3 ms·

Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance. Outside of sympathetic lone operators, there really isnt much to suggest they can do anything

Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance. Outside of sympathetic lone operators, there really isnt much to suggest they can do anything more than ramp up rhetoric and calls for violence. The reason why I call it empty threats is because it accomplishes its goal no matter the outcome. If a sympathetic lone operator uses this as an excuse to start shooting, they can claim the credit. But if all it does is stoke fear that "Something somewhere might happen" then it's still a win for them.

jzb 7mo ago
"Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance" I'm curious what you're basing this on, since Iran has been supplying Russia with drones, etc. for much of the war in Ukraine and so far has launched attacks into Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Cyprus since the US began its attacks. Iran may not be able to strike at sites in the US, but it could certainly target data centers in the Middle East with some hope of success. I'm not at all confident the current administration has accurately assessed Iran's capabilities or has the ability to protect the assets of US-based companies (or US citizens) in that region.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- pear01 7mo ago
  Your post is extremely misleading. Shipping drones in a box or whatever they are doing so Russians can use them is completely different from what we mean by projecting power. In many cases the Russians are actually manufacturing the drones themselves based off the Iranian plan. That's not anything like the USA's power projection, where B2s can takeoff in Missouri, bomb Iran and come home without ever landing or even being shot at. I mean it's just not even close. Launching attacks and having "some hope of success" is weak. And that's what Iran is and has always been, weak. Yes they launch attacks. Most of these fail. They have nowhere near the level of lethality, precision, force projection and penetration of Israel or the United States. When are Americans going to learn nationstates and some radical blowing themselves up are two different things? The latter is the threat to Americans here. You don't stop it by blowing up the former. History has always shown in fact that doing that makes the latter problem worse.
reliabilityguy 7mo ago
> Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance. Sure. Now they maybe able to reach Greece. Give them five years and they will develop missiles that can reach France, or even UK. I am sure europeans would love the idea of fanatical regime having arms that can reach them, especially, if we consider that EU today does not have very robust air defense. Even Israel that planned for this war for a while has rockets that penetrate their defenses. I would prefer the politicians not to take those gambles.
- pear01 7mo ago
  Great logic. China and America might find themselves at war in the coming years. Should we just get it over with and attack them now? Where did you pull Greece from? The Iranians can barely hit anything next door. Maybe in five years the regime would have collapsed during a succession or economic crisis. Perhaps this perhaps that. Initiating a war is a gamble in of itself. Now Americans all over the world are potentially at increased risk from lone wolves. A failed Iranian state might be the site of horrible atrocities to come. For a post that seems to contemplate the future you seem to exhibit a strange lack of reflection.
  - reliabilityguy 7mo ago
    China has both the nukes and ballistic missiles. Obviously, the calculus for the war with China completely different: you create a situation where China prefers not to attack Taiwan. > Maybe in five years the regime would have collapsed during a succession crisis. Perhaps this perhaps that. Maybe, but the war in Iran is not about Iran itself, at least from the US standpoint. It's about cutting China off from cheap oil that they buy from Iran with a huge discount. For Trump, to get a win is enough to get a new supreme leader who is more aligned with the west, like in Venezuela. > A failed Iranian state might be the site of horrible atrocities to come. Why would it fail? Iran is not Iraq or Syria or Libya. Like, nothing in common at all. If you analyze Iraq, Syria, and Libya pre-war and Iran pre-war you would see that none of the conditions that lead these countries to become failed states exist in Iran. IF you are interested, I can elaborate. > For a post that seems to contemplate the future you seem to exhibit a strange lack of reflection. I am not.
anigbrowl 7mo ago
FTA: Many of these companies operate regional offices, cloud infrastructure, or data-center operations across the Gulf [...]
Larrikin 7mo ago
This sounds like unless a missile goes from Iran to the target you won't give them credit. How is it meaningfully different if they act like Russia and just have people sneak in and take out a CXO in retaliation.
- bawolff 7mo ago
  There is a big difference between iranian agents sneaking onto us homeland and conducting an attack vs just inspiring a sympathetic person to commit a violent act.

jzb 7mo ago

"Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance" I'm curious what you're basing this on, since Iran has been supplying Russia with drones, etc. for much of the war in Ukraine and so far has launched attacks into Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Cyprus since the US began its attacks. Iran may not be able to strike at sites in the US, but it could certainly target data centers in the Middle East with some hope of success. I'm not at all confident the current administration has accurately assessed Iran's capabilities or has the ability to protect the assets of US-based companies (or US citizens) in that region.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
pear01 7mo ago
Your post is extremely misleading. Shipping drones in a box or whatever they are doing so Russians can use them is completely different from what we mean by projecting power. In many cases the Russians are actually manufacturing the drones themselves based off the Iranian plan. That's not anything like the USA's power projection, where B2s can takeoff in Missouri, bomb Iran and come home without ever landing or even being shot at. I mean it's just not even close. Launching attacks and having "some hope of success" is weak. And that's what Iran is and has always been, weak. Yes they launch attacks. Most of these fail. They have nowhere near the level of lethality, precision, force projection and penetration of Israel or the United States. When are Americans going to learn nationstates and some radical blowing themselves up are two different things? The latter is the threat to Americans here. You don't stop it by blowing up the former. History has always shown in fact that doing that makes the latter problem worse.

reliabilityguy 7mo ago

> Iran has always lacked an ability to project power at a distance. Sure. Now they maybe able to reach Greece. Give them five years and they will develop missiles that can reach France, or even UK. I am sure europeans would love the idea of fanatical regime having arms that can reach them, especially, if we consider that EU today does not have very robust air defense. Even Israel that planned for this war for a while has rockets that penetrate their defenses. I would prefer the politicians not to take those gambles.

pear01 7mo ago
Great logic. China and America might find themselves at war in the coming years. Should we just get it over with and attack them now? Where did you pull Greece from? The Iranians can barely hit anything next door. Maybe in five years the regime would have collapsed during a succession or economic crisis. Perhaps this perhaps that. Initiating a war is a gamble in of itself. Now Americans all over the world are potentially at increased risk from lone wolves. A failed Iranian state might be the site of horrible atrocities to come. For a post that seems to contemplate the future you seem to exhibit a strange lack of reflection.
- reliabilityguy 7mo ago
  China has both the nukes and ballistic missiles. Obviously, the calculus for the war with China completely different: you create a situation where China prefers not to attack Taiwan. > Maybe in five years the regime would have collapsed during a succession crisis. Perhaps this perhaps that. Maybe, but the war in Iran is not about Iran itself, at least from the US standpoint. It's about cutting China off from cheap oil that they buy from Iran with a huge discount. For Trump, to get a win is enough to get a new supreme leader who is more aligned with the west, like in Venezuela. > A failed Iranian state might be the site of horrible atrocities to come. Why would it fail? Iran is not Iraq or Syria or Libya. Like, nothing in common at all. If you analyze Iraq, Syria, and Libya pre-war and Iran pre-war you would see that none of the conditions that lead these countries to become failed states exist in Iran. IF you are interested, I can elaborate. > For a post that seems to contemplate the future you seem to exhibit a strange lack of reflection. I am not.

anigbrowl 7mo ago

FTA: Many of these companies operate regional offices, cloud infrastructure, or data-center operations across the Gulf [...]

Larrikin 7mo ago

This sounds like unless a missile goes from Iran to the target you won't give them credit. How is it meaningfully different if they act like Russia and just have people sneak in and take out a CXO in retaliation.

bawolff 7mo ago
There is a big difference between iranian agents sneaking onto us homeland and conducting an attack vs just inspiring a sympathetic person to commit a violent act.