Air superiority =/= Controlling a country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The straight if Hormuz is this wide

|---‐------|

IT BOTTLENECKS

You dont need an army of 90M but just 1 bad actor to stop entire shipping lanes.

We have a false illusion of control. We have to learn to live with other people and work with them not attack them, especially for other countries.

The bad actor has to have both the intent and the capability. Iran may have the intent, but their capacity is rapidly declining to zero.

(facepalm on face emoji)

One small boat on the straight of hormuz with 3 iranians can stop entire shipping lanes of ships.

We have some really not so intelligent people on this forum.

[Anonymous]

Choke off Iran’s oil industry, and they will do regime change themselves within a year. Yes, we all pay more at the pump until other sources ramp up. Saudis can definitely open the taps more, likely others as well including the US.

[Anonymous]

^Yes or No

Did Israel successfully perform regime change in Gaza?

It borders it. Small flat area geography with only 1.7M people, were they successful? Again it borders Gaza, advantagous logistics.

[Anonymous]

The whole point of the exercise is to first continue to set back Iran’s nuclear capability and second to cause sufficient chain of command disruption to allow the good people of Iran to take control of the government from extremist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Yes or No

Did Israel successfully perform regime change in Gaza?

It borders it. Small flat area geography with only 1.7M people, were they successful? Again it borders Gaza, advantagous logistics.

Not quite the same as Iran because Gaza never really had a stable functioning government/society for any period of time. So, I don’t think they’re even used to a regime period - unless it’s an authoritarian terrorist group like Hamas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of the exercise is to first continue to set back Iran’s nuclear capability and second to cause sufficient chain of command disruption to allow the good people of Iran to take control of the government from extremist.

Ok, so we are still on track to release the Epstein files?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The straight if Hormuz is this wide

|---‐------|

IT BOTTLENECKS

You dont need an army of 90M but just 1 bad actor to stop entire shipping lanes.

We have a false illusion of control. We have to learn to live with other people and work with them not attack them, especially for other countries.

The bad actor has to have both the intent and the capability. Iran may have the intent, but their capacity is rapidly declining to zero.

(facepalm on face emoji)

One small boat on the straight of hormuz with 3 iranians can stop entire shipping lanes of ships.

We have some really not so intelligent people on this forum.

Exactly, the mere threat gets the job done. No one wants to risk their ship and cargo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the US public matters anymore.
The ruling elite decides.

The ruling elite also doesn't pay for it (Big Beautiful Bill), nor fight. It was like this starting with Vietnam. But our ignorant electorate just doesn't get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of the exercise is to first continue to set back Iran’s nuclear capability and second to cause sufficient chain of command disruption to allow the good people of Iran to take control of the government from extremist.

And how do you expect that to happen? Just drive up and run the ministries?

[Anonymous]

You can bomb countries into submission if you are willing to bomb indiscriminately

Japan 1945

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can bomb countries into submission if you are willing to bomb indiscriminately

Japan 1945

Dsiagree. My dad was on his way to Japan for the invasion when the war ended (he saw the Missouri in Tokyo Bay). There was not a tree standing straight in Tokyo, yet an invasion would have cost one million American lives. Bombing tends to make people angry, just ask the Vietcong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They don’t want to control the country. They have no plan for the future of Iran. They don’t particularly care what happens to the Iranian people or the region.

They want to distract from Epstein. That tells you how huge the Epstein revelations actually are. And everything else makes sense when you look at it from that lens.

Cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:History will provide the answer as to whether or not the current conflict leaves the region and the world better off than it was. My bet is that it can't help but be better; it could hardly be worse.

if nothing else, the Iranian appetite and capacity to prop up Palestinian terror proxies will be essentially eliminated, a huge win.

You must be joking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don’t want to control the country. They have no plan for the future of Iran. They don’t particularly care what happens to the Iranian people or the region.

They want to distract from Epstein. That tells you how huge the Epstein revelations actually are. And everything else makes sense when you look at it from that lens.

Cite?

Where has the administration indicated that they have any sort of plan for Iran’s future? Why did they do this in the middle of the Epstein scandal? It’s such an obvious distraction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History will provide the answer as to whether or not the current conflict leaves the region and the world better off than it was. My bet is that it can't help but be better; it could hardly be worse.

if nothing else, the Iranian appetite and capacity to prop up Palestinian terror proxies will be essentially eliminated, a huge win.

You must be joking.

Right?
It’s almost as if no one posting here has any concept of history or the region. This just a very expensive and misguided distraction from Epstein.