Comment by themafia

16 hours ago

They underestimated Iran's unique mix of capabilities and strategy. It's not that Iran is undefeatable but it seems that the price is going to be far too high both globally and especially regionally for the tiny coalition of Israel and the US to succeed in the long term.

I think it says something that the US paid such a high price to try to produce a "viral military campaign" video of a Uranium heist. Straight out of the cold war. The palatable options must be steadily dwindling.

> tiny coalition of Israel and the US

This coalition is "tiny" insofar NATO & the GCC (well, apart from Bahrain and the UAE) refused to join the attacks, despite Iran's transgressions. The US could wage this war for many years all alone, and force the GCC to watch as the region burned. I guess, Trump's administration isn't willing to go as far as the current Israeli leadership may have hoped or wanted. That said, the war could very well still flare up, if the events from past 2 years following "talks" are any indicator.

  • why would NATO join the attacks? NATO is a defensive agreement, not a "kick a hornets nest and drag your former friends into it" agreement

    • > why would NATO join the attacks

      I don't disagree, but the expectation from the US Admin was some of their NATO allies would join (like they did in Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq). Especially since the Oil spike hurts Europe (where the NATO nations are) the most.

      > NATO is a defensive agreement

      Turkey was attacked by Iran, though, it is unclear if Turkey would have invoked Art5 even if Iran had kept escalating.

  • Building coalitions is slow, deliberative work. Not a skills match for this administration, whatever your assessment of their overall aptitude is.