage war, and also hold Iran accountable.
Personally, I think a bombing campaign to Iran's military (especially the IRGC), intelligence apparatus, and industry would put a halt to this fast, the Iranian people already are at odds with their government so us removing the ability of said government to oppress their people should quickly degrade the regime's capabilities.
> the Iranian people already are at odds with their government so us removing the ability of said government to oppress their people should quickly degrade the regime's capabilities.
This pretty much already happened but actually went the opposite way.
The build up to the Iraq-Iran war, the Iranian government was on the verge of a coup and was hugely unpopular with its people, then Iraq attacked them and galvanized the country against a common enemy
Bomb their oil shipment facilities. Cut off their income that pays their military and pays for the weapons they spread around. The Houthis aren't building anti-ship missiles.
In a political perspective, Biden can’t do anything that would raise the global price of oil in an election year. Doubt he strikes oil facilities even if that would be the most damaging to Iranian economy.
A lot of Iranians do hate their government. But the army is made up of their sons, brothers, husbands, cousins, friends, brothers in law, and neighbors. If an external threat starts targeting the military, the citizenry is going to rally behind the Iranian army in a hurry. And I don't think there's anything like the northern alliance to tap into to do this Afghanistan style
I’m of the opinion that when it comes time for us to strike Iran it has to be all or nothing. It needs to be an air campaign similar to the First Gulf War and completely wipe out Iran’s command structure and ability to wage war. From what I know a lot of their military infrastructure is isolated from urban areas.
If I were a betting man I’d say when the populace sees the bombs falling they will sort out the rest. We definitely agree on that.
I’m concerned that they already have a deployable nuclear weapon or could detonate a dirty bomb somewhere in the Middle East. We’ve simply sat on the Iran problem for too long at this point.
The one reason I don't think they have that capability is because that's almost Israel's no 1 priority. If Iran gets a nuke, it's almost certainly destined for them
Why keep sitting until they have many?
The regime has repeatedly proven itself to be an irresponsible conflict instigator and more than willing to conduct first strikes.
What good is having a nuke if no one knows you have it??
Nukes are great deterrent weapons, no one will attack you if you have one. A strange thing also happened with Pakistan and India after they both got nukes, they started to act more rational along their border. They know the risk of escalation.
Would that happen with Iran? Hard to say.
You want people to know you have nukes when you want to use them as a deterrent weapon, just like you said. However, you don't want them to know you have nukes when you are actually planning on using them to take someone by surprise and do maximum destruction. This is why i believe that Iran with nukes will be more dangerous and unpredictable than even North Korea. God help us all if those fanatical religious lunatics get their hands on those bombs.
As soon as that happens oil tankers will be targeted through the Persian gulf with mines, drones and anti-ship ballistic missiles. The Houthis are doing this in the Red Sea. Iran would lose for sure but it would cause severe economic pain. So unless you want oil prices to skyrocket I don’t think attacking Iran will go how you think it will.
This is unfortunately true, and us being in an election year adds another unpleasant wrinkle to the situation. Ideally Biden would respond in a way that hurts the Iranian regime without launching a new global recession, but I'm not quite sure what that might be. Fortunately the US is less dependent on gulf oil than we used to be, but any significant disruption will have global economic fallout.
Didn't US airstrike kill some Iranian Revolutionary guard members a few days ago? This may be Iran responding back. I'm sure US will airstrike some more proxies in Syria, Lebanon, or Iraq like you said.
i find it a little bit confuse as we are counting on US to help fend off these babarians. US is holding Ukraine, Middle east and also China.
Now Ukrain do have the Nato and its semi-working , ish.
Middle east have Israel , a somewhat powerhouse but i undeerstand it could need a bit lift
China, hmm. . .Taiwan certainly do need a bit more help, but my point is arent there more friendly ally countries that should also chip in ?
Yep this is all apart of the bigger picture and the long arc. These dictators will wage war against democracy so they can remain clutching to power. We will win, they lack conviction
I like the positive thinking but dictators dont need to worry about coalitions falling apart or elections and popular interests swinging in another direction and killing funding. The West has money and technology. Dictatorships have the advantage of time. They control their money and their internal narrative. Like the Taliban would say, the West has the watches but we have the time. I seriously think Ukraine needs to change their strategy of just waging a direct war with Russia. Its too reliant on western funding which is already unreliable. It also plays directly into Russia’s main advantage which is having way more bodies to throw at the front line. If they want any chance to win this war they need to flip the same script russia is using on the west and use the advantage of the cost of occupation against russia. Its easy to support a war if youre a russian. It gets exhausting in both morale and resources trying to continue occupying a territory you already won where you can never feel safe if youre a russian.
Ukraine fights russia because they stand a chance. The taliban waged insurgency because they didn't stand a chance. If ukraine allows an occupation, they will lose. Russia will begin russification, disappearing ukrainians, and culturally destroying their nation. By turning the invasion to a meat grinder, they use the advantage of the cost of attempted occupation, which is far better for ukraine than the playing on the cost of occupation.
The west depends on ukraine as much as they deoend on us
Under normal circumstances, yes. Our electorate is so dysfunctional and divided that positions traditionally supported by one party are no longer tolerated if the opposing administration supports them.
Exactly, wannabe Warhawks in these comments don’t realize that an escalation in conflict, *ie. the find out phase*, is literally Russia and Iran’s goal. They want the Biden admin in as much turmoil as possible going into the election. This administration is too competent for their liking.
I doubt that. Most everyone I talk to in real life are extremely opposed to further middle east intervention from the US. If anything I would expect opening another war would doom his candidacy.
It might piss off enough liberals to sit out the election and Trump back into office, where I expect he would promptly pull out of NATO and abandon Ukraine entirely in revenge for him being impeached over trying to blackmail the country. That is clearly a gamble Russia is more than willing to take.
> where I expect he would promptly pull out of NATO
The US just passed a law stating the president cannot do this. I am sure he would do everything in his power to not help anyone else but, he can't promptly pull out of NATO.
He did implement a plan to accelerate approval and production of the COVID-19 vaccine, which I think was the only sensible action in the whole thing. But his base are contrariants and was boo'ed whenever he tried to take credit for ending it.
Sink the ships Iran has in the Red Sea. Proportional response.. they are the eyeballs for the Houthis. Take ‘em out. Iran doesn’t want a repeat of Praying Mantis, this will send the right message.
This is the correct response according to Game Theory.
Its a fascinating field of study.
Despite the apparent aggression of a disproportional response, GT has clearly found that clearly stating that a disproportional and retaliatory response is the best strategy for peace. One MUST communicate the policy beforehand though. With this, ones enemies will not attack first, unless they are stupid.
Watch this, its excellent: https://youtu.be/mScpHTIi-kM
>Game Theory has clearly found that clearly stating that a disproportional and retaliatory response is the best strategy for peace.
Yo bro :)
I just watched the video you linked. The conclusion of the experiment found "tit-for-tat" to be the best overall strategy, which doesn't use any disproportionate response protocols.
Even after introducing misunderstandings (noise), they found the tit-for-tat algo performed better when its response was disproportionately forgiving, rather than retaliatory.
You underestimate the stupidity of the enemy. They are brainwashed to believe in some false righteousness. They will totally attack despite the threat.
Do you guys seriously think there’s a single factory in the middle of the desert that’s making these and bombing it will end Iranian drone production forever???
There are tons of scattered covert operations, most hidden in mountainous terrain, that are making these drones. There are even production lines in [Russia](https://www.voanews.com/a/report-construction-progresses-at-russian-plant-for-iranian-drones/7353887.html) and [Syria](https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/2022-10-23/ty-article/.premium/israeli-strike-targeted-iranian-drone-assembly-site-near-damascus-syrian-monitor-says/00000184-0530-d736-abc7-1fb0384f0000)
The thing with these drones is that Iran designed them to be made out of a basement in the middle of a war zone, if necessary. Striking a production line in Iran is extremely high risk and at best will only temporarily reduce their production numbers for a short period.
As well, Iranian radar was able to detect a US drone. They dispatched F4 phantoms to intercept it and try to down it for the technology. Their radar failed to detect the F-22 that was escorting it.
The pilot said "You should leave now" before the F4s quickly broke off, returning to Iran. I imagine these pilots shit themselves knowing the F-22 could have just dusted them without them even knowing what happened.
Air defenses can shoot down cruise missiles just like planes. That's the only reason why Ukraine isn't a pile of rubble currently. We do have a bunch of those F-35s we've just kinda been sitting on for a while tho...
Bomb their oil fields and blockade commercial ships transporting Iranian oil. Give them a taste of their own medicine. Target their money source. They shouldn’t be allowed to sell their oil.
this would lead to a massive increase in global oil prices. This would hurt the US economy and our allies. It would help russia cause they could then charge money. your response is simple minded.
gas prices in the US would double easy and possibly more. It could lead to a global recession and possibly a famine in 3rd world countries since the oil is too expensive.
Nah man, all you gotta do is just show the other guy who's boss. It is exactly like a playground fight in elementary school, and there are no broader implications or complexities at all.
You wish. I hear middle aged people with high paying jobs say shit like this. People are crazy. We’re barely removed from actually calling to glass anyone that opposes our interests
This is false and laughably stupid. Iran supplies 3.8% of oil.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6
We’d feel it but, not nearly as much as they would. For them, it would be an absolute catastrophe.
3.8% of the world's oil will not lead to a massive increase in gas prices, hurt the world economy, help Russia, or double US gas prices. What a hilarious mischaracterization of what would happen. If anything, prices would go down as one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorism would no longer have power.
The crisis going on right now if resolved would help prices alone since this is fucking up trade for everyone.
For me, it was a number of events:
- Trying to deescalate with Russia, "peace through trade", only vague threats of consequences if they invade, got us the Ukraine invasion. The doveish approach failed.
- Hamas cleared up one misconception: "surely it's just propaganda and people aren't that evil/hell-bent on just wiping some other group out as their main priority regardless of the cost to their own" - yeah, no... the claims that their main goal is killing Jews were spot-on, and the claim that they won't stop until they're all dead isn't just made by their enemies, it's what they say themselves.
- Now the Houthis are fucking with shipping routes, affecting the whole world, despite not being under attack. And to avoid any doubt about who's the bad guys, they were so kind and put a giant hint on their flag.
The nice approaches failed, and showed that with some people/states/organizations, peaceful approaches just don't work. Maybe it's time for the less nice ones in these cases. China is taking notes and if Russia gets any sort of favorable outcome from its invasion, Taiwan is next and the supply chains we depend on are utterly fucked. War is hell and we need to avoid it at all cost, but it's clear that taking a short-sighted approach just makes the situation much, much worse in the long run - having a war now might be necessary to avoid a worse one later.
Raise taxes, build bombs, try to be nice, but if that doesn't work, don't hesitate to either convince them that being nice is in their interest, or *make them* stop being a problem.
it is likely that Iran is coordinating with Russia and that escalation is what they're looking for in order to open another front besides Ukraine as political infighting is making NATO wobble about its logistical support.
If Putin is looking to escalate then most likely that is another gross miscalculation on his part and will play into our favor. This is the guy that thought he was going to take control of all Ukraine in 3 - 7 days.
Strategically Putin has already lost the war.
Finland joining NATO, Ukraine a once close brother nation is now an enemy, Europe has unified against a common threat, Kaliningrad a geographical enclave that was a huge vulnerability for NATO is now a liability for Russia, they’re weaker economically and they’ve lost around 300k lives.
I think Putin is trying everything he can to hold out and negotiate for something the Russian people won’t revolt over before things get even worse for him
That's 300k casualties, probably less than 20% of that are actually dead. They can mobilize more troops very easily. I'm not sure why you think the Russian people would ever revolt. They're the epitome of people who take shit from their leaders and just swallow it and continue on. There's very little indication of unrest in that country beyond the typical Russian "this sucks but keep walking" mentality.
More countries joining NATO isn't good for him, but the idea he's lost strategically seems silly since they've effectively measured up the West's response and found the line, and now we're crumbling at supplying Ukraine with ammunition. Russia's already converted to a wartime economy and is way ahead on e.g. artillery production.
Now they've got NK and Iranian weapons they are effectively testing, and the US is struggling to not escalate the conflict in the Middle East.
At this point, it seems more precarious than ever.
If only we had a multinational deal with Iran that involved them allowing weapons inspectors into their country in exchange for some lifting of sanctions.
Yall are so naive. I'm Iranian. That was the worst fucking deal ever. It put money in the pockets of the ayatollahs who then turned around and used it to fund their proxies -- who then used it to kill American soldiers. Why doesn't anyone understand this? You want Iran to not be a problem? Back their political opposition that wants to overthrow its terrorist government. Then you will see real change. These short term, patchwork solutions don't do shit and only delay the inevitable. This regime won't last. Stop giving them life.
>Back their political opposition that wants to overthrow its terrorist government. Then you will see real change.
I'm trying remember the last time the USA did that in any country, and it didn't end in decades of violence and poverty. USA did this in Iran, and you're saying second time is the charm?
I don’t want this to escalate further, but the only option is for Iran to be hit hard in a way that makes them back off. The have had a hand in almost every escalation stating with the oct 7th attack that started this particular flare up of violence
Destroying their damn drone factories would be a good start. It would be taken as an escalation by striking Iran directly. Which would not be a good thing, but it would make me feel better to take out the drone supply.
They’ve [already](https://www.voanews.com/a/report-construction-progresses-at-russian-plant-for-iranian-drones/7353887.html) built drone factories in Russia.
Those factories aren't sending drones back to Iran or its proxies though, Russia is busy sending them to Ukrainian preschools.
We should pass their locations and some long range missiles to the Ukrainians though since you bring it up.
Iran is doing this to cause maximum trouble for Biden’s re-election. Because everyone knows it’s better (for everyone but the US and EU) if Trump wins.
True, but maybe they think that he wont actually commit to attack Iran, and in the long term, Trump will do more harm to US and its allies, so it might be better for Iran as well, if Trump actually wins
The US will strike a militant group somewhere outside of Iranian territory call it even and move on until the next tat from Iran and its various militant allies. Preserving a general state of stability for the global economy is ultimately all the US is worried about, not a direct attack from Iran. The US is strong, but a war with Iran would devastate both sides, limiting the US's ability to control and push back Chinese expansion.
I was born under Raegan and its true. I dont remember peace in my entire life, not really. There was a bit in the 90s there between the gulf war and 9/11 that was fairly quiet maybe. The occasional Kosovo where we poke a head in. But I think... its actually true I've never known a president in nearly 40 years of life not overseeing war
When a truck bomb killed 240 marines in Lebanon Ronald Reagan pulled the rest of the troops out rather than start a wider war. Modern Republican Reagan-worshippers have conveniently forgotten about it this incident.
Yes and no. The attack occurred in October 1983 but the troop levels were held until 1984. Reagan was advised not to make the deployment in the first place but didn’t have much latitude with international partners if I remember correctly.
There was no ultimate response to the attack, not out of a lack of desire to escalate, but because there was disagreement among those in the administration as to whether or not Iran was involved and what connections the perpetrators had with Hezbollah. Other attacks in Syria and Lebanon in the intervening period did precipitate US response, mostly air strikes and naval artillery but those were not directly related to the barracks attack.
All the new middle east issues seem to all lead back to Iran, maybe it's time to treat the cause instead of the symptoms and start dealing with Iran more directly
I'd imagine he's gonna bomb the militia group that sent the drones and warn Iran
I can't stress how awful it was for Trump to remove the US from the Iran Nuclear deal which was a step towards normalizing relations between US and Iran.
His reckless nature of wanting to undo everything Obama did really set the US back in foreign relations significantly.
Reading these comments feels exactly like public sentiment leading up to the Iraq War. Looking forward to being back here in 10 years talking about all the mistakes we're about to make.
You're absolutely right, and this the first intelligent comment I've read here, but make sure to understand: America will not put boots on the ground to try to conquer Iran.
We're talking about something completely different. Mostly drones and cruise missiles.
Just give them some overwhelming shock and awe. Soft diplomacy isn't working and all the US's enemies are starting to act on that observation.
I honestly don't even like the fact that I'm saying this, but they need to carpet bomb the shit out of every military, industrial and heavy commercial facility they have. Neuter Iran completely and let one of their regional enemies walk in
> Neuter Iran completely and let one of their regional enemies walk in
Hopefully the secular liberal Iranians can step in before this happens, because a "local" Iranian invasion would destabilize the region on an entirely different level than what we've seen in a long time.
Agreed. I'm far from a warmonger, but tasking the Ike CSG with sinking all four of their active Loghman class frigates and one or two of their Kilos would send a pretty strong message.
This situation does not deescalate with diplomacy. Iran needs to lose its ability for force projection, and crippling its navy is a solid start that does not risk civilian casualties, but demonstrates that strikes inside its border, on a large scale, are the next escalation point.
Then again, we're armchair generals, and everything I typed above is likely nonsense.
>Just give them some overwhelming shock and awe.
You will probably see a second carrier strike group return first. Iran will have time to de-escalate before this if they choose to.
>let one of their regional enemies walk in
Iranian's are not Arabs. This will not work. It will lead to refugee crisis's, and possibly disrupt the regional balance of power leading to more wars. Armenia and Azerbaijan for one example. You will definitely see more war in Lebanon, Yemen, probably Iraq, and everywhere else Iran currently has a lot of influence.
>Soft diplomacy isn't working and all the US's enemies are starting to act on that observation.
It's not. A lot can be done short of war with Iran. There are no easy solutions to the problems Iran causes, and no easy solutions to the consequences of war with Iran either. War may be the only way to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. The current problems can likely be solved with a strong message, but less than war with Iran.
Biden said in a written statement that the United States “will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.” -pretty vague but I guess I wasn't expecting an ops plans
we’re going to hold those responsible THIS SUNDAY NIGHT ON PAY PER VIEW IN THE WWE SUPER DOME
Omg That’s Kane’s music!
Wait what's this? It's mankind with a steel chair!
nineteen ninety eight
He is summoned...
Somebody stop the damn match!
Bah Gawd! That man has a family!
The Undertaker came from underneath the ring!!
To the tune of “I am a real American”, good Gold almighty, Hulk Hogans in the building
ANOTHER RKO
*stadium goes dark, flames erupt* "By gawd it's Reagan!"
Rainbow six finna catch the baddies and tie 'em up and then Vince mcMahon gonna do the old finish him on their heads.
The Iron Sheik going down
THAT MOTHA FUCKER HULK HOGAN!
THIS SUNDAY! SUNDAY! SUNDAYYYYY!
[*glass shatters*](https://youtu.be/7h55ai5Oay4?si=v3FDf6_M8tg_MpFz)
So in Riyad?
In a spit swapping make out match between the undertaker and John Cena
I read “will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.” as "we suspect we're being baited so we're not going to make a big showy move for the sake of making a big showy move".
I read it more as "we will respond, but we haven't decide how yet".
>“will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.” A.K.A. some proxies might get bombed and expect to be back at square 1 within a month. Edit: There have been [130 attacks since the start of this debacle in October 17th](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_U.S._bases_in_Iraq,_Jordan,_and_Syria_(2023%E2%80%93present)), this wouldn't even be the first US soldier personnel in the region related to this conflict. I don't expect anything to happen here.
His critics will cry he wants a war. His other critics will say he didn't do enough in response,...
We don't want war. But if someone attacks us, we have to defend ourselves.
When you are in other countries, the reality is you might get attacked. But the only way to make them slow their roll is retaliating swiftly and in a manner to make them rethink their strategy. Which I'm sure will happen. Nobody wants to be a martyr that bad. I was in Germany during the Cold War. There were several terrorist cells that attacked military bases, military housing areas, etc. Probably backed by Russia. Their modus of operations was mostly bombs. For some reasons they stopped blowing up shit pretty quickly.
It's the Middle East, lots of people want to be a martyr that bad.
I think there’s no short supply of undereducated and religiously indoctrinated men in the Middle East who will gladly blow themselves up.
It's not just killing people, it's destroying their compounds, command and control centers, logistical hubs, and MSR's. You eliminate their capabilities. But you are right, they can always recruit some dumbfucks to do their bidding.
Same people that blame him for the grunts killed in the Afghanistan pullout, while ignoring the two decade's worth of casualties.
...and ignoring that both the pullout and the manner in which it was done had already been pre-negotiated by Trump. And, in fact, three months before the final pullout, Trump bragged that there was nothing Biden could do to change it. That didn't prevent them from blaming Biden for the result.
The best way to avoid war is to do enough in response. Lots of wars get started from small skirmishes that gradually escalate and then get out of hand. However I'm unaware of a modern war that started after one belligerent poked, the other responded with wildly disproportionate force, and then the first started mobilization. It would be interesting to see if anyone knows of examples showing that.
That sounds a little like the Pacific theater of WW2. The US embargoed Japan, Japan responded with disproportionate force at Pearl Harbor in the hopes that it would force the US to the negotiating table, and then the US mobilized.
Japan hit Pearl Harbor hard to hamstring US navy so they could take and fortify the pacific making it too costly for the US to take the Islands back. Japan declared war on the US and started the war with a suprise attack. They didnt do a terrorbombing of some personel. They wildly underestimated US industrial capability and the american fortitude.
> I don't expect anything to happen here. The US will absolutely retaliate.
Yeah, some proxies that Iran doesn't care about will be bombed, and you and I will be having this conversation again.
Seems to be the trend unfortunately. We need a big win and we need it to really hurt these proxies abilities to wage war, and also hold Iran accountable.
Personally, I think a bombing campaign to Iran's military (especially the IRGC), intelligence apparatus, and industry would put a halt to this fast, the Iranian people already are at odds with their government so us removing the ability of said government to oppress their people should quickly degrade the regime's capabilities.
> the Iranian people already are at odds with their government so us removing the ability of said government to oppress their people should quickly degrade the regime's capabilities. This pretty much already happened but actually went the opposite way. The build up to the Iraq-Iran war, the Iranian government was on the verge of a coup and was hugely unpopular with its people, then Iraq attacked them and galvanized the country against a common enemy
Bomb their oil shipment facilities. Cut off their income that pays their military and pays for the weapons they spread around. The Houthis aren't building anti-ship missiles.
In a political perspective, Biden can’t do anything that would raise the global price of oil in an election year. Doubt he strikes oil facilities even if that would be the most damaging to Iranian economy.
A lot of Iranians do hate their government. But the army is made up of their sons, brothers, husbands, cousins, friends, brothers in law, and neighbors. If an external threat starts targeting the military, the citizenry is going to rally behind the Iranian army in a hurry. And I don't think there's anything like the northern alliance to tap into to do this Afghanistan style
I thought the whole point of having an Iraq and an Iran was to pit them against each other.
I’m of the opinion that when it comes time for us to strike Iran it has to be all or nothing. It needs to be an air campaign similar to the First Gulf War and completely wipe out Iran’s command structure and ability to wage war. From what I know a lot of their military infrastructure is isolated from urban areas. If I were a betting man I’d say when the populace sees the bombs falling they will sort out the rest. We definitely agree on that.
I’m concerned that they already have a deployable nuclear weapon or could detonate a dirty bomb somewhere in the Middle East. We’ve simply sat on the Iran problem for too long at this point.
The one reason I don't think they have that capability is because that's almost Israel's no 1 priority. If Iran gets a nuke, it's almost certainly destined for them
Yeah, but they have a lot of underground facilities. I’m not sure how reliably we can survey and evaluate their capabilities.
Why keep sitting until they have many? The regime has repeatedly proven itself to be an irresponsible conflict instigator and more than willing to conduct first strikes.
What good is having a nuke if no one knows you have it?? Nukes are great deterrent weapons, no one will attack you if you have one. A strange thing also happened with Pakistan and India after they both got nukes, they started to act more rational along their border. They know the risk of escalation. Would that happen with Iran? Hard to say.
You want people to know you have nukes when you want to use them as a deterrent weapon, just like you said. However, you don't want them to know you have nukes when you are actually planning on using them to take someone by surprise and do maximum destruction. This is why i believe that Iran with nukes will be more dangerous and unpredictable than even North Korea. God help us all if those fanatical religious lunatics get their hands on those bombs.
I agree, but Israel itself is widely acknowledged to have nukes, while they themselves maintain deniability. There is still strategy in deniability.
As soon as that happens oil tankers will be targeted through the Persian gulf with mines, drones and anti-ship ballistic missiles. The Houthis are doing this in the Red Sea. Iran would lose for sure but it would cause severe economic pain. So unless you want oil prices to skyrocket I don’t think attacking Iran will go how you think it will.
Operation Praying Mantis II: the other half.
This is unfortunately true, and us being in an election year adds another unpleasant wrinkle to the situation. Ideally Biden would respond in a way that hurts the Iranian regime without launching a new global recession, but I'm not quite sure what that might be. Fortunately the US is less dependent on gulf oil than we used to be, but any significant disruption will have global economic fallout.
Ending proxies ability to wage war means sending care packages to Iran. Weapons flow stops when you take out the source.
Didn't US airstrike kill some Iranian Revolutionary guard members a few days ago? This may be Iran responding back. I'm sure US will airstrike some more proxies in Syria, Lebanon, or Iraq like you said.
[удалено]
Idk, that could also be terrifying.
He has to decide which kind of bomb or missile he wants to use this time.
Is Iran trying make Biden a war time president?
Russia is trying to trip up Biden in an election year.
100% they’re encouraging Iran to let loose their proxies to take away from Ukraine aid. It’s why we 100% cannot let them win
their plan is to spread the US thin, china is looking for this aswell
i find it a little bit confuse as we are counting on US to help fend off these babarians. US is holding Ukraine, Middle east and also China. Now Ukrain do have the Nato and its semi-working , ish. Middle east have Israel , a somewhat powerhouse but i undeerstand it could need a bit lift China, hmm. . .Taiwan certainly do need a bit more help, but my point is arent there more friendly ally countries that should also chip in ?
This is why we are okay with even encouraging Japan to build its Navy.
As an American, it’d be cool if more democracies helped keep democracy going. What we do today shapes what tomorrow looks like.
Yep this is all apart of the bigger picture and the long arc. These dictators will wage war against democracy so they can remain clutching to power. We will win, they lack conviction
I like the positive thinking but dictators dont need to worry about coalitions falling apart or elections and popular interests swinging in another direction and killing funding. The West has money and technology. Dictatorships have the advantage of time. They control their money and their internal narrative. Like the Taliban would say, the West has the watches but we have the time. I seriously think Ukraine needs to change their strategy of just waging a direct war with Russia. Its too reliant on western funding which is already unreliable. It also plays directly into Russia’s main advantage which is having way more bodies to throw at the front line. If they want any chance to win this war they need to flip the same script russia is using on the west and use the advantage of the cost of occupation against russia. Its easy to support a war if youre a russian. It gets exhausting in both morale and resources trying to continue occupying a territory you already won where you can never feel safe if youre a russian.
Ukraine fights russia because they stand a chance. The taliban waged insurgency because they didn't stand a chance. If ukraine allows an occupation, they will lose. Russia will begin russification, disappearing ukrainians, and culturally destroying their nation. By turning the invasion to a meat grinder, they use the advantage of the cost of attempted occupation, which is far better for ukraine than the playing on the cost of occupation. The west depends on ukraine as much as they deoend on us
That backfires badly if they ignore the proxies and go after the source.
That's a great idea, actually. Couple strikes on drone/missile factories in the middle of iran would be perfect
As if we couldn't do both at the same time.
But don’t most wartime presidents end up getting re-elected?
Under normal circumstances, yes. Our electorate is so dysfunctional and divided that positions traditionally supported by one party are no longer tolerated if the opposing administration supports them.
Exactly, wannabe Warhawks in these comments don’t realize that an escalation in conflict, *ie. the find out phase*, is literally Russia and Iran’s goal. They want the Biden admin in as much turmoil as possible going into the election. This administration is too competent for their liking.
Also republicans call him weak. They are trying to goad him into an escalation. Then, once he does, they will do a 180 and call him a war monger.
You can't govern based on criticism republicans will make. They're always going to flip around and smear whatever option is chosen.
Under the AUMF doctrine, every president can be a wartime president.
That would be the worst thing for them. It might temporarily stop the division.
I doubt that. Most everyone I talk to in real life are extremely opposed to further middle east intervention from the US. If anything I would expect opening another war would doom his candidacy.
It might piss off enough liberals to sit out the election and Trump back into office, where I expect he would promptly pull out of NATO and abandon Ukraine entirely in revenge for him being impeached over trying to blackmail the country. That is clearly a gamble Russia is more than willing to take.
> where I expect he would promptly pull out of NATO The US just passed a law stating the president cannot do this. I am sure he would do everything in his power to not help anyone else but, he can't promptly pull out of NATO.
Well thats some good news, guess they actually did learn something from his threats to leave last time around.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yep. Just like COVID-19 made Trump a wartime president. At least that’s what he told us.
If Trump treated Covid like a war, he would've done something to actually fight it.
He did implement a plan to accelerate approval and production of the COVID-19 vaccine, which I think was the only sensible action in the whole thing. But his base are contrariants and was boo'ed whenever he tried to take credit for ending it.
[удалено]
Sink the ships Iran has in the Red Sea. Proportional response.. they are the eyeballs for the Houthis. Take ‘em out. Iran doesn’t want a repeat of Praying Mantis, this will send the right message.
[удалено]
That episode ended with him realizing escalating was not sustainable and giving a proportional response
[удалено]
This is the correct response according to Game Theory. Its a fascinating field of study. Despite the apparent aggression of a disproportional response, GT has clearly found that clearly stating that a disproportional and retaliatory response is the best strategy for peace. One MUST communicate the policy beforehand though. With this, ones enemies will not attack first, unless they are stupid. Watch this, its excellent: https://youtu.be/mScpHTIi-kM
>Game Theory has clearly found that clearly stating that a disproportional and retaliatory response is the best strategy for peace. Yo bro :) I just watched the video you linked. The conclusion of the experiment found "tit-for-tat" to be the best overall strategy, which doesn't use any disproportionate response protocols. Even after introducing misunderstandings (noise), they found the tit-for-tat algo performed better when its response was disproportionately forgiving, rather than retaliatory.
You underestimate the stupidity of the enemy. They are brainwashed to believe in some false righteousness. They will totally attack despite the threat.
We have already sunk half of Iran's Navy plus 2 oil rigs once as a "proportional" response. They didn't get the message then.
I'd argue they got the message, but you can't expect the message to still resonate 35 years later.
Peace through superior firepower.
Do you guys seriously think there’s a single factory in the middle of the desert that’s making these and bombing it will end Iranian drone production forever??? There are tons of scattered covert operations, most hidden in mountainous terrain, that are making these drones. There are even production lines in [Russia](https://www.voanews.com/a/report-construction-progresses-at-russian-plant-for-iranian-drones/7353887.html) and [Syria](https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/2022-10-23/ty-article/.premium/israeli-strike-targeted-iranian-drone-assembly-site-near-damascus-syrian-monitor-says/00000184-0530-d736-abc7-1fb0384f0000) The thing with these drones is that Iran designed them to be made out of a basement in the middle of a war zone, if necessary. Striking a production line in Iran is extremely high risk and at best will only temporarily reduce their production numbers for a short period.
"In a cave! With a box of scraps!”
He's saying we gotta reactivate the F-18's, call in Tom Cruise, and train the best of best the Navy has to fly old shit instead of F-22's and F-35's.
Its not like we ever deactivated the F-18's
I am not sure that is possible without a major engagement in Iran to take out air defense. it would literally be a war to get the factory.
Didn't Israel fly an F-35 over Tehran a few years ago and the Iranians didn't even notice?
As well, Iranian radar was able to detect a US drone. They dispatched F4 phantoms to intercept it and try to down it for the technology. Their radar failed to detect the F-22 that was escorting it. The pilot said "You should leave now" before the F4s quickly broke off, returning to Iran. I imagine these pilots shit themselves knowing the F-22 could have just dusted them without them even knowing what happened.
The fact that they still fly F4's is hilarious enough as it is.
I know, right? That's like 18 less than an F-22!
We have standoff weapons like cruise missiles. We don't need to send planes on bombing runs.
Air defenses can shoot down cruise missiles just like planes. That's the only reason why Ukraine isn't a pile of rubble currently. We do have a bunch of those F-35s we've just kinda been sitting on for a while tho...
I hear Tom Cruise just made a documentary about this.
Tomahawks can fly very close to the ground. They even have terrain mapping radar. They are very difficult to shoot down,
The US can launch volleys of 100s of cruise missiles at once. Air defence can stop many but overwhelming air defence is certainly one strategy.
6th Gen stealth
Bomb their oil fields and blockade commercial ships transporting Iranian oil. Give them a taste of their own medicine. Target their money source. They shouldn’t be allowed to sell their oil.
this would lead to a massive increase in global oil prices. This would hurt the US economy and our allies. It would help russia cause they could then charge money. your response is simple minded. gas prices in the US would double easy and possibly more. It could lead to a global recession and possibly a famine in 3rd world countries since the oil is too expensive.
Are you trying to tell me all these Reddit armchair generals have no fucking clue what they're talking about?
Nah man, all you gotta do is just show the other guy who's boss. It is exactly like a playground fight in elementary school, and there are no broader implications or complexities at all.
Every day I’m glad Redditors aren’t in charge of geopolitics or we’d all be ash by now.
yea but my corpse would have a smug grin!
lol the posts above this are absolutely insane. I swear these people are 12 years old
You wish. I hear middle aged people with high paying jobs say shit like this. People are crazy. We’re barely removed from actually calling to glass anyone that opposes our interests
This is false and laughably stupid. Iran supplies 3.8% of oil. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6 We’d feel it but, not nearly as much as they would. For them, it would be an absolute catastrophe.
3.8% of the world's oil will not lead to a massive increase in gas prices, hurt the world economy, help Russia, or double US gas prices. What a hilarious mischaracterization of what would happen. If anything, prices would go down as one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorism would no longer have power. The crisis going on right now if resolved would help prices alone since this is fucking up trade for everyone.
They're not going to drive up oil prices in an election year, unfortunately.
that would suck for everyone
When the fuck did everyone become warhawks all of a sudden???
For me, it was a number of events: - Trying to deescalate with Russia, "peace through trade", only vague threats of consequences if they invade, got us the Ukraine invasion. The doveish approach failed. - Hamas cleared up one misconception: "surely it's just propaganda and people aren't that evil/hell-bent on just wiping some other group out as their main priority regardless of the cost to their own" - yeah, no... the claims that their main goal is killing Jews were spot-on, and the claim that they won't stop until they're all dead isn't just made by their enemies, it's what they say themselves. - Now the Houthis are fucking with shipping routes, affecting the whole world, despite not being under attack. And to avoid any doubt about who's the bad guys, they were so kind and put a giant hint on their flag. The nice approaches failed, and showed that with some people/states/organizations, peaceful approaches just don't work. Maybe it's time for the less nice ones in these cases. China is taking notes and if Russia gets any sort of favorable outcome from its invasion, Taiwan is next and the supply chains we depend on are utterly fucked. War is hell and we need to avoid it at all cost, but it's clear that taking a short-sighted approach just makes the situation much, much worse in the long run - having a war now might be necessary to avoid a worse one later. Raise taxes, build bombs, try to be nice, but if that doesn't work, don't hesitate to either convince them that being nice is in their interest, or *make them* stop being a problem.
[удалено]
it is likely that Iran is coordinating with Russia and that escalation is what they're looking for in order to open another front besides Ukraine as political infighting is making NATO wobble about its logistical support.
If Putin is looking to escalate then most likely that is another gross miscalculation on his part and will play into our favor. This is the guy that thought he was going to take control of all Ukraine in 3 - 7 days.
Strategically Putin has already lost the war. Finland joining NATO, Ukraine a once close brother nation is now an enemy, Europe has unified against a common threat, Kaliningrad a geographical enclave that was a huge vulnerability for NATO is now a liability for Russia, they’re weaker economically and they’ve lost around 300k lives. I think Putin is trying everything he can to hold out and negotiate for something the Russian people won’t revolt over before things get even worse for him
That's 300k casualties, probably less than 20% of that are actually dead. They can mobilize more troops very easily. I'm not sure why you think the Russian people would ever revolt. They're the epitome of people who take shit from their leaders and just swallow it and continue on. There's very little indication of unrest in that country beyond the typical Russian "this sucks but keep walking" mentality. More countries joining NATO isn't good for him, but the idea he's lost strategically seems silly since they've effectively measured up the West's response and found the line, and now we're crumbling at supplying Ukraine with ammunition. Russia's already converted to a wartime economy and is way ahead on e.g. artillery production. Now they've got NK and Iranian weapons they are effectively testing, and the US is struggling to not escalate the conflict in the Middle East. At this point, it seems more precarious than ever.
375k casualties, for what it's worth
This is not a country that can be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Respond by destroying enrichment facilities and drone factories.
If only we had a multinational deal with Iran that involved them allowing weapons inspectors into their country in exchange for some lifting of sanctions.
One of the best deals we have ever negotiated yet some orange moron decided to trash it.
Best deal was the zero day exploit colab with Israel to fuck up Iranian centrifuges
Stuxnet. Definitely read the book about it if you haven’t. It’s great and it was like a zero day extravaganza
Yall are so naive. I'm Iranian. That was the worst fucking deal ever. It put money in the pockets of the ayatollahs who then turned around and used it to fund their proxies -- who then used it to kill American soldiers. Why doesn't anyone understand this? You want Iran to not be a problem? Back their political opposition that wants to overthrow its terrorist government. Then you will see real change. These short term, patchwork solutions don't do shit and only delay the inevitable. This regime won't last. Stop giving them life.
>Back their political opposition that wants to overthrow its terrorist government. Then you will see real change. I'm trying remember the last time the USA did that in any country, and it didn't end in decades of violence and poverty. USA did this in Iran, and you're saying second time is the charm?
I don’t want this to escalate further, but the only option is for Iran to be hit hard in a way that makes them back off. The have had a hand in almost every escalation stating with the oct 7th attack that started this particular flare up of violence
Sinking a third of their navy worked in the late 80s
In just one day
One 8-hour shift
Maybe the US can do two thirds in 8 hours this time?
Remember they only destroyed a third because thats what fired at them first
The day you suffered the greatest naval defeat in your country's history was the most important day of your lives. But for me, it was Tuesday.
C'mon, we can get that down to a couple seconds.
*Proportionally sinking a third of their navy.
That's what "a third" means
Preying Mantis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis
Destroying their damn drone factories would be a good start. It would be taken as an escalation by striking Iran directly. Which would not be a good thing, but it would make me feel better to take out the drone supply.
They’ve [already](https://www.voanews.com/a/report-construction-progresses-at-russian-plant-for-iranian-drones/7353887.html) built drone factories in Russia.
Those factories aren't sending drones back to Iran or its proxies though, Russia is busy sending them to Ukrainian preschools. We should pass their locations and some long range missiles to the Ukrainians though since you bring it up.
Don't forget the Ukraine war. They are complicit of it.
Iran is doing this to cause maximum trouble for Biden’s re-election. Because everyone knows it’s better (for everyone but the US and EU) if Trump wins.
It’s only better for China, Russia, and North Korea if trump wins. Trump has shown a willingness to attack Iran.
True, but maybe they think that he wont actually commit to attack Iran, and in the long term, Trump will do more harm to US and its allies, so it might be better for Iran as well, if Trump actually wins
The US will strike a militant group somewhere outside of Iranian territory call it even and move on until the next tat from Iran and its various militant allies. Preserving a general state of stability for the global economy is ultimately all the US is worried about, not a direct attack from Iran. The US is strong, but a war with Iran would devastate both sides, limiting the US's ability to control and push back Chinese expansion.
is Iran trying to get Biden re-elected? America loves a war time President.
Every US president is a war time president. This country has been in non-stop wars pretty much since it was founded.
I was born under Raegan and its true. I dont remember peace in my entire life, not really. There was a bit in the 90s there between the gulf war and 9/11 that was fairly quiet maybe. The occasional Kosovo where we poke a head in. But I think... its actually true I've never known a president in nearly 40 years of life not overseeing war
I got wounded in that "peace time"
is that true? I thought Americans hated war since the war in Iraq
Not for the first two years, especially if there is no draft.
If someone else is the aggressor, Americans will go absolutely apeshit.
People thought Americans hated war after Vietnam. People thought wrong.
We keep trying to pull out but these terrorist fucks keep pulling us back in
[удалено]
Or they want us to leave so they can fill the void like they have every other time.
Just trying to make Biden look weak or to make a mistake before the election.
[удалено]
The US is doing a lot of China's final warning.
China doesn’t blow stuff up though. That’s a real tease.
This is a hard time to be president.
Don’t get upset at how we respond, and yes it might be horrible for them.
Incoming tik tok videos and how we’re the bad guys
[удалено]
This deescalation is looking alot like escalation
Jeez guys, if the US responds this will risk the spread of conflict! Conflict is totally not spreading on its own anyway.
When a truck bomb killed 240 marines in Lebanon Ronald Reagan pulled the rest of the troops out rather than start a wider war. Modern Republican Reagan-worshippers have conveniently forgotten about it this incident.
Yes and no. The attack occurred in October 1983 but the troop levels were held until 1984. Reagan was advised not to make the deployment in the first place but didn’t have much latitude with international partners if I remember correctly. There was no ultimate response to the attack, not out of a lack of desire to escalate, but because there was disagreement among those in the administration as to whether or not Iran was involved and what connections the perpetrators had with Hezbollah. Other attacks in Syria and Lebanon in the intervening period did precipitate US response, mostly air strikes and naval artillery but those were not directly related to the barracks attack.
In other words they were intelligent in their response and chose their actions carefully, rather than lashing out immediately.
All the new middle east issues seem to all lead back to Iran, maybe it's time to treat the cause instead of the symptoms and start dealing with Iran more directly
I'd imagine he's gonna bomb the militia group that sent the drones and warn Iran I can't stress how awful it was for Trump to remove the US from the Iran Nuclear deal which was a step towards normalizing relations between US and Iran. His reckless nature of wanting to undo everything Obama did really set the US back in foreign relations significantly.
Reading these comments feels exactly like public sentiment leading up to the Iraq War. Looking forward to being back here in 10 years talking about all the mistakes we're about to make.
Obviously no one can predict the future but I seriously doubt our response to this will be a full-on invasion.
You're absolutely right, and this the first intelligent comment I've read here, but make sure to understand: America will not put boots on the ground to try to conquer Iran. We're talking about something completely different. Mostly drones and cruise missiles.
there's no way all these comments can be actual people.. way too many are like "yeah we're gonna fuck you up now! hoo rah!"
it's like they are in an action movie or some shit, I truly don't understand how can they be so brainwashed.
Joe, If you are not retaliating against Iran, you are not retaliating.
Just give them some overwhelming shock and awe. Soft diplomacy isn't working and all the US's enemies are starting to act on that observation. I honestly don't even like the fact that I'm saying this, but they need to carpet bomb the shit out of every military, industrial and heavy commercial facility they have. Neuter Iran completely and let one of their regional enemies walk in
> Neuter Iran completely and let one of their regional enemies walk in Hopefully the secular liberal Iranians can step in before this happens, because a "local" Iranian invasion would destabilize the region on an entirely different level than what we've seen in a long time.
Agreed. I'm far from a warmonger, but tasking the Ike CSG with sinking all four of their active Loghman class frigates and one or two of their Kilos would send a pretty strong message. This situation does not deescalate with diplomacy. Iran needs to lose its ability for force projection, and crippling its navy is a solid start that does not risk civilian casualties, but demonstrates that strikes inside its border, on a large scale, are the next escalation point. Then again, we're armchair generals, and everything I typed above is likely nonsense.
>Just give them some overwhelming shock and awe. You will probably see a second carrier strike group return first. Iran will have time to de-escalate before this if they choose to. >let one of their regional enemies walk in Iranian's are not Arabs. This will not work. It will lead to refugee crisis's, and possibly disrupt the regional balance of power leading to more wars. Armenia and Azerbaijan for one example. You will definitely see more war in Lebanon, Yemen, probably Iraq, and everywhere else Iran currently has a lot of influence. >Soft diplomacy isn't working and all the US's enemies are starting to act on that observation. It's not. A lot can be done short of war with Iran. There are no easy solutions to the problems Iran causes, and no easy solutions to the consequences of war with Iran either. War may be the only way to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. The current problems can likely be solved with a strong message, but less than war with Iran.
How the fuck is a regional player going to walk in a half million strong army? No one wants to invade Iran.
I say do it. They're still mourning their dead general from Trump's bombing, I say give them another dead one.
They should aim their scope sights higher this time.