15 ms·

That's an all around bad move for the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war and probably having to carry the can for the next few years alone after getting in

That's an all around bad move for the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war and probably having to carry the can for the next few years alone after getting into a mess not of our own making (well directly anyway). This is going to hit gas prices, the markets and US security considerations all in order to help keep the current Israeli leadership out of Israeli prisons. Bad move.

tim333 1y ago
Dunno - better than the alternative of Iran getting nukes.
- karmakurtisaani 1y ago
  It was not one or the other. Don't buy into that bullshit.
- insane_dreamer 1y ago
  We’ve been “on the verge” of Iran getting nukes for decades. They’re about as credible as Saddam’s WMDs at this point. And even if they did I’m not sure that’s so bad. The fact that India and Pakistan both have nukes may help provide a deterrent due to MAD. Might do the same for Iran and Israel (which has nukes already).
zild3d 1y ago
> the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war A lot of people saying this, what would this actually entail? My money is much more on this being a "1 and done" exchange. Iran poses very little threat now, launchers being taken out everyday, leadership chain wiped out, seemingly no other Iran allies getting pulled into the fold
- karmakurtisaani 1y ago
  This only happens if Iran sits there and takes it. What if they close the strait? Or shoot missiles to US bases?
  - infecto 1y ago
    I have mixed feelings about the current state but is that a legitimate question. I imagine Iran would fire once on the US and then all heck would reign down on them from the skies. I don’t see a situation where Iran can hold on. Most of the people do not support the government.
    - gcanyon 1y ago
      > Most of the people do not support the government. You're implying that a foreign power bombing Iran would make the people less likely to support their government. Do you have justification for that?
      - GlacierFox 1y ago
        Iranian people hate the Ayatollahs. They execute any opposition. The populace is literally dying for change.
        swat535 1y ago
        Yes, they do but they love IRAN even more. Defending the country against hostile forces is going to be their priority.
        GlacierFox 1y ago
        Which hostile forces? The US has attacked nuclear sites which they're using to build Nuclear bombs, not sent a warhead into Tehran. I think you're underestimating the dissatisfaction of the Iranian people people with the death cult in charge.
        bigyabai 1y ago
        How about you Google SAVAK and then get back to me on how receptive you think Iranian citizens are of American "guidance" under "democratic leadership" and all that jazz. I think you're underestimating how many Iranians the CIA allowed to be tortured and raped in the Shahist regime. Agree to disagree?
- Panoramix 1y ago
  Reports are that if Iran keeps things going on, Israel is going to run out of interceptors in 10 days or so, at which point they are gonna be seriously damaged. Some missiles are already getting through, there's speculation of hyper-sonic missiles from Iran or just failure to shoot them down. Either way: This doesn't stop here, and it was never about these bogus nuclear weapons (which are just around the corner since the 80's) just like Iraq was not about weapons of mass destruction. They want to place a puppet government...what could go wrong?
  - MF-DOOM 1y ago
    This isn’t accurate. The thing that’s going to possibly be depleted is “Arrow 3” - the first line of aerial defense (excluding operations that target the launchers within Iran). They still have plenty of Arrow 2 and David’s’ slingshot missiles.
  - Beefin 1y ago
    this couldn't be more false - jordan and saudi have been shooting down iranian drones. you think america/israel is alone in this dogfight?
- mjburgess 1y ago
  Iran has a population of 92mil and an economy vastly stronger than iraq 2003 -- it also has extremely motivated backers in China, who are eagar to use it the way the US uses Ukraine: a means to deplete a peer competitor of their military resources. The best outcome for China here is the US blowing its assets in Iran. The propaganda at the moment is israel is winning, iran isnt using missiles because of "air superiority", and the US is able and willing to detroy the nuclear capacity via the air. All of these claims are false. Iran's capacity to strike back remains vast using only its own resources. What the US has been dragged into by israel is an amazing opportunity for a US peer competitor (china) to grind down its arms -- it would be remarkable if China doesn't take it. It can hardly afford the US to be a well-armed protector of Taiwan. The iranian regieme's apparent hesitation at the moment is not as extreme as russia's on the first days of the ukraine war, and look at where we are now. This apparent hesitation is waiting for israel to deplete its missile defense, waiting for a more stable intelligence environment (presumably moving assets, etc. around out of uncovered israeli operations), and most of all, waiting for a moment to strike off-guard.
  - bamboozled 1y ago
    The propaganda What propaganda ? I’ve seen the footage of Iran firing flak cannons somewhere in the direction of f35s. Not a single Israeli plane has been lost…where is the lie ? Iran has a population of 92mil and an economy vastly stronger than iraq 2003* why assume they want the current leadership to remain in charge? Why assume they wanted nukes ? You mention China grinding down its enemy ? What about the fact the air force is actually performing real missions being and gaining real experience ? Is a few bunker busters going to grind down the USAF ?
    - mjburgess 1y ago
      Neither you or I, and esp. not the media, have any access to facts on the ground. All photographs or videos you have seen have been placed there for you to see them. All we can work backwards from are the most reliable facts we have before the war, about capabilities on the ground. We know the rough size of the iranian missile programme, of the country, economic, various military assets and similar. We can work backwards from this to ask, "what would we be able to see had Israel achieved its claim re iran" -- and we're talking extraordinary levels of destruction in iran, across the country, and so on. We don't have any evidence of operations of that scale even taking place, let alone having been successful. It is most likely, at the moment, that at least some alleged air force victories by israel are actual missiles they've issued from neighbouring states on the land. However, either way, all of this is speculation. What can be stated with near certainty is that any picture presented in the media is an extremely careful creation of the propaganda arms of our states, and not a credible military briefing. Our only access to reliable inferences is purely rational and hypothetical: what are X's aims, what are their claims, what are they claimed strategies, what are their capabilities and so on.. and then what would we see *if*...
- LeonB 1y ago
  Chance of Iran launching a nuclear strike on the US has gone from 0% to 0%. Chance of terrorist activity on US soil in the next 10 years has increased. I don’t think it’s improved things for the US.
  - umbra07 1y ago
    They could have nuked a neighboring country. Neighboring countries like KSA have openly declared their intention to get nukes. They could give the nuke to a proxy (or have it stolen) who then detonates it either at a US military base in the region or on US soil.
- floatrock 1y ago
  > Iran poses very little threat now, launchers being taken out everyday What do Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, and Dubai have in common? All of their oil tankers sail through a 20mi strip of water called the Straight of Hormuz, completely bordered by Iran on one side. Saudi Arabia has access to the Red Sea and a bunch of pipelines to take some of their oil there, but most of their maritime ports are in the Persian Gulf. You don't need hypersonic ballistic missiles to take out an oil tanker. Save those for Israel, all you need is a few drones, speedboats, and mines. Oh, what's that, a good chunk of attack drones undergoing "field trials" in Ukranian population centers are Iranian-made purchased by Russia? And those drones are designed to be launched from mobile trucks in any non-descript garage instead of static missile silos? We've seen what a rag-tag group of Yemeni rebels with some light rockets have done to ocean shipping at the chokepoint to the Red Sea, now we're gonna see what the people supplying the Houthi's can do at the chokepoint to the Oil Sea. Hope y'all enjoyed your sub-$2 gas prices.
  - pimeys 1y ago
    Bingo. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-urges-china-dissuade-iran-closing-strait-hormuz-2025-06-22/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-urges-china-dissuade-... WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran to not shut down the Strait of Hormuz after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Rubio's comments on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo" show came after Iran's Press TV reported that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 20% of global oil and gas flows.
    - insane_dreamer 1y ago
      The problem for Iran is that it also hurts itself as its own terminals are upstream of the straight
  - tguvot 1y ago
    houthis been using iran supplied anti ship missiles. not exactly stuff that you pickup in bass pro shops
- diggan 1y ago
  > My money is much more on this being a "1 and done" exchange For as long as I've been alive, every action from the US in the middle east been a "1 and done" exchange, and Bush famously hosted a "Mission Accomplished" party two months after the start of the invasion of Iraq. I'd be surprised if this was the only action from the US' side during this war, based on history, but maybe things are different today, seems highly unlikely though.
  - burnt-resistor 1y ago
    This. The Iran "nuclear" thing is Iraq "WMDs" MacGuffins all over again, but it's the saber rattling Netanyahu is using to maintain popular and power, and Trump is going along for it, imperiling America's security for decades by asking for more terror attacks in the homeland.
    - mindslight 1y ago
      If there is one value that Trump is able to empathize with, it's lying and then turning it into a political crusade to stay out of prison.
    - diggan 1y ago
      "Fun" fact: Same guy lied in his congressional testimony, claiming that Saddam Hussein is building nuclear weapons which was the reason for the Iraq invasion. Shame politicians always seem to lack a spine when it matters.
- sanderjd 1y ago
  This episode has demonstrated that diplomacy is not a credible option. So with that off the table, the only two options now are 1. A series of "1 and done" engagements every few years or months, as the regime tries to race toward a bomb, or 2. Regime change. It's possible that #2 will happen via domestic uprising, but not at all clear whether the result of that would be a friendlier regime that is less interested in going nuclear. It could very plausibly instead be hardliners who are pissed the regime failed to put up a strong enough fight. (I think that would be what would predictably happen in the US in this scenario, for instance!) And if it's not a domestic uprising, it's a bloody regime change war like the ones fought in the 00s, which ... didn't turn out great, if you recall! Possibly #1 is a better outcome. But I'm very skeptical that "we'll just bomb a big country periodically" is a strategy that will never escalate into protracted war.
- EasyMark 1y ago
  Unless they find the location of the moved highly enriched uranium, there may be a few follow up bombings to handle that but I suspect Israel would take that on.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  Trump is already screaming online about regime change. Your money might be at risk.
- burnt-resistor 1y ago
  You missed the point: this was entirely for show, may not have accomplished any or all of the mission objectives claimed, and, in all likelihood, setup thousands of American civilians for a series of 9/11-like terrorist attacks for the next 20 years. The reality show circus continues.
noobermin 1y ago
At least this comment is second top post. That's all this is, and the American media will cheerlead for it.
- thrance 1y ago
  Gotta somehow manufacture consent for something indefensible.
JKCalhoun 1y ago
Yep, the market was already on a precarious footing. Monday will likely be a blood bath.
- drexlspivey 1y ago
  Futures are up. The market was also up last Friday when the Israel started bombing Iran
- infecto 1y ago
  Meh, Iran is only an oil provider for the Chinas of the world. Oil prices may go up but it will definitely not be a blood bath. This is a non-event.
  - msgodel 1y ago
    I short oil with massive leverage every time this happens. People think the middle east is about oil and it's really not so it's basically free money.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Shocka1 1y ago
I don't disagree with much of your comment, but I immediately saw this as a bullish sign for the markets, along with oil prices possibly coming down. I saw the B2 bombing as a crescendo to the conflict. I shorted volatility futures on the market open Sunday night and sold a lot more S&P future's put options. I've had a very good week so far. There will continue to be ordinance flying here and there of course (probably until the end of time being the ME), but Iran has been weakened to the point that Wall Street has more than likely written it off for the near future.
msgodel 1y ago
>This is going to hit gas prices Heh. I made more in a day than I get paid in month for my job trading the opposite. The Middle East hardly effects American gas prices.

tim333 1y ago

Dunno - better than the alternative of Iran getting nukes.

karmakurtisaani 1y ago
It was not one or the other. Don't buy into that bullshit.
insane_dreamer 1y ago
We’ve been “on the verge” of Iran getting nukes for decades. They’re about as credible as Saddam’s WMDs at this point. And even if they did I’m not sure that’s so bad. The fact that India and Pakistan both have nukes may help provide a deterrent due to MAD. Might do the same for Iran and Israel (which has nukes already).

zild3d 1y ago

> the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war A lot of people saying this, what would this actually entail? My money is much more on this being a "1 and done" exchange. Iran poses very little threat now, launchers being taken out everyday, leadership chain wiped out, seemingly no other Iran allies getting pulled into the fold

karmakurtisaani 1y ago
This only happens if Iran sits there and takes it. What if they close the strait? Or shoot missiles to US bases?
- infecto 1y ago
  I have mixed feelings about the current state but is that a legitimate question. I imagine Iran would fire once on the US and then all heck would reign down on them from the skies. I don’t see a situation where Iran can hold on. Most of the people do not support the government.
  - gcanyon 1y ago
    > Most of the people do not support the government. You're implying that a foreign power bombing Iran would make the people less likely to support their government. Do you have justification for that?
    - GlacierFox 1y ago
      Iranian people hate the Ayatollahs. They execute any opposition. The populace is literally dying for change.
      - swat535 1y ago
        Yes, they do but they love IRAN even more. Defending the country against hostile forces is going to be their priority.
        GlacierFox 1y ago
        Which hostile forces? The US has attacked nuclear sites which they're using to build Nuclear bombs, not sent a warhead into Tehran. I think you're underestimating the dissatisfaction of the Iranian people people with the death cult in charge.
        bigyabai 1y ago
        How about you Google SAVAK and then get back to me on how receptive you think Iranian citizens are of American "guidance" under "democratic leadership" and all that jazz. I think you're underestimating how many Iranians the CIA allowed to be tortured and raped in the Shahist regime. Agree to disagree?
Panoramix 1y ago
Reports are that if Iran keeps things going on, Israel is going to run out of interceptors in 10 days or so, at which point they are gonna be seriously damaged. Some missiles are already getting through, there's speculation of hyper-sonic missiles from Iran or just failure to shoot them down. Either way: This doesn't stop here, and it was never about these bogus nuclear weapons (which are just around the corner since the 80's) just like Iraq was not about weapons of mass destruction. They want to place a puppet government...what could go wrong?
- MF-DOOM 1y ago
  This isn’t accurate. The thing that’s going to possibly be depleted is “Arrow 3” - the first line of aerial defense (excluding operations that target the launchers within Iran). They still have plenty of Arrow 2 and David’s’ slingshot missiles.
- Beefin 1y ago
  this couldn't be more false - jordan and saudi have been shooting down iranian drones. you think america/israel is alone in this dogfight?
mjburgess 1y ago
Iran has a population of 92mil and an economy vastly stronger than iraq 2003 -- it also has extremely motivated backers in China, who are eagar to use it the way the US uses Ukraine: a means to deplete a peer competitor of their military resources. The best outcome for China here is the US blowing its assets in Iran. The propaganda at the moment is israel is winning, iran isnt using missiles because of "air superiority", and the US is able and willing to detroy the nuclear capacity via the air. All of these claims are false. Iran's capacity to strike back remains vast using only its own resources. What the US has been dragged into by israel is an amazing opportunity for a US peer competitor (china) to grind down its arms -- it would be remarkable if China doesn't take it. It can hardly afford the US to be a well-armed protector of Taiwan. The iranian regieme's apparent hesitation at the moment is not as extreme as russia's on the first days of the ukraine war, and look at where we are now. This apparent hesitation is waiting for israel to deplete its missile defense, waiting for a more stable intelligence environment (presumably moving assets, etc. around out of uncovered israeli operations), and most of all, waiting for a moment to strike off-guard.
- bamboozled 1y ago
  The propaganda What propaganda ? I’ve seen the footage of Iran firing flak cannons somewhere in the direction of f35s. Not a single Israeli plane has been lost…where is the lie ? Iran has a population of 92mil and an economy vastly stronger than iraq 2003* why assume they want the current leadership to remain in charge? Why assume they wanted nukes ? You mention China grinding down its enemy ? What about the fact the air force is actually performing real missions being and gaining real experience ? Is a few bunker busters going to grind down the USAF ?
  - mjburgess 1y ago
    Neither you or I, and esp. not the media, have any access to facts on the ground. All photographs or videos you have seen have been placed there for you to see them. All we can work backwards from are the most reliable facts we have before the war, about capabilities on the ground. We know the rough size of the iranian missile programme, of the country, economic, various military assets and similar. We can work backwards from this to ask, "what would we be able to see had Israel achieved its claim re iran" -- and we're talking extraordinary levels of destruction in iran, across the country, and so on. We don't have any evidence of operations of that scale even taking place, let alone having been successful. It is most likely, at the moment, that at least some alleged air force victories by israel are actual missiles they've issued from neighbouring states on the land. However, either way, all of this is speculation. What can be stated with near certainty is that any picture presented in the media is an extremely careful creation of the propaganda arms of our states, and not a credible military briefing. Our only access to reliable inferences is purely rational and hypothetical: what are X's aims, what are their claims, what are they claimed strategies, what are their capabilities and so on.. and then what would we see *if*...
LeonB 1y ago
Chance of Iran launching a nuclear strike on the US has gone from 0% to 0%. Chance of terrorist activity on US soil in the next 10 years has increased. I don’t think it’s improved things for the US.
- umbra07 1y ago
  They could have nuked a neighboring country. Neighboring countries like KSA have openly declared their intention to get nukes. They could give the nuke to a proxy (or have it stolen) who then detonates it either at a US military base in the region or on US soil.
floatrock 1y ago
> Iran poses very little threat now, launchers being taken out everyday What do Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, and Dubai have in common? All of their oil tankers sail through a 20mi strip of water called the Straight of Hormuz, completely bordered by Iran on one side. Saudi Arabia has access to the Red Sea and a bunch of pipelines to take some of their oil there, but most of their maritime ports are in the Persian Gulf. You don't need hypersonic ballistic missiles to take out an oil tanker. Save those for Israel, all you need is a few drones, speedboats, and mines. Oh, what's that, a good chunk of attack drones undergoing "field trials" in Ukranian population centers are Iranian-made purchased by Russia? And those drones are designed to be launched from mobile trucks in any non-descript garage instead of static missile silos? We've seen what a rag-tag group of Yemeni rebels with some light rockets have done to ocean shipping at the chokepoint to the Red Sea, now we're gonna see what the people supplying the Houthi's can do at the chokepoint to the Oil Sea. Hope y'all enjoyed your sub-$2 gas prices.
- pimeys 1y ago
  Bingo. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-urges-china-dissuade-iran-closing-strait-hormuz-2025-06-22/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-urges-china-dissuade-... WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran to not shut down the Strait of Hormuz after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Rubio's comments on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo" show came after Iran's Press TV reported that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 20% of global oil and gas flows.
  - insane_dreamer 1y ago
    The problem for Iran is that it also hurts itself as its own terminals are upstream of the straight
- tguvot 1y ago
  houthis been using iran supplied anti ship missiles. not exactly stuff that you pickup in bass pro shops
diggan 1y ago
> My money is much more on this being a "1 and done" exchange For as long as I've been alive, every action from the US in the middle east been a "1 and done" exchange, and Bush famously hosted a "Mission Accomplished" party two months after the start of the invasion of Iraq. I'd be surprised if this was the only action from the US' side during this war, based on history, but maybe things are different today, seems highly unlikely though.
- burnt-resistor 1y ago
  This. The Iran "nuclear" thing is Iraq "WMDs" MacGuffins all over again, but it's the saber rattling Netanyahu is using to maintain popular and power, and Trump is going along for it, imperiling America's security for decades by asking for more terror attacks in the homeland.
  - mindslight 1y ago
    If there is one value that Trump is able to empathize with, it's lying and then turning it into a political crusade to stay out of prison.
  - diggan 1y ago
    "Fun" fact: Same guy lied in his congressional testimony, claiming that Saddam Hussein is building nuclear weapons which was the reason for the Iraq invasion. Shame politicians always seem to lack a spine when it matters.
sanderjd 1y ago
This episode has demonstrated that diplomacy is not a credible option. So with that off the table, the only two options now are 1. A series of "1 and done" engagements every few years or months, as the regime tries to race toward a bomb, or 2. Regime change. It's possible that #2 will happen via domestic uprising, but not at all clear whether the result of that would be a friendlier regime that is less interested in going nuclear. It could very plausibly instead be hardliners who are pissed the regime failed to put up a strong enough fight. (I think that would be what would predictably happen in the US in this scenario, for instance!) And if it's not a domestic uprising, it's a bloody regime change war like the ones fought in the 00s, which ... didn't turn out great, if you recall! Possibly #1 is a better outcome. But I'm very skeptical that "we'll just bomb a big country periodically" is a strategy that will never escalate into protracted war.
EasyMark 1y ago
Unless they find the location of the moved highly enriched uranium, there may be a few follow up bombings to handle that but I suspect Israel would take that on.
UncleMeat 1y ago
Trump is already screaming online about regime change. Your money might be at risk.
burnt-resistor 1y ago
You missed the point: this was entirely for show, may not have accomplished any or all of the mission objectives claimed, and, in all likelihood, setup thousands of American civilians for a series of 9/11-like terrorist attacks for the next 20 years. The reality show circus continues.

noobermin 1y ago

At least this comment is second top post. That's all this is, and the American media will cheerlead for it.

thrance 1y ago
Gotta somehow manufacture consent for something indefensible.

JKCalhoun 1y ago

Yep, the market was already on a precarious footing. Monday will likely be a blood bath.

drexlspivey 1y ago
Futures are up. The market was also up last Friday when the Israel started bombing Iran
infecto 1y ago
Meh, Iran is only an oil provider for the Chinas of the world. Oil prices may go up but it will definitely not be a blood bath. This is a non-event.
- msgodel 1y ago
  I short oil with massive leverage every time this happens. People think the middle east is about oil and it's really not so it's basically free money.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Shocka1 1y ago

I don't disagree with much of your comment, but I immediately saw this as a bullish sign for the markets, along with oil prices possibly coming down. I saw the B2 bombing as a crescendo to the conflict. I shorted volatility futures on the market open Sunday night and sold a lot more S&P future's put options. I've had a very good week so far. There will continue to be ordinance flying here and there of course (probably until the end of time being the ME), but Iran has been weakened to the point that Wall Street has more than likely written it off for the near future.

msgodel 1y ago

>This is going to hit gas prices Heh. I made more in a day than I get paid in month for my job trading the opposite. The Middle East hardly effects American gas prices.