We have had satellites overhead, reapers, X35, and probably things I don't know the name of or that even exist. Why don't we use the knowledge of where they've moved their weapons to and any remaining production capacity to give them a little love tap and see if it changes their stance on nuclear/straight/proxies? We are already locked and loaded as I've heard a number of times. Just a little friendly "hello" from the armed forces.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
We have had satellites overhead, reapers, X35, and probably things I don't know the name of or that even exist. Why don't we use the knowledge of where they've moved their weapons to and any remaining production capacity to give them a little love tap and see if it changes their stance on nuclear/straight/proxies? We are already locked and loaded as I've heard a number of times. Just a little friendly "hello" from the armed forces.

Perhaps we don't have to give them a love tap, but instead repeat history.

January 14th, we cleared the Iranian air space, active GPS jammed the area, and pizza orders to pizza joints near the Pentagon went through the roof. I believed an attack on Iran was imminent, but instead it was a feint to get the Iranians to move air defenses, troops, and key people while the US and Israel took notes. 6 weeks later, the current skirmish kicked off and we decimated them in the early hours partly due to the intelligence from the feint.

A week ago, air traffic was diverted from Iran, active GPS jamming took place, and there was a 300% spike in pizza orders to pizza joints near the Pentagon. I think the US and Israel just remapped/reconfirmed Iran's defenses and people locations.

Yes, the Pizza Index. Though a noticeable spike in pie orders mostly only alert the domestic media of possible big operations. Doubtful the Iranians would have insights into that little phenomenon. Unless those left wing activist-journalist pass that along to our enemy. Which I guess wouldn't be too far fetched.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
We have had satellites overhead,....
Why don't we use the knowledge of where they've moved their weapons to and any remaining production capacity...Just a little friendly "hello" from the armed forces.

Consider the size of Iran is about equal to the eastern part of the US to the Mississippi river. (not counting Florida or Maine).

That is a great deal of area to know where "everything is", and all the subterranean (under mountains) facilities, and the many "decoy" sites throughout the area.

It is not an easy thing, no matter what our capabilities are for intel gathering.

And then understanding the mindset of these shithouse rats.

Their worldview is so far from most American's understanding as to what "winning and losing" mean.

It really comes down to them realizing they are facing their ultimate and complete demise.

But we have a very slim percentage of Americans that realize the only way to succeed with a cancer, is to eradicate it.

We are dealing with a "cancerous" mindset.
While need to contain, control, and ultimately eliminate it. The majority only have the balls to seek and stop at the first step, and let the other two be, while "wishing and blowing out candles".

Such things need be left to children and Romper Room...

Either there is an existential threat that needs to be dealt with harshly and without concern of a bad Yelp review, or we are full of shit and need to stop playing silly games.

I know what I believe.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
We have had satellites overhead,....
Why don't we use the knowledge of where they've moved their weapons to and any remaining production capacity...Just a little friendly "hello" from the armed forces.

Consider the size of Iran is about equal to the eastern part of the US to the Mississippi river. (not counting Florida or Maine).

That is a great deal of area to know where "everything is", and all the subterranean (under mountains) facilities, and the many "decoy" sites throughout the area.

It is not an easy thing, no matter what our capabilities are for intel gathering.

And then understanding the mindset of these shithouse rats.

Their worldview is so far from most American's understanding as to what "winning and losing" mean.

It really comes down to them realizing they are facing their ultimate and complete demise.

But we have a very slim percentage of Americans that realize the only way to succeed with a cancer, is to eradicate it.

We are dealing with a "cancerous" mindset.
While need to contain, control, and ultimately eliminate it. The majority only have the balls to seek and stop at the first step, and let the other two be, while "wishing and blowing out candles".

Such things need be left to children and Romper Room...

Either there is an existential threat that needs to be dealt with harshly and without concern of a bad Yelp review, or we are full of shit and need to stop playing silly games.

I know what I believe.

I hope you never get tired of being a voice of reason here and I say that without a hint of smugness or irony. Thanks

Iran Poised To Finalize Hormuz Strait Management Plan, Brushing Aside Trump's Threats

Iran's state Tasnim is saying the US naval blockade remains in effect, despite days of headlines of a 'finalized' US-Iran deal, which were clearly premature - though both sides still signal they are close to agreeing on a Memorandum of Understanding. But this is toward simply extending the ceasefire by 60-days in order to get back to the table, in hopes of finally ending the war based on a final deal.

Despite President Trump's latest warning which declared strict conditions on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran appears to be completely brushing his words aside, and is moving closer to formalizing its authority over vital energy shipping waterway.
via Palestine Chronicle

State-run Nour News is reporting that a bill outlining Tehran's role in managing passage through the strategic waterway has been finalized and is expected to be brought to a vote soon.

According to Bloomberg, Iranian lawmaker Alireza Salimi did not provide a specific timeline for the vote but said the legislation is on track to become law. Salimi said that "only Iran and Oman can decide on Strait of Hormuz management" - adding that "the Omani side has given preliminary approval" to Tehran's plan.

He further emphasized the strategic importance of Hormuz, declaring that "the Strait of Hormuz is more important and more valuable to the Islamic Republic of Iran than dozens of nuclear bombs."

Previous comments by Salimi indicate the bill would cover shipping security, the collection of navigation and environmental pollution fees, as well as the creation of a regional development and progress fund - all of which critics have dismissed as but Tehran's ruse to collect what is in effect a "toll".

The legislation is expected to undergo review by Iran's Guardian Council, which is responsible for vetting and approving all laws before they take effect.

President Trump has sternly warned against the Islamic Republic and Oman teaming up to assert control over the strait. As a reminder, during a Wednesday televised cabinet meeting he said as follows:

“No, the strait’s got to be open to everybody; it’s international waters,” the president told reporters. “We’ll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation that we have.”

“They would like to control it; nobody’s going to control it. It’s international waters,” he continued. “And Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we’ll have to blow ’em up. They understand that. They’ll be fine.”

In the wake of this, Iran has been expressing solidarity with Oman. As reported in The Hill:

Iran reupped its backing for Oman on Thursday, after President Trump warned the latter nation to “behave” or face consequences.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said in a statement that Iran would support the Gulf nation, which is separated from Iran by the Strait of Hormuz, against U.S. threats, Reuters reported. He also criticized recent strikes in Bandar Abbas, a southern port city.

The irony in all of this is that Oman has long been an American ally in the region, though is also often called the "Switzerland of the Middle East" for its diplomatic and mediatory role in regional disputes.

Despite generally positive relations with Washington going back years and even decades, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent chastized Oman, stating on X Thursday: "The United States Government will not tolerate any effort to impose a tolling system in the Strait of Hormuz."

"Oman, in particular, should know that the U.S. Treasury will aggressively target any actors involved - directly or indirectly - in facilitating tolls for the Strait and any willing partners will be penalized," Bessent stated. "All nations should reject outright any efforts by Iran to disrupt the free flow of commerce. Tehran’s days of terrorizing the region and the world are over."

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...aside-trumps-threats

They're a death cult. I listened to an expert (real expert not a faker) today explain the culture in some depth and after that there was no more speculation for me, though I didn't realize how deep and widespread it was. It's pretty sick business, not just for us, but for anyone who opposes them. It's difficult for westerners to comprehend because it's so sick and twisted compared to normal western thinking and common sense.

They have been laying mines in the straits and they’re also digging out the tunnels of their missile manufacturing sites that we bombed back in week 1

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
<snip>
Despite President Trump's latest warning which declared strict conditions on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran appears to be completely brushing his words aside, and is moving closer to formalizing its authority over vital energy shipping waterway.
<snip>

That’s blather. The Iranians are in no position to enforce that.

Without oil revenues they’re cooked.

quote:

They're a death cult.

The leadership is. The Mulla’s and the IRGC.
But I don’t think all of the people are, which is why we hesitate.
They were very westernized before the Islamic Revolution.

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:
They're a death cult. I listened to an expert (real expert not a faker) today explain the culture in some depth and after that there was no more speculation for me, though I didn't realize how deep and widespread it was. It's pretty sick business, not just for us, but for anyone who opposes them. It's difficult for westerners to comprehend because it's so sick and twisted compared to normal western thinking and common sense.

Can you post a link? Some if us might be interested to hear that. Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

They're a death cult.

The leadership is. The Mulla’s and the IRGC.
But I don’t think all of the people are, which is why we hesitate.
They were very westernized before the Islamic Revolution.

Yes I know, didn't intend to communicate the entire population was like that, my mistake. I'm overdue to learn about that history.

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Skins2881:
Perhaps we don't have to give them a love tap, but instead repeat history.

.

I guess nuking Mecca and Medina followed by complete occupation on the ground is right out. Worked 80 years ago.


Bet Lindsay would back that kind of action.

I detect a bit of sarcasm...

quote:

Bet Lindsay would back that kind of action.

Yeah, he would.

We weren't designed to be an empire... but we kind of picked up where the Brits left off, unfortunately.
But I think Donald Trump's instinct is to pull back to focus on the American hemisphere.
Hopefully, we can accomplish our limited goals of
1. NO NUKES and
2. Open shipping through the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz and both gulfs.
And then get out of there.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...SzX8GOeoUjTEfOecs%3D

Iran Halts Talks With US Over Israeli Escalation in Lebanon

Tehran is suspending indirect negotiations with Washington and is threatening to expand military pressure across key regional shipping routes: Iran state media.

Iran has halted indirect negotiations with the United States over what it describes as Israel’s escalating military campaign in Lebanon, according to a report by Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News Agency, raising fresh doubts about efforts to transform a fragile ceasefire into a broader agreement that would end the war.

Tasnim reported on June 1 that Iran’s negotiating team will stop talks—including the exchange of messages through a mediator—because Israel had continued military operations in Lebanon despite what Tehran considers a ceasefire that applies across all fronts.

The report said Iran considers a pause in Israeli military operations in Lebanon as a precondition of the ceasefire and that Israel’s actions amounted to a violation of the truce.

Iranian officials and negotiators are calling for an immediate cessation of Israeli military operations in both Gaza and Lebanon, along with the need for a complete withdrawal from occupied areas in Lebanon, Tasnim reported.

Besides halting talks, Iran is also threatening to completely close the Strait of Hormuz and expand the conflict to other regions, including the Bab el-Mandab Strait in the Red Sea, in response to Israeli actions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday ordered the military to strike Hezbollah targets in Beirut, escalating Israel’s campaign against the Iran-backed terrorist group.

Netanyahu cited “repeated and ongoing” ceasefire violations by Hezbollah against Israeli cities and civilians.

Iranian officials denounced the Israeli military’s moves and hinted at retaliation.

The speaker of Iran’s parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, said that escalation of Israeli military operations in Lebanon, along with the ongoing U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports, is “clear evidence” that the United States has broken the terms of the ceasefire.

“Every choice has a price, and the bill comes due,” Ghalibaf said in a June 1 post on X. “It will all fall into place.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the White House with a request for comment.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

quote:

“Every choice has a price, and the bill comes due,” Ghalibaf said in a June 1 post on X. “It will all fall into place.”

These Iranian spokesmen have the credibility of Baghdad Bob

quote:

Besides halting talks, Iran is also threatening to completely close the Strait of Hormuz and expand the conflict to other regions, including the Bab el-Mandab Strait in the Red Sea, in response to Israeli actions.

Yes, of course. Because the world has started bypassing the Strait of Hormuz!

I think it’s time for a little “FO” to go with Iran’s “FA”. I admire the patience that President Trump has shown over the last 2 months, but I think if he doesn’t make some sort of impact statement (impact action more accurately) it does start to make our resolve seem questionable. I think it’s time for a little reminder that we’re the ones with the power. Perhaps at the first sign of interference with another strait we hit something other than the strait to show that such behavior will simply not be tolerated. Perhaps it’s time to enforce a complete isolation of Iran, as I do believe that the naval blockade of the strait of Hormuz has been the most effective strategy thus far.

The ports at Chabahar and Bandar Abbas seem like good targets...

Victor Davis Hanson is always worth reading.

Iranian Endgames?
Iran survives by delay, deception, and deterrence games—but the moment may be coming when airpower, not diplomacy, decides how the nuclear standoff ends.

By Victor Davis Hanson

June 2, 2026

The Trump administration has bent over backward to negotiate an end to Iran’s grand plans to develop nuclear weapons—before the June 2025 bombing, afterward, and again during the follow-up diplomacy of spring 2026.

Yet Iran is unlikely ever to abandon its pursuit of the bomb voluntarily. With nuclear weapons, Tehran hopes to become the de facto hegemon of the Middle East. Only then could it effectively coerce or deter both Israel and the wealthy Arab Gulf states. And that is the charitable view, one that excludes the possibility of a messianic Shiite theocracy believing that eliminating the “one-bomb” state of Israel would forever ensure the Shiite minority permanent preeminence in the pantheon of Islamic jihadists.

After three months of intermittent war, we are now better acquainted with Iran’s intentions and the realities of the conflict.

The Iranian regime has never viewed “negotiations” as a path leading to an ultimate “deal.” At best, the regime’s supposedly “elected” government plays good cop, while the bad cop theocratic henchmen periodically violate whatever understandings have been reached. Accordingly, talks remain perpetually fluid, punctuated by delays, pauses, and renewed demands. The regime’s art of “dealing” is not aimed at resolution but at gaining strategic advantage by postponing any military effort that leads to their demise. The regime’s mere survival is broadcast as victory, whatever the damage to the country.

As a result, Iran does not necessarily regard overwhelming military defeat on the battlefield as a strategic loss. The regime believes its own advantage lies in the long term and beyond the battlefield itself. For nearly half a century, this wicked regime has survived through propaganda, bloodcurdling threats, slaughtering civilians at home and abroad, terrorist proxies and clients, and mastery of both global politics and the internal politics of its adversaries, especially in the U.S. and Europe.

Its strategy is also to feign detachment from reality and appear capable of doing anything to anyone anywhere at any time. Iran’s leaders are like the crazy assailant on the subway who feels he can do anything he wishes, since most people either fear his antics or don’t wish to stoop to his level to stop him.

All threats, ultimatums, and vows are also not credible. They are designed to bluff or mislead opponents into miscalculations. The more left-leaning American presidents, whether Clinton, Obama, or Biden, reached out to dialogue and normalize with Iran, the more the Iranians loathed these presidents for being weak.

They view Europe and the U.S. not as nations, but as various successive governments and administrations that, to various degrees, can be manipulated. And they have utter contempt for perceived Western appeasement. Magnanimity they interpret as weakness to be exploited, never as kindness to be reciprocated.

This Iran war is unlike our past conflicts in the Middle East. So far, there is no American use of ground troops. The bombing (and thus the war itself) has been historically short, lasting only around 38 days—unlike the two Iraq wars, Afghanistan, Libya, and Serbia.

In terms of size, population, resources, wealth, and military strength, Iran has been the most formidable adversary the United States has faced in the Middle East. Yet our losses in this war so far have been historically low, while the damage to the Iranian industrial, nuclear, and military infrastructure has been immense and unprecedented.

Unlike past conflicts, where combatants often struggled to distinguish friend from foe in places such as the streets of Fallujah, the villages of Helmand Province, or the rice paddies of South Vietnam, this war has been uniquely suited to overwhelming American airpower. The United States has clearly won the shooting war, though it has yet to secure the peace.

One problem is the scarcity of accurate information. We have only rumors and spotty regime-fed reports of what is actually going on inside Iran, given there are neither American ground troops nor embedded Western reporters there.

What comes out of Iran is the chronic form of lying associated with “Baghdad Bob” during the Second Gulf War. No one yet knows the full extent of the damage to the regime or the viability of the Iranian resistance. The result is that Iran is likely to be in far worse shape than it lets on.

Even so, a militarily weakened Iran seems to hope that escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz will raise gas prices, at home and worldwide, and cost Trump the midterms, before American sanctions, blockades, and freezing assets will bankrupt the country.

The United States is now weighing two choices. One is to end the war and get some sort of deal, assured that it has already done close to a decade’s worth of damage to Iran, and perhaps more if sanctions persist.

The United States would seek to negotiate an exit that lowers oil prices and staves off political catastrophe in the November midterms. America’s anxious Gulf allies might support—or even now insist upon—such a negotiated settlement, assuming that Iran has been sufficiently defanged in the short term, that their vulnerable oil infrastructure remains secure for the time being, that anti-Iran sentiment in the Arab world remains strong, and that the Iranian people will grow increasingly restive if the regime continues to ignore their poverty and instead chooses to rebuild its shattered arsenals and revive its bankrupt Arab terrorist proxies abroad.

Yet the long-term limitations of such a limited and transitory victory are twofold. First, Iran’s regime would likely consolidate its hold on power, claiming that its reputation abroad has grown, and that its mere survival should be seen as an incredible victory.

Secondly, Iran would likely rebuild and wait to go nuclear until the arrival of a president akin to Obama or Biden, convinced then that there would be no danger of another American intervention and that the new American Left sympathizes with Iran’s anti-Israel agenda and therefore its nuclear aspirations. The regime has good reason, given the current new Socialist-Islamist Democrat Party, that a future Democrat president would revive Obama’s bankrupt visions of empowering a Shia crescent from Tehran to Yemen to “balance” Israel and the Gulf monarchies.

An alternative course is a riskier one that could involve greater casualties and Iranian missile and drone strikes against Israel and the Gulf states. It would begin with issuing a final one-week deadline for Iran to concede to U.S. demands to denuclearize, hand over all its enriched uranium, dismantle its remaining missile forces, cease subsidizing Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, and stop interfering with international traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Otherwise, for a week or so, the U.S. would strike the remaining regime grandees who believe they are still in charge of the government, along with dual-use bridges, subterranean nuclear depots, power plants, island ports and docks, weapons arsenals and factories, and the remnants of the Iranian mosquito navy. It would then open the Strait of Hormuz, leave a guardian force to keep it navigable, declare victory, go home, and pivot to the economy.

The point would be to inflict enough damage on the Iranian theocracy and its appendages to end the current off-and-on war. Either such Iranian concessions or such destruction would humiliate the regime, neuter its military, and halt its nuclear aspirations for decades, leaving it ripe for internal uprising—and reminding the world there is a limit to unpredictable U.S. patience and placidity.

LINK