And in the real world I see, the Iranian regime is able to absorb a tremendous amount of pain and stay in power.
During their war with Iraq they cleared mine fields with big groups of teenagers.
I think it’s likely they would withstand whatever the US bombing does, and in return damage tons of gulf oil and gas infrastructure, as well as ships already in the gulf.
> And in the real world I see, the Iranian regime is able to absorb a tremendous amount of pain and stay in power.
Tragic for the Iranian people, but also it has only been 5 weeks. We’ve destroyed whatever we can find and their regime is routinely blown up once we find them. Exercising control and staying in power amounts to them hanging 19 year old kids. But sure they’re “in power”.
The US can do damage too. As Trump threatened we could quite literally ensure that the country has no functioning infrastructure forever. No power. Nothing. Meanwhile Iran will eventually run out of missiles, unless of course Russia helps them out. Not that anyone seems to remember Iran helping Russia for some reason when they gloat about how they think the Iranians have the upper hand. Hell the US just forced them to open the straight for 2 weeks and sit down at the table.
The US 'forced' them to do this by agreeing in principal that Iran could charge that toll (along with 9 other points).
The question isn't whether the US can destroy Iran, it obviously could(as evil as that would be). The question is does the US want to pay the price of continuing the war more than the price of agreeing to those points, and would Iran pay the price required to fight back if it does not get the US to capitulate on those points.
I can tell you what will happen to any boat that doesn't pay the extortion (toll) and enters the straight. So realistically it doesn't matter if it's in breach of maritime norms, who's going to restart attacks on Iran to enforce those norms if the US capitulated on it?
Technically this war might be "won" by carrying out this threat--just as it could be "won" by using nuclear weapons--but the long-term strategic damage done to the winner by using those means would perhaps spawn a new phrase with more a sweeping strategic connotation than "Pyrrhic". "Trumpian" springs to mind.
Presumably, the ships that want to pass through the strait will have to care. As you said, there's no room for compromise.
> shows they don’t live in the real world.
i don't think iran is the country living in a world of delusion—to the contrary, they seem to understand how to leverage their position better than israel, the US, and the gulf states combined.
I don’t think they do because they’re not doing anything that wasn’t already prepared for. Remember while prices rise means MAGA is mad about their Ford truck gas prices… big deal… countries in Asia are switching to 4-days in the office and Italian cities are restricting jet fuel. The leverage they have is, frankly, to the extent they can make the world mad against America but most adults in the room know you can’t have these guys holding 20% of the world’s oil hostage. Even China seems to have been pressuring Iran.
> but most adults in the room know you can’t have these guys holding 20% of the world’s oil hostage.
...where, presumably, your understanding of "adult" is whether or not they align with the US? C'mon; be serious. We've been acting like spoiled toddlers throwing a tantrum for the last fifty years because we can't twist iran into kissing our ass.
It was working just fine, until Bibi decided he wanted to be remembered as "the guy who completed Israel" so he needed a distraction to try and finish Hezbollah. It will work just fine once Trump is cut to size and the adults get back in the room.
And in the real world I see, the Iranian regime is able to absorb a tremendous amount of pain and stay in power.
During their war with Iraq they cleared mine fields with big groups of teenagers.
I think it’s likely they would withstand whatever the US bombing does, and in return damage tons of gulf oil and gas infrastructure, as well as ships already in the gulf.
They have the advantage here
> And in the real world I see, the Iranian regime is able to absorb a tremendous amount of pain and stay in power.
Tragic for the Iranian people, but also it has only been 5 weeks. We’ve destroyed whatever we can find and their regime is routinely blown up once we find them. Exercising control and staying in power amounts to them hanging 19 year old kids. But sure they’re “in power”.
The US can do damage too. As Trump threatened we could quite literally ensure that the country has no functioning infrastructure forever. No power. Nothing. Meanwhile Iran will eventually run out of missiles, unless of course Russia helps them out. Not that anyone seems to remember Iran helping Russia for some reason when they gloat about how they think the Iranians have the upper hand. Hell the US just forced them to open the straight for 2 weeks and sit down at the table.
The US 'forced' them to do this by agreeing in principal that Iran could charge that toll (along with 9 other points).
The question isn't whether the US can destroy Iran, it obviously could(as evil as that would be). The question is does the US want to pay the price of continuing the war more than the price of agreeing to those points, and would Iran pay the price required to fight back if it does not get the US to capitulate on those points.
I can tell you what will happen to any boat that doesn't pay the extortion (toll) and enters the straight. So realistically it doesn't matter if it's in breach of maritime norms, who's going to restart attacks on Iran to enforce those norms if the US capitulated on it?
4 replies →
> Exercising control and staying in power amounts to them hanging 19 year old kids.
If you're going to play the utilitarian card, you need to actually compare the numbers.
How many kids does Iran government execute every year?
How many kids have died in that one single school that was hit by US? How many more of that will happen if the war continues?
Technically this war might be "won" by carrying out this threat--just as it could be "won" by using nuclear weapons--but the long-term strategic damage done to the winner by using those means would perhaps spawn a new phrase with more a sweeping strategic connotation than "Pyrrhic". "Trumpian" springs to mind.
You're absolutely right that the ratification of laws isn't of consequence here and that we live in the real world.
And in this real world Iran has successfully exerted their will over the waterway and is clearly in control of it.
That's real and that's not going away so countries will continue to pay them because they have no choice.
Iran is holding all the cards here.
How many "cards" will they be holding with no functioning infrastructure to speak of?
"They" care about as much about the sufferings of their own people that Trump cares about "his people". Very, very little.
If those cards can inflict damage to their enemies, that's what matter.
Presumably, the ships that want to pass through the strait will have to care. As you said, there's no room for compromise.
> shows they don’t live in the real world.
i don't think iran is the country living in a world of delusion—to the contrary, they seem to understand how to leverage their position better than israel, the US, and the gulf states combined.
I don’t think they do because they’re not doing anything that wasn’t already prepared for. Remember while prices rise means MAGA is mad about their Ford truck gas prices… big deal… countries in Asia are switching to 4-days in the office and Italian cities are restricting jet fuel. The leverage they have is, frankly, to the extent they can make the world mad against America but most adults in the room know you can’t have these guys holding 20% of the world’s oil hostage. Even China seems to have been pressuring Iran.
> but most adults in the room know you can’t have these guys holding 20% of the world’s oil hostage.
...where, presumably, your understanding of "adult" is whether or not they align with the US? C'mon; be serious. We've been acting like spoiled toddlers throwing a tantrum for the last fifty years because we can't twist iran into kissing our ass.
1 reply →
It was working just fine, until Bibi decided he wanted to be remembered as "the guy who completed Israel" so he needed a distraction to try and finish Hezbollah. It will work just fine once Trump is cut to size and the adults get back in the room.
this
think there will be some coalition of some sorts
just mentioning "toll" is enough to "be made an example"