Politics

[mdwest]

Multiple sources now reporting that a substantial number of SOF forces including SEAL platoons and elements of the 75th Ranger Regiment have arrived in the Middle East (guaranteed that SF, CAG, and certain SOF-centric intel assets have already been there since well before the first bomb dropped)..

As a good friend of mine put it "The IRGC is about to find out why the US doesnt have free healthcare" lol..

Still no "invasion force" noted to be in the area or seen gearing up for such a deployment..

But now you have the worlds preiminant large scale raiding force (Ranger Battalion), along with numerous small strategic direct action elements in place..

Ive got a feeling things are going kinetic with ground troops very soon.. you dont send a Ranger Battalion into theater as a saber rattle.. they are much more than a "threat"..

Theres significantly more in theater now than is needed for just Karg island..

I imagine the plans for taking the enriched uranium (or destroying it or denying access forever), killing off another dozen or so key leaders, etc.. are very interesting..

 

[Brent in Az]

If the military destroyed most of Irans capabilities, how does Iran keep the strait of Hormuz closed?
What will happen if they give Iran the 1 finger salute and sail right thru the strait?

 

[tinktink12]

I was wondering this myself?

 

[mdwest]

If the military destroyed most of Irans capabilities, how does Iran keep the strait of Hormuz closed?
What will happen if they give Iran the 1 finger salute and sail right thru the strait?

until all of the missiles, launchers, and drones are gone... Iran remains a threat..

the strait is very narrow and is an "easy" and "fast" shot for the Iranians that wouldnt give a ton of reaction time for the US or Israel to get a defensive munition moving unless the thing carrying the defensive munition or system was in really close proximity to the target... which means each ship navigating the strait needs a warship in very close escort..

all of that said, we've now got engaging launch systems down to a science it would appear.. so.. assume they brought a ballistic missile launcher out for the purpose of hitting an oil tanker..in a matter of minutes (if not seconds depending on what is flying in orbit, where it is, etc) that launcher is going to be destroyed and the crew is going to be dead... firing a missile at this point is tantamount to suicide for the Iranian on station.. we're also knocking out drone launch sites, etc as well..

But.. drop even just a few oil tankers in the straits and you have a huge environmental mess to deal with, and it creates an even bigger navigational mess.. there are parts of the straits that are as much as 650 feet deep.. but most of the shipping lane in the straits are only about 200 feet deep..

A typical VLCC (big crude carrier) is about 200 feet tall from the bottom of its keel to the top of its superstructure.. they also range anywhere from about 100 feet to 200 feet wide... So.. if one goes down in one of the more shallow parts of the straits it creates a navigational hazard for any other ships wanting to go through..

 

[Wheels]

It looks like Rubio is signaling significant changes within NATO on the horizon.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2038680072161272066

 

[mdwest]

It looks like Rubio is signaling significant changes within NATO on the horizon.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2038680072161272066

I dont think under the current political climate that the US can leave.. it takes a 1 year notice of denunciation.. and then the senate would have to vote in favor of leaving with a 2/3 majority...

That said.. there are plenty of ways the US could "leave" without formally leaving or start to dismantle NATO without leaving.. there are lots of military alliances on paper around the world that are for all intents and purposes defunct..

The first would be to simply not fund anything remotely looking like a NATO action, activity, or need...

Stop participating in any joint NATO exercises..

Stop sharing information with NATO countries..

Stop allowing NATO countries to send their personnel to the US War College, the service academies, and other institutions that they send their officers and senior NCOs to..

Simply stop following the "rules".. not unlike most of Europe did for a couple of decades..

 

[Brent in Az]

until all of the missiles, launchers, and drones are gone... Iran remains a threat..

the strait is very narrow and is an "easy" and "fast" shot for the Iranians that wouldnt give a ton of reaction time for the US or Israel to get a defensive munition moving unless the thing carrying the defensive munition or system was in really close proximity to the target... which means each ship navigating the strait needs a warship in very close escort..

all of that said, we've now got engaging launch systems down to a science it would appear.. so.. assume they brought a ballistic missile launcher out for the purpose of hitting an oil tanker..in a matter of minutes (if not seconds depending on what is flying in orbit, where it is, etc) that launcher is going to be destroyed and the crew is going to be dead... firing a missile at this point is tantamount to suicide for the Iranian on station.. we're also knocking out drone launch sites, etc as well..

But.. drop even just a few oil tankers in the straits and you have a huge environmental mess to deal with, and it creates an even bigger navigational mess.. there are parts of the straits that are as much as 650 feet deep.. but most of the shipping lane in the straits are only about 200 feet deep..

A typical VLCC (big crude carrier) is about 200 feet tall from the bottom of its keel to the top of its superstructure.. they also range anywhere from about 100 feet to 200 feet wide... So.. if one goes down in one of the more shallow parts of the straits it creates a navigational hazard for any other ships wanting to go through..

Iran must have those Hormuz defenses well hidden and guarded if the Navy hasn't sniffed them out and destroyed them?

 

[mdwest]

Iran must have those Hormuz defenses well hidden and guarded if the Navy hasn't sniffed them out and destroyed them?

A lot of it’s underground as I understand it… they only bring them to the surface to launch, then scurry back underground…

 

[Longwalker]

Can someone please explain to me what the objective is for the Iran war? An objective so pressing that the President of the USA and the government of Israel felt compelled to launch their attack? Right now? Despite the contravention of the controls and limitations in the USA constitution? And how NATO members were asked to help after member nations of NATO were dismissed, insulted, and called Irrelevant by the USA government? And exactly how all this death and destruction of the Iranian people is helping the economy of the "fee world" oops, "Free world" ?? I'd really love a thoughtful response, not another ad hominem attack. I predict the latter.

 

[Altitude sickness]

No politician is ever going to say out loud “It’s about the oil, Petrodollar and the Reserve Currency.

The GCC agreed to not develop their own nuclear weapons programs to protect themselves against Iran, its proxies and others.

In trade they agreed to only accept U.S. dollars from any nation for their oil.

As trust in the U.S. erodes the GCC started to accept the YUAN.

Iran has been a growing threat for decades. Iran and Its proxies have killed hundreds or perhaps thousands of Americans.

Iran has been bragging about the amount of enriched fuel they have for the last two weeks.

They have intermediate and long range missiles.

If we followed the same strategy of dithering while North Korea developed nuke weapons. We would be even closer to eventual Nuclear Armageddon. The Ayatollah’s want to cause or at least be involved with ending the infidels of the world. Or the entire earthly world.

And there are about 8 other less pressing issues or reasons we are there.

If the GCC moves away from the Petrodollar and to the Yuan. Your 401, pension, cash savings in dollars all crash in value.

 

[Longwalker]

Thanks Altitude sickness for a reasonably thoughtful reply. I don't have a 401, but Canadian investments aren't immune to this conflict. Refreshing to have someone clearly state it's all about the money, not some kind of touchy-feely global benefit.

 

[Brent in Az]

I'm no military, or oil strategist, but it seems like pretty bad timing to me.
The whole world is feeling the pain at the pump, and even the Philippines was in emergency fuel supplies, even though a tanker just brought oil that will get them thru until June.
All of a sudden the Trump admin lifts oil sanctions on Russia?
I don't know, but this Iran thing has the smell of something that wasn't thought thru very well.
The Saudi east-west pipeline is pumping at full capacity. 7 million barrels a day.

 

[Longwalker]

So, in the spirit of genuine curiosity, why would Trump almost simultaneously insult and belittle the NATO allies of the USA, and then next day call on us to help with his Iran conflict? I am genuinely puzzled by the seeming lack of logic. Or is the lack of response by NATO exactly what he wants? Not sure what Trump's end game is, but it does not seem to be about mutual interests or cooperation or democratic values, and I can't even put this conflict in the greedy self interest category. It seems genuinely self destructive - Help please?

 

[Tbitty]

Can someone please explain to me what the objective is for the Iran war? An objective so pressing that the President of the USA and the government of Israel felt compelled to launch their attack? Right now? Despite the contravention of the controls and limitations in the USA constitution? And how NATO members were asked to help after member nations of NATO were dismissed, insulted, and called Irrelevant by the USA government? And exactly how all this death and destruction of the Iranian people is helping the economy of the "fee world" oops, "Free world" ?? I'd really love a thoughtful response, not another ad hominem attack. I predict the latter.

It is comical to me that you phrased your entire post the way you did, but then ask for a "thoughtful response, not another ad hominem attack." But I'm your Huckleberry.

Objective? most notably, it is to set back Iran's threat capacity. What I mean by that is to reduce/destroy their nuclear capabilities, incapacitate most of their non-nuclear strike capabilities, both in munitions and launch sites/infrastructure. Additionally give the people of Iran an opportunity to be freed from their oppressive regime "government."

Why now? "Now" is a relative term. Most view this as overdue. The longer you wait, the harder it is to completely eliminate the threat.

Despite the contravention of the controls and limitations in the USA constitution? ... what? Very simply, this question tells me you have no idea what you are talking about. Absolutely nothing about this attack is beyond the well established allowance of what Commander in Chief is able to do. In my lifetime, everyone from Bush Sr. to Obama used the same powers for one attack or another.

NATO has not been directly asked to help. It has been implied that if they want a seat at the table of decisions on how to continue or what the end game is, they should participate in the actions. Otherwise, stay out and we dont give a shit what you want, we will settle this on our terms.

Follow up to that point, NATO basically is irrelevant to the US. Let's remember when and why NATO was founded: the capability and positioning of the world in 1949 is vastly different than the world we live in today. Obviously, Allies are good and desirable to have. But if we are to take any one nation in NATO and say they would be most capable to handle their own defense without the others, who do you think that would be? Im not advocating for NATO to be disbanded, just noting it's relative pro/con evaluation for the US, vs pro/con of every other member.

Effect on the economy: I will answer your question with a question. Which is worse: oil and gas prices rising for a while, maybe some other goods costs in parallel, OR letting a terrorist regime have free reign at mass genocide on their own people and terrorize countries all around the Middle East with growing capabilities and threats of nuclear development? If they are willing and able to shut down the Strait of Hormuz now, why would anyone be against diminishing that threat?

The ridiculousness of all those who are acting like this is some outrage is their utter lack of comprehension. The Iranian people are celebrating this action, and jackasses like AOC and her ilk are trying to say how horrible it is. No one can honestly say with a straight face that a powerful and/or nuclear capable Iran is better than what we have now as I type this.

 

[Tbitty]

*Addendum to add that I'm just a simpleton from po-dunk nowhere Kansas. The above are my thoughts and observations, but there are a number of well qualified and/or much smarter than me people on this forum who can provide a better answer or advise on where I may be incorrect in my assessment.

 

[Brent in Az]

Our commie shitbag of an Arizona governor has vetoed Charlie Kirk memorial license plates, and a section of Highway to be named after Kirk.

 

[jruby]

I carry a significantly different handgun in the field versus around town. In the field I like a ruger blackhawk in 44mag or 45 Colt. Both are loaded hot. Kind of hard to conceal them.

 

[fourfive8]

*Addendum to add that I'm just a simpleton from po-dunk nowhere Kansas. The above are my thoughts and observations, but there are a number of well qualified and/or much smarter than me people on this forum who can provide a better answer or advise on where I may be incorrect in my assessment.

Your assessment was well done. No need to qualify or second guess.

 

[KJE81]

Can someone please explain to me what the objective is for the Iran war? An objective so pressing that the President of the USA and the government of Israel felt compelled to launch their attack? Right now? Despite the contravention of the controls and limitations in the USA constitution? And how NATO members were asked to help after member nations of NATO were dismissed, insulted, and called Irrelevant by the USA government? And exactly how all this death and destruction of the Iranian people is helping the economy of the "fee world" oops, "Free world" ?? I'd really love a thoughtful response, not another ad hominem attack. I predict the latter.

I have read a few articles similar to this one that was the one I could find now (link below) suggesting that Israel through the years has tried to get several previous US presidents, both democrat and republican, to join in an attack on Iran and that it always got shut down by the National Security Council as to dangerous...and that this is simply a matter of Trump being the first president to "basically fall for the israaeli attempts at lobbying for the US to join in an war against Iran", perhaps because he more or less dismantled the National Security Council they were not able to give him enough reasons to not do it or he simply did not asked anyone before deciding.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/ripple/2026/03/20/no-president-trump-authorized-war-iran/

The calling on Nato members to join and help apparently are, again according to Media, because Trump realized that he bit of more then he could chew...and the insulting of Nato members before realizing that he might in fact have a need for them is simply Trumps usual behavior of no long term strategy...after all he says that the war in Iran will end when he feels it in his bones...a "normal" president be it a republican or democrat would probably have taken the time to build a coalition before striking just like both the Bush-presidents did before their wars in the middle east.

 

[Altitude sickness]

I think when building pros and cons columns for finally attacking Iran.

On the Pros side is keeping zealots that want to end the world from Nuke weapons

Destroying missile and drone manufacturing capabilities

Satisfy the GCC that the U.S. is still a reliable partner and will protect them as we agreed to do, and Gulf nations continue to primarily accept the U.S. Dollars as payment for oil sales to any nation.

So Iran needed to be dealt with. Every administration has said so. But there is a huge side benefit of keeping Saudi Arabia and the GCC satisfied that we will protect them. And for them to stay with the Petrodollar as the primary means of paying for their oil.

There has been a softening of the Petrodollar relationship and other currencies and methods of payments have been creeping in.

This video is cheaply done with AI but it’s the shortest one I could find that explains the relationship between conflicts and the Petrodollar.

There’s always a primary cause of the war or conflict, but underneath is usually the side benefit of keeping the petrodollar as the number one payment method and the reserve currency Status Quo

Some tend to view that as a negative thing, but wars usually fought for multiple complications.