[Chance]

QuickTidal, on 23 June 2025 - 02:09 PM, said:

I didn't realize the US had radicalized you this much Cause, but you do you. Just to be clear...

Just remember that to the other side you sound just as radicalized in the other direction.

Not saying either US or Israel is doing the right thing especially with Israel competing pretty hard in the atrocity leagues recently, war pretty much never is the right thing but it isn't like their motivations are hard to read and Iran has been asking for it since the 80's. We are speaking about a nation whose leaders publicly and frequently evangelically preaches the destruction of the west and Israel. Doesn't matter if they didn't mean it eventually people will take you seriously and when you seem to be pursuing the means to accomplish that goals people can't really hazard the tiny chance that you mean what you say. If you continue to poke the bear after 45 or so years eventually it will bite your head off.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Cause, on 23 June 2025 - 01:34 PM, said:

Attempting to close it would also piss off the rest of the Gulf states who regardless of what they may say publicly are privately pleased to see Iran taken down a peg and are not supporting Iran with their actions, often the opposite.

Quote

Eurasia Group senior analyst Gregory Brew told Axios [...] "a move to close Hormuz would be an effective declaration of war against the Gulf states and the U.S."

https://www.axios.co...trait-of-hormuz

The US military does have 2.86 million troops... not sure if it could spare a million for an occupation. However...

A lot of people will be put out of work by AI.

Invading Iran would give them something to do.

MAGA would prefer military service over UBI.

And much of it might be doable remotely too.

(I know... it rhymes, and so it must be true.

See, QT, that is an example

Of a position that would be radical...

Putting "white-collar professionals" to work in the fields of war...)

[Mentalist]

market traders DGAF that US barely needs any Gulf Oil. If there's a plausible reason to make oil prices go up, they'll do it.

trump is already accusing those who try to make prices go up as "doing what the enemy wants" lol.


rubio is asking China to interfere, b/c he knows China has the most to lose if the straits are shut down.

Reminder that the last time the West tried to do a bombing-based regime change in MENA was during the Lybian civil war. That was already ongoing.

atm, Israel and the US are just pissing off the Iranian population, making them more radical. Which means eventually trump will sign off on boots on the ground, b/c he refuses to acknowledge he can be wrong.

[QuickTidal]

Chance, on 23 June 2025 - 02:29 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 23 June 2025 - 02:09 PM, said:

I didn't realize the US had radicalized you this much Cause, but you do you. Just to be clear...

Just remember that to the other side you sound just as radicalized in the other direction.

Not saying either US or Israel is doing the right thing especially with Israel competing pretty hard in the atrocity leagues recently, war pretty much never is the right thing but it isn't like their motivations are hard to read and Iran has been asking for it since the 80's. We are speaking about a nation whose leaders publicly and frequently evangelically preaches the destruction of the west and Israel. Doesn't matter if they didn't mean it eventually people will take you seriously and when you seem to be pursuing the means to accomplish that goals people can't really hazard the tiny chance that you mean what you say. If you continue to poke the bear after 45 or so years eventually it will bite your head off.

Saying this without the caveat that the current regime only exists in Iran BECAUSE of the US interference/regime change back in the day is interesting.

Also, I'm not radicalized, I said out loud that all three actors in this are terrible not a few posts back and none of them are good in any way. Cause literally said "I know it's probably not good, but I still want my side to win even though they are in the wrong" is pretty radical to me for someone who was not originally American. I would not say that. If my Cdn govt did something like this, I would be well against it.

Chance, on 23 June 2025 - 02:29 PM, said:

We are speaking about a nation whose leaders publicly and frequently evangelically preaches the destruction of the west and Israel

Please find me them talking about the West. I cannot. I know they talk about Israel like that, and if Israel didn't have a genocidal madman in charge I would be more amenable, but the man has ostensibly been in charge for 20 years now...

Aside from that, if "talk" was all if took to go to thermonuclear war, we'd all be in much deeper shit.

And no one is talking about the Regime in Iran being good...I certainly wasn't. But somehow also disparaging two of the three bad actors along with the 3rd makes me radical? I mean okay...

Chance, on 23 June 2025 - 02:29 PM, said:

but it isn't like their motivations are hard to read and Iran has been asking for it since the 80's

The same Iran who joined the NRC and was fully at the table during Obama's reign...? Like we can argue about their leadership being awful (I have Iranian friends who hate them and live here as a result of them), but they were at least at the table until Trump pulled out...because gods forbid he leave something in place that Obama did right?

Chance, on 23 June 2025 - 02:29 PM, said:

Doesn't matter if they didn't mean it eventually people will take you seriously and when you seem to be pursuing the means to accomplish that goals people can't really hazard the tiny chance that you mean what you say. If you continue to poke the bear after 45 or so years eventually it will bite your head off.

You know what I like best about this sentence? It could be talking about Israel as much as Iran. So....there's that.

And quite frankly, until Israel allows inspections and is truthful about its own arsenal (and REMOVES the Samson Option from it's books)...I'm not willing to be any more conciliatory about them having such weapons...not especially with someone as insane as Netanyahu in charge.

Mentalist, on 23 June 2025 - 02:49 PM, said:

market traders DGAF that US barely needs any Gulf Oil. If there's a plausible reason to make oil prices go up, they'll do it.

trump is already accusing those who try to make prices go up as "doing what the enemy wants" lol.


rubio is asking China to interfere, b/c he knows China has the most to lose if the straits are shut down.

Reminder that the last time the West tried to do a bombing-based regime change in MENA was during the Lybian civil war. That was already ongoing.

atm, Israel and the US are just pissing off the Iranian population, making them more radical. Which means eventually trump will sign off on boots on the ground, b/c he refuses to acknowledge he can be wrong.

This.

[HoosierDaddy]

QuickTidal, on 23 June 2025 - 02:09 PM, said:

Cause, on 23 June 2025 - 01:34 PM, said:

The USA gets very little of its oil through the straight of Hormuz, practically none in the grand total of its usage (< 5%).

It's 7% and though you want to downplay that, it's not nothing.

Cause, on 23 June 2025 - 01:34 PM, said:

Blocking the straight only works as a tactic in increasing the price of oil by altering the supply.

Any disruption in supply causes everyone in the oil sector to take a piece of the pie. EVERYTHING goes up. Thinking that gas won't eventually skyrocket as a result of this going on is silly. There's historical evidence it does eventually start affected things a lot.

And if it wasn't doing something, then Rubio would not be asking China to ask Iran not to close it...I assure you the Trump admin is not asking for them not to close it for the benefit of OTHER countries...That's not even a little bit their style.

Cause, on 23 June 2025 - 01:34 PM, said:

Trump is a walking, talking disaster as Potus. Israel is not very popular right now. Still as I would not willingly subject myself to live under either the Iranian or Chinese government I am going to hope that America, the country where I do live, comes out on top.

I didn't realize the US had radicalized you this much Cause, but you do you. Just to be clear...You hope the country where you lives comes out on top of a war THEY started in a foreign sovereign country under spurious reasons at the behest of a totally different foreign govt?

Complex situations often require complex solutions, and our current government is NOT good at that.

I'd prefer results in this order: (A): no bombing (past this point), ( No escalation, © no war, (D) No dead civilians, (E) no dead American civilians (F) no dead Iranian civilians.


But if I had to choose, of course I choose people who I might know and love over people I don't. I don't think that's radicalization. That's humanity in a nutshell, and unfortunately what always gets us into these messes to begin with.

[QuickTidal]

HoosierDaddy, on 23 June 2025 - 03:54 PM, said:

Complex situations often require complex solutions, and our current government is NOT good at that.

I'd prefer results in this order: (A): no bombing (past this point), ( No escalation, © no war, (D) No dead civilians, (E) no dead American civilians (F) no dead Iranian civilians.


But if I had to choose, of course I choose people who I might know and love over people I don't. I don't think that's radicalization. That's humanity in a nutshell, and unfortunately what always gets us into these messes to begin with.

Right, I agree with all that. I'm not trying to be on Iran's side here either.

But we've also invented a worst case scenario on assumptions and then acted on that and made statements in support of that scenario....meanwhile I doubt Iranians are happy that their country was attacked over scenarios. Nor the least of which is the IAEA reporting that the safety of Iran's nuclear program is now at risk, and civilians may have to deal with that fallout. The IAEA has consistently underlined, as stated in its General Conference resolution, that armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place, and could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked. The US did it anyways.

Can we not agree with what I said upthread that ALL THREE actors are bad in this?

Remember, ALL of this happened because the USA didn't like the idea that a democratically elected leader in Iran wanted to Nationalize their oil in the 1950's. ALL of it.

Adding in: Perhaps my radicalization comment was over the line. I apologize Cause, but it came out of nowhere and sounded exceptionally "Rah Rah freedom" to me, so perhaps I misread it. I'll delete it.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 23 June 2025 - 04:20 PM

[QuickTidal]

Also, adding fuel to the fire...Russia has said that other countries could supply Iran with Nukes...

If Russia is going to be bogged down in Ukraine, it's entirely in their interest to see the US get similarly involved in a protracted war in the Middle East. Force your adversary to spend money, tie up their military forces, builds internal dissent. Putin senses an opportunity here and China is happy to look like the stable force on the global scene. This is what happens when the US goes alone in taking military action without any support from allies or from NATO or the UN. This is exactly what the US did the Russia with Afghanistan. The US had been bogged down in Vietnam, so the CIA funded the Mujahideen to bog down the Soviet Union...and Oil prices will come to Putin's financial rescue if the Iranians DO close the Strait.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

QuickTidal, on 23 June 2025 - 04:24 PM, said:

Also, adding fuel to the fire...Russia has said that other countries could supply Iran with Nukes...

If Russia is going to be bogged down in Ukraine, it's entirely in their interest to see the US get similarly involved in a protracted war in the Middle East. Force your adversary to spend money, tie up their military forces, builds internal dissent. Putin senses an opportunity here and China is happy to look like the stable force on the global scene. This is what happens when the US goes alone in taking military action without any support from allies or from NATO or the UN. This is exactly what the US did the Russia with Afghanistan. The US had been bogged down in Vietnam, so the CIA funded the Mujahideen to bog down the Soviet Union...and Oil prices will come to Putin's financial rescue if the Iranians DO close the Strait.

Would have thought that cutting off Russia's supply of Iranian drones would be a major negative for Putin, but apparently not:

Quote

Intelligence: Russia does not rely on Iran anymore, prepares to unleash "swarms of death" on Ukraine

[...] it has established a closed-loop production cycle for drones on Russian territory.

https://euromaidanpr...ath-on-ukraine/

Wonder how boots on the ground would do vs drones in the mountains. (Mountain caves? Tunnels? Drone swarms hiding behind/inside mountains? Shia don't believe in suicide bombings, but kamikaze drones don't count... though producing enough of them could get expensive, even under extreme austerity.)

[worry]

Azath Vitr (D, on 23 June 2025 - 04:35 PM, said:

"swarms of death"

I don't mean to speak out of turn, but has anyone considered forming a type of society where psychopaths don't inevitably rise to the top?

[Mentalist]

QuickTidal, on 23 June 2025 - 04:24 PM, said:

Also, adding fuel to the fire...Russia has said that other countries could supply Iran with Nukes...

If Russia is going to be bogged down in Ukraine, it's entirely in their interest to see the US get similarly involved in a protracted war in the Middle East. Force your adversary to spend money, tie up their military forces, builds internal dissent. Putin senses an opportunity here and China is happy to look like the stable force on the global scene. This is what happens when the US goes alone in taking military action without any support from allies or from NATO or the UN. This is exactly what the US did the Russia with Afghanistan. The US had been bogged down in Vietnam, so the CIA funded the Mujahideen to bog down the Soviet Union...and Oil prices will come to Putin's financial rescue if the Iranians DO close the Strait.

Tbf, it's mostly Medvedev saying that. And he threatens to unleash nuclear Armageddon on the Western capitals once a binge.

Not that I'd put it past putler to smuggle something across the Caspian Sea. But the Pakistani military could do it just as easily across their border.
The problem is, doing so would make the situation completely unpredictable. If this was to happen out of the blue, we could maybe imagine the West trying a DPRK-style blocade and isolation of "another rogue nuclear state" w/o trying to actively engage it. But since we're already in the middle of a war, there's an equally good chace that things would escalate (considering the impulsive idiots in charge of most places) as there is that everyone would slam the brakes.

putler won't risk such unpredictability unless he feels he's in danger of losing badly. RN it would be an excessive risk for him.

[Tiste Simeon]

worry, on 23 June 2025 - 04:49 PM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 23 June 2025 - 04:35 PM, said:

"swarms of death"

I don't mean to speak out of turn, but has anyone considered forming a type of society where psychopaths don't inevitably rise to the top?

How very un-patriotic of you!

[Werthead]

Iranian missile attack on the American Al Udeid Airbase in Dohar, Qatar. Six ballistic missiles were shot down by Patriot batteries. Unconfirmed report of a missile strike on the US Al-Asad Airbase in Iraq.

The US administration is currently in the Situation Room in Washington, DC. One claim is that Al Udeid was currently unoccupied and the Iranians both deliberately targeted an empty base and gave warning beforehand. The situation in Iraq is murkier, but Iranian channels confirming they launched an operation against both Qatar and Iraq.

This post has been edited by Werthead: 23 June 2025 - 05:01 PM

[Cause]

I read that they claim to have shot ten missiles. One missile for every bunker buster dropped by the USA. Interestingly Qatar claims to have shot them down, which if that is distinct from the US bases defended shooting them down would be interesting.

It seems to me a very calculated face saving attack. They can say they responded but they clearly didn’t expect to accomplish anything significant.

[QuickTidal]

Werthead, on 23 June 2025 - 05:00 PM, said:

One claim is that Al Udeid was currently unoccupied and the Iranians both deliberately targeted an empty base and gave warning beforehand.

My brother in law, who is active military in Canada, says this is often the case (I was with him on the weekend). They care about bombing the base more than they do about killing any soldiers for the most part. He said that basically saying "Hey, we are going to strike your base, you got about 3 hours to GTFO of dodge before we do" is standard.

[Macros]

Dead bodies are martyrs

Fastest way to drive early recruitment.


All this is doing it putting oil money in Putins pockets

[Briar King]

Ceasefire in effect in 6 hrs. We ll see.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Briar King, on 23 June 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

Ceasefire in effect in 6 hrs. We ll see.

Quote

In expletive-laced remarks to reporters, Mr. Trump said he was "not happy." He sharply criticized Israel for firing on Iran "right after we made the deal" and said that the two adversaries didn't know what they were doing.

https://www.nytimes....?smid=url-share

[...] Trump suggested that both had continued fighting and warned Israel that further attacks would be a "major violation."

https://www.nytimes....?smid=url-share

[Briar King]

Seems to be holding for now. I know right before I took my ambien at 3am volley out of Iran where still coming in after going in effect. I think Israel was vowing to hit hard back around 5am but I was lit and watching drones flying so not paying attention to my phone to much at my fire. Woke up at 3pm I guess to it holding but not knowing if the jets ever hit back.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Quote

[Trump:] "It was my great honor to Destroy All Nuclear facilities & capability, and then, STOP THE WAR!"

The classified report, compiled by the Defense Intelligence Agency, suggested otherwise. It said the American bombing of Iran's nuclear sites had sealed off the entrances to two of the facilities but did not collapse their underground buildings, according to officials familiar with the findings. The early findings concluded that the strikes set back Iran's nuclear program by only a few months, the officials said.

Live Updates: Israel and Iran Claim Victory as Cease-Fire Takes Hold - The New York Times

Quote

after striking Iran and persuading the United States to hit its prized nuclear sites, Mr. Netanyahu is in a much more comfortable position.

Amid widespread enthusiasm in Israel for his actions against Tehran, Mr. Netanyahu's polling numbers are higher than at almost any point since the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023. If his government collapsed tomorrow, Mr. Netanyahu would now stand a reasonable chance of re-election. And that has spurred hope in Israel that Mr. Netanyahu could now override his coalition's concerns and show greater flexibility over Gaza.

"He's at the strongest he's been for years," [...]

[...] in reality, the scale of the damage to the nuclear program has yet to be determined, amid uncertainty about the whereabouts of Iran's stocks of enriched uranium.

In Israel, those details now seem to matter less than the optics of the situation. Even the prime minister's fiercest critics have praised his boldness and ingenuity in persuading President Trump to join the attack. Reports in the Israeli news media speculated that Mr. Netanyahu might soon end the war in Gaza, call a snap election and campaign on the strength of his victory over Iran.

How Netanyahu's Move Against Iran Gives Him Room to Maneuver on Gaza - The New York Times

[Maark Abbott]

Orange Goblin: There is a bigly ceasefire
Israel and Iran: What ceasefire
Orange Goblin: *incoherent soccer mom social media post*