quote:

Originally posted by 6guns:
Iran is such a bunch of assholes! We all knew it, but still had hope. I still try to keep a glimmer of hope, but damn, it's getting frustrating.

Never thought they'd give in, all the delays are to get to November and hope that Trump is lame ducked and checkmated by USA voters.

It's looking like it will take an ending similar to WWII Japan, as the political and military leaders are fanatics and will never surrender or beholden to any written contract with the West.

Nothing short of decimation of the power grids and transportation hubs will work, Trump will have to push the people into a position they revolt against the machine in the country. And even that might not be possible.

Getting Iran to a position where they can't control the strait militarily is a key, once they lose any control of that they have nothing to bargain with but human life, and they will do that as well. The country is run by religious fanatics that hate the world and want power over all of the middle east.

For now he should just keep bombing military installations, any known nuke locations and anything that allows them to be a threat in the strait.

Israel is not the only country that should be threatened by the IIRG and Mullahs agenda and thus participate in taking Iran down.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
IRGC Fires Missiles at Ships in Strait of Hormuz

And in other news, the sun was seen to rise in the east this morning.

Since the dawn of the military aviation age its pundits have predicted that air power alone could win wars, both because of its devastating physical effects, and because it would cause the enemy’s will to resist to collapse due to its psychological effects on the populace.
Has that ever happened? Has any significant conflict been won by the users of air power alone without at least the credible threat of ground action?

This is what people in the 1920s assumed that air power could accomplish by itself. Note that the “bomber” at the upper left corner of the upper panel is a lighter-than-air dirigible that would be able to lay waste to our cities with impunity.*





One pre-WWII catch phrase was “The bomber will always get through,” but at what cost to the attacker and to what result? World War II saw the greatest bombing campaigns in history, with countless missions, many involving 1000 bombers or more that scattered ordnance over large areas. Air power advocates during that conflict were still preaching that sooner or later the populaces would demand the surrender of their forces if only enough bombs could be dropped, and yet that never happened.

* Cartoon by Winsor McCay, “What Could Happen—and Would”

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

Yes you can win wars with airpower. If you have the determination to employ it totally. Think WWII Dresden. Casualty numbers of 25K there. Or the firebombing of Tokyo. Casualty numbers in Tokyo were 100K.
But... We no longer have the determination to resort to the tactics that brought our enemies to their knees.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Think WWII Dresden. Or the firebombing of Tokyo.

Did either cause the German or Japanese people to demand (and compel) the surrender of their military forces? Nope.
Both actions killed vast numbers of civilians, but neither had any significant effect on the enemies’ military capabilities.

The Germans were brought to their knees by the invasion and occupation of their country by the Americans, British, Canadians (et. al), French, and Russians (in alphabetical order). Air power helped a lot, but it was not the decisive factor.

The Japanese surrender was closer to an air power-alone win, but only after the US was prepared to invade their home islands. But again it was not something the Japanese people forced to happen. Even after the two atomic bombs, many in the Japanese army wanted the resistance to continue—and came close to making that happen. And of course, the Japanese were threatened with the possibility of the home islands’ being invaded and occupied only because of nearly three years of America’s ground activities that resulted in the invasion and occupation of other territories.

Trump had the chance, with Israel, to knock out Iran's capacity to sell energy that would have put the war on a US victory path. That step was not taken instead DJT chose to negotiate with Iran's position the same as it has been for decades "Death to America." The US's lame response has Iran in the driver seat. Whoever Trump's advisors
on the Middle East are uneducated on the subject of Iran. Unending negotiations to follow that will yield a more powerful Iran. Wonder how many Iranian assets entered the US during Biden's open borders free-for-all?

Eurasia Group analyst Gregory Brew warned that at least three vessels were attacked in the Hormuz over the last 24 hours, with the possibility that as many as five ships were struck in the strait. "Traffic is continuing but has gone dark, with ships switching off AIS."

Brew noted, "Hard to see how US can let this stand--reckon some kind of kinetic response is coming."

https://x.com/gbrew24/status/2...le-hormuz-chokepoint



Bloomberg commodities expert Javier Blas noted that while Iran attacked at least three tankers in the Strait of Hormuz today, it was simultaneously loading its own tankers at Kharg Island, the country's key energy export hub.


https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...le-hormuz-chokepoint

Iran may be playing this low level game of striking vessels in the Strait of Hormuz as both a provocation to get Trump to strike back, and as a way to placate internal factions. If Trump strikes back with severity it could derail the midterm elections for Republicans, and thus aid Iran's position when the Dem Congress takes over in January. If Trump does nothing significant to retaliate, Iran's leadership can keep claiming they're winning, a la Baghdad Bob of course, but it helps them internally.

As far as air power not being sufficient by itself to win a war, the problem may be that the civilian population is subject to only their own government's propaganda. They hear that our soldiers will eat them, or will brutalize their women, or are otherwise evil. They may wish the war would end, but they don't see their government as needing to be replaced.

The Iranian civilian population is widely in agreement with their government's theology. That is a different problem than we had in WWII with the German and Japanese civilians.

Government propaganda was very effective among all the major combatants in World War II.

Japanese civilians were told that Americans were literal unhuman monsters and that they would be raped, tortured, and murdered. That’s why on Saipan and elsewhere many mothers killed their children before committing suicide themselves. There are accounts of Japanese children asking occupying Americans where their horns were.

In Germany there was the secular religion of Nazism, but at least there was no belief that they would go to Hell for losing faith. There was plenty of propaganda, though, about the supposed reason for the war, i.e., that the Jews were responsible.
What most Germans probably did understand by the end of the war was that Hell was way on its way to them in the form of Russians who were intent on vengeance.

What indiscriminate bombing of Britain, Germany, Russia, and Japan didn’t do, though, was break the civilian population’s spirit and resolve. As I recall, in his book The Second World Wars Victor Davis Hanson mentioned that the start of the bombing campaign of London actually changed attitudes by the British people into greater support for the war. Given their religious faith and beliefs plus the effectiveness of the government at suppressing opposition, I strongly doubt that the Iranians are any different. If I were a religious or civil authority in Iran (is there any difference?), I know exactly what I’d be telling the people about America’s efforts.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...G9i8lnm07Z7ib77ZU%3D

US Launches Strikes on Iran After Attacks on Commercial Vessels

U.S. Central Command said it has begun launching a series of strikes against Iran after it attacked three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. Central Command said Tuesday it has begun launching a series of strikes against Iran after it attacked three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

The military said the operation is intended to impose “heavy costs” on Iran for what it described as attacks on commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in international waters.

U.S. Central Command said Iran’s actions were “unwarranted, dangerous, and a clear violation of the ceasefire.”

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

"They're Scum": Trump Says US-Iran Ceasefire Is Over, Sending Oil Higher

Brent crude futures jumped more than 6% in London after President Trump told reporters at a press conference in Ankara that the tentative ceasefire with Iran is over.

"To me, I think it's over. I don't want to deal with them anymore; they're scum," Trump told reporters.

Trump says the ceasefire between U.S. and Iran is over.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...r-sending-oil-higher

Looks like Trump has finally figured out what pretty much everyone else knew months ago. JD Vance - who made the media rounds a couple weeks ago selling the obvious nonsense that the new leaders are different and see the error of their predecessors' ways - is hardest hit.

"President Trump said Wednesday that he believes his memorandum of understanding with Iran is dead after he ordered overnight airstrikes on 80 targets in response to Iranian attacks on commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

“I don’t like them at all. And frankly, I think we wasted a lot of time with them, I think we should just do our business,” Trump said in his first public remarks after ordering the airstrikes.

"When asked by a reporter if the preliminary peace deal, which Trump signed at the Palace of Versailles in France June 17, was dead, the president replied: “To me, I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them anymore. They’re scum.”

Oil is already up 5% this morning on his comments. I imagine he was hoping he could get the Iran situation calm enough until the midterms, but it doesn't look like the IRGC is prepared to cooperate. I still remain pessimistic on this issue. It has significant potential to cost the Republicans the midterms, with all the massive consequences for the Trump administration that a Democratic Congress brings.

Link

^^ Gee, if only Donald Trump and JD Vance had your grasp of Geo-Politics and Geo-Strategic Foreign Policy...

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^ Gee, if only Donald Trump and JD Vance had your grasp of Geo-Politics and Geo-Strategic Foreign Policy...

How about if instead of making cheap, snarky (and unoriginal) remarks, you make a case for the current policy and explain how it is correct and successful???

Trump can now say we did everything possible, but Iran has proven they will not honor any agreement. He is free to unleash maximum force to neutralize Iran. Prior to the negotiations, Trump's detractors said we were being too mean to the misunderstood Iranians, who just wanted domestic tranquility. Now it is proven that Iran's leadership just wants to attack and kill. They want to blackmail the world over oil.

Timing is now getting critical. Whatever Trump does needs to be finished and successful by the end of September, considering the midterms.

"Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast." Lone Watie -The Outlaw Jose Wales

I imagine there would be a lot fewer whiners and detractors to operations in Iran if the IRGC had first managed to pop off even a weak nuke or dirty bomb in Tel Aviv or in one of our ports aboard a container ship.

Personally, I think we should bomb the fuck out of every last single piece of military hardware and underground bunker. Every single attack boat that dates push an inch into the straights of Hormuz. Every last identifiable IRGC radical Islamic terrorist.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
bomb the fuck out of every last single piece of military hardware and underground bunker. Every single attack boat that dates push an inch into the straights of Hormuz. Every last identifiable IRGC radical Islamic terrorist.

I've been hesitant to step into this discussion. But I'll agree with gearhounds' statement above, entirely.
My opinion: a country who uses its military only for offense, against darn near everyone else ought not be allowed to continue having a military.
Eliminate every stitch of their aggressive capability.

I realize it's whack-a-mole... but let's not let up whacking moles. Finish this.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
Looks like Trump has finally figured out what pretty much everyone else knew months ago.

Don't come in here with shit like that, saying that Donald Trump is clueless. That's utterly fucking ridiculous. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm not going to put up with remarks like that from you or anyone else in this forum. You have been warned.

That's a great way to thank the man for his maximum effort. Nice.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
How about if instead of making cheap, snarky (and unoriginal) remarks, you make a case for the current policy and explain how it is correct and successful???

You have NO room to be talking about "snarky remarks" from anyone else. NONE.

How is President Trump's policy correct? It's correct by making it crystal clear to everyone that diplomacy does not work with these psychopaths.

How is it successful? Did it ever occur to you that there can be no success when dealing with these people, short of destroying their entire country? And "success" is not even the correct term with that outcome, because it would further destabilize the region and affect the world's economy, including the United States.

You've got a lot of fucking nerve, man

Nothing's changed. We still can't bomb them into compliance. The song remains the same. Our choices are still to try to negotiate with mentally compromised religious fanatics or invade the country and do some old-fashioned nation building. It might be time to quit trying to get a deal with the crazies and just monitor them and strike them periodically until the reality of the situation becomes apparent. Every bad guy in that country understands the importance of resisting through the US midterms. Probably a better strategy to work towards eliminating the Straight as a key component for the movement of oil.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
Trump can now say we did everything possible, but Iran has proven they will not honor any agreement. He is free to unleash maximum force to neutralize Iran. Prior to the negotiations, Trump's detractors said we were being too mean to the misunderstood Iranians, who just wanted domestic tranquility. Now it is proven that Iran's leadership just wants to attack and kill. They want to blackmail the world over oil.

Yeah... escalation now seems inevitable, unfortunately.