I will be honest: I have wanted to pop Iran since 1979 when they took the hostages. Once the hostages have were released, I would have cheered had we sent in one cruise missile for each hostage. I cheered the news that that old goat Khamenei and his equally evil cohort were obliterated. However, such celebrations, however justifiable, come with a cost, and the cost might be too high. Apparently, the Trump administration did no assessment of costs and benefits. They had, and still have, no exit strategy. Trump attacked because he could and he wanted to. Bush and Cheney started a war of choice. Trump started a war of ego.
Bombing the shit out of people has been tried many times, with decidedly uncertain results. Hitler tried it on the British. How did that work out for him? American and British air forces pounded German cities to rubble. Yet the Nazis fought ferociously until the Soviet troops occupied Berlin and destroyed the German ability to resist. We dropped more tonnage of bombs on Vietnam than in all theaters in WW II. How did that work out for us? American B-52's knocked the Taliban out of Afghanistan. They came back literally hours after our boots on the ground left. Does Donald Trump know any of this? Would he care?
I think that there is a lot to be said for Nemo me impune lacessit. Hitting back may provoke more violence. Letting people attack you with impunity certainly will.
Which seems to have been Khomeini and the students' calculation, given all they'd suffered under the Shah. and so they stuck at the agents of the government that propped him up and supplied him with weapons and training.
It's both the justification of the Palestinians and the Israelis. And the principle of Greco-Turkish relations since Constantinople.
I rather think that not overthrowing others' governments without great cause (greater than "they're weaker"), not running people off their land, and not leaving treaties because a black man negotiated it/Bibi wanted me to, is a better way to live.
Overthrowing the democratically elected government of Iran and installing the Shah was wrong and stupid. No doubt what happened in '79 was largely a matter of our own doing. We are still paying the price. The world is full of excuses for hate. However, when you are the object of intense and inveterate hate, whatever its cause, tolerating violent attacks will not decrease the hate. Rather, you signal that the haters can act with impunity. If someone hates me for what my grandfather did, I may regret that it happened, but that does not give them the right to attack me or deprive me of the right to strike back.
Apparently the Iranians agree with you. It can make one/one's organization/nation, feared if not respected, and Trump has outdone even Bush on that score -- see Krugman's Substack today, and the response of allies to the dotard's request for (he'd never use the word) allies.
It's also an interesting question if the nation of the US of the 50s-70s and today's US are different nations, the way you and your grandfather are different people. I would have to say no. Everything about nationhood and law drives to that conclusion ... or to chaos
Of course, I agree with your historical analysis. However, whatever moral claim Iran may have had against us after '53, they have squandered by their murderous behavior ever since. I do not favor Trump's war, but I do not oppose it because I think the Iranians do not deserve it. I think they have deserved it for a very long time. At this point, having the Iranians--and Russia, and North Korea, and perhaps China--fear us is probably the best we can do. And I hope they fear us deeply.
There's plenty to indicate Netanyahu leading Trump to war, while Jared and Witkoff blew off the talks (which they didn't understand) and spent their time making deals-- Jared for his fund. Lindsey Graham -- by his own account -- was very active coaching Netanyahu on how to get Trump roped in.
We didn't have to go to war with Russia, we could have supplied Ukraine -- for less than this debacle!
But Z wasn't holding any cards until Trump figured out he is CiC of the only army that knows how to run a 21st century war. Now he's come to US aid in return for Trump enriching Russia.
Also see the WSJ reporting on Venezuela and the deeper dives on Iran. He wants compliant authoritarians in both cases; in Iran someone to rule for "the next 5-10 years."
I'm still more or less a combination of it's Netanyahu's machinations and it's Norway's fault. In any event, Maybelline has not manufactured enough lipstick for this pig.
Here's one response to my Letter (kidding--he knows vastly more than I do about this and besides he posted this with extremely little chance of having read my bit). Well worth reading-- https://x.com/ilangoldenberg/status/2033566389978423382
I've been thinking about your report that some people claim there's a Putin to blame for the war. Still haven't heard the argument, but I suppose it would be a way of answering, Cui bono?
Not just the depletion of expensive weapons and the spike in oil prices that enriches Moscow, and the possibility of oil shipments being denominated un yuan destabilizing the dollar, but also that the Syrian War's humanitarian crisis did much to energize the Moscow-aligned hard right parties in Europe, so imagine such a crisis in a country five times the size.
Yes, it's true that Trump also wants the hard right parties to succeed , but he's also Putin aligned.
This is one path in the question of why this war now. the other is the country's being run by idiots.
And either way, Israel did not condemn Russia for invading Ukraine and told Z to pound sand.
I will be honest: I have wanted to pop Iran since 1979 when they took the hostages. Once the hostages have were released, I would have cheered had we sent in one cruise missile for each hostage. I cheered the news that that old goat Khamenei and his equally evil cohort were obliterated. However, such celebrations, however justifiable, come with a cost, and the cost might be too high. Apparently, the Trump administration did no assessment of costs and benefits. They had, and still have, no exit strategy. Trump attacked because he could and he wanted to. Bush and Cheney started a war of choice. Trump started a war of ego.
Bombing the shit out of people has been tried many times, with decidedly uncertain results. Hitler tried it on the British. How did that work out for him? American and British air forces pounded German cities to rubble. Yet the Nazis fought ferociously until the Soviet troops occupied Berlin and destroyed the German ability to resist. We dropped more tonnage of bombs on Vietnam than in all theaters in WW II. How did that work out for us? American B-52's knocked the Taliban out of Afghanistan. They came back literally hours after our boots on the ground left. Does Donald Trump know any of this? Would he care?
Me, I've wanted a world built on something more lasting than cycles of violence, spite, and revenge.
79 was payback for 53, if we're really keeping score. The US installed a vicious secularist ruler, creating the conditions for 79.
I think that there is a lot to be said for Nemo me impune lacessit. Hitting back may provoke more violence. Letting people attack you with impunity certainly will.
Which seems to have been Khomeini and the students' calculation, given all they'd suffered under the Shah. and so they stuck at the agents of the government that propped him up and supplied him with weapons and training.
It's both the justification of the Palestinians and the Israelis. And the principle of Greco-Turkish relations since Constantinople.
I rather think that not overthrowing others' governments without great cause (greater than "they're weaker"), not running people off their land, and not leaving treaties because a black man negotiated it/Bibi wanted me to, is a better way to live.
Overthrowing the democratically elected government of Iran and installing the Shah was wrong and stupid. No doubt what happened in '79 was largely a matter of our own doing. We are still paying the price. The world is full of excuses for hate. However, when you are the object of intense and inveterate hate, whatever its cause, tolerating violent attacks will not decrease the hate. Rather, you signal that the haters can act with impunity. If someone hates me for what my grandfather did, I may regret that it happened, but that does not give them the right to attack me or deprive me of the right to strike back.
Apparently the Iranians agree with you. It can make one/one's organization/nation, feared if not respected, and Trump has outdone even Bush on that score -- see Krugman's Substack today, and the response of allies to the dotard's request for (he'd never use the word) allies.
It's also an interesting question if the nation of the US of the 50s-70s and today's US are different nations, the way you and your grandfather are different people. I would have to say no. Everything about nationhood and law drives to that conclusion ... or to chaos
Of course, I agree with your historical analysis. However, whatever moral claim Iran may have had against us after '53, they have squandered by their murderous behavior ever since. I do not favor Trump's war, but I do not oppose it because I think the Iranians do not deserve it. I think they have deserved it for a very long time. At this point, having the Iranians--and Russia, and North Korea, and perhaps China--fear us is probably the best we can do. And I hope they fear us deeply.
There's plenty to indicate Netanyahu leading Trump to war, while Jared and Witkoff blew off the talks (which they didn't understand) and spent their time making deals-- Jared for his fund. Lindsey Graham -- by his own account -- was very active coaching Netanyahu on how to get Trump roped in.
We didn't have to go to war with Russia, we could have supplied Ukraine -- for less than this debacle!
But Z wasn't holding any cards until Trump figured out he is CiC of the only army that knows how to run a 21st century war. Now he's come to US aid in return for Trump enriching Russia.
Also see the WSJ reporting on Venezuela and the deeper dives on Iran. He wants compliant authoritarians in both cases; in Iran someone to rule for "the next 5-10 years."
I'm still more or less a combination of it's Netanyahu's machinations and it's Norway's fault. In any event, Maybelline has not manufactured enough lipstick for this pig.
Yep. As Zelenskyy realizes, and has shown against Russia, the future of war is tens of thousands of cheap, deadly, unstoppable drones.
Here's one response to my Letter (kidding--he knows vastly more than I do about this and besides he posted this with extremely little chance of having read my bit). Well worth reading-- https://x.com/ilangoldenberg/status/2033566389978423382
The trouble with Ilan's #10 is the peace deal hasn't actually brought peace.
This is terrific. Most thorough analysis I have seen.
I've been thinking about your report that some people claim there's a Putin to blame for the war. Still haven't heard the argument, but I suppose it would be a way of answering, Cui bono?
Not just the depletion of expensive weapons and the spike in oil prices that enriches Moscow, and the possibility of oil shipments being denominated un yuan destabilizing the dollar, but also that the Syrian War's humanitarian crisis did much to energize the Moscow-aligned hard right parties in Europe, so imagine such a crisis in a country five times the size.
Yes, it's true that Trump also wants the hard right parties to succeed , but he's also Putin aligned.
This is one path in the question of why this war now. the other is the country's being run by idiots.
And either way, Israel did not condemn Russia for invading Ukraine and told Z to pound sand.