4 ms·

Agreed on your points. This conflict, just validated the North Korea style of strategy to all regimes out there. It does the opposite of what it is intended.

by ardit33 7mo ago

Agreed on your points. This conflict, just validated the North Korea style of strategy to all regimes out there. It does the opposite of what it is intended. I hope things do get de-escalated soon, as this is not good for any party (apart Israel and Russia, which are the main gainers of all this mess).

pas 7mo ago
But it didn't really. Iran is poorer than it was before, even more of a problem than it was before. NK has two very special advantages (Seoul is within artillery range, and it is literally in the backyard of one or two relevant superpowers over the decades) whereas Tehran's "force projection" is mostly through proxies and affecting global commodity trade. Without NK's hard deterrence (and without being next door to its allies) Tehran is an easy target up until the last second. And even then what's going to happen if they detonate a nuclear bomb? Everyone will sit back and let them build as many more as they feel?
- surgical_fire 7mo ago
  > Iran is poorer than it was before, even more of a problem than it was before. Iran seemingly is coming out of this mess stronger than it was before. The regime remains unchanged, and is likely less willing to make concessions now. Hell, even sanctions on it being able to sell oil have been lifted, which is a boon to their economy. They are in effective control of the strait, and justified in exercising it now. Yeah, other gulf countries may try to circumvent it with pipelines and whatnot, depending on how poorly they come out of this war - and it is not like you create a pipeline in a few days. Those are big engineering projects. If I were a betting man, which I am not, I think they will just resume their nuclear weapons program unchallenged after this, and will likely achieve it. It is clear that no one can stop them doing so. And frankly, they should. Every country that can have nuclear weapons should develop them, that much is very clear, as the last decade taught everyone.
  - pas 7mo ago
    Obviously the current US Mobministration is almost impervious to shame, but of course they still have their own egoistic expectations to grapple with. They are not afraid to spend money (and blood) on a problem, even if it turns out to be bigger than expected. How much? We'll see. The neighbors are motivated to not live next to one more nuclear state. We'll see how much.
    - surgical_fire 7mo ago
      > They are not afraid to spend money (and blood) on a problem, even if it turns out to be bigger than expected. How much? We'll see. I agree, but it is unclear if "more money" is the answer here. Iran is a much tougher nut to crack than Afghanistan. Afghanistan is barely a country. Iran is an actual, functioning country, with a territory that is geographically very defensible. And on top of that, they have actually been preparing for this for decades. The ironic bit is that I thought the Iranian regime was on an irreversible decline, as the unrest amongst the population was growing in recent years. The analysis I have read point out that this attack actually further legitimizes the regime and takes steam away from internal unrest, especially if Iran comes out on top. Every authoritarian government needs an enemy. The US-Israel axis provided a very real, tangible one.
      - pas 7mo ago
        > The analysis I have read point out that this attack actually further legitimizes the regime and takes steam away from internal unrest, especially if Iran comes out on top. Yes. Unfortunately both things can be true (irreversible decline) and solidified regime due to any external intervention.
  - hersko 7mo ago
    > Iran seemingly is coming out of this mess stronger than it was before. This is a wild take. Their top leaders and generals have been killed, they have no control over their own airspace, have their military and civilian infrastructure completely at the mercy of their enemies, and have no navy/airforce any more. Oh, and their currency collapsed. But other than that they are doing great.

by ardit33 7mo ago

pas 7mo ago

But it didn't really. Iran is poorer than it was before, even more of a problem than it was before. NK has two very special advantages (Seoul is within artillery range, and it is literally in the backyard of one or two relevant superpowers over the decades) whereas Tehran's "force projection" is mostly through proxies and affecting global commodity trade. Without NK's hard deterrence (and without being next door to its allies) Tehran is an easy target up until the last second. And even then what's going to happen if they detonate a nuclear bomb? Everyone will sit back and let them build as many more as they feel?

surgical_fire 7mo ago
> Iran is poorer than it was before, even more of a problem than it was before. Iran seemingly is coming out of this mess stronger than it was before. The regime remains unchanged, and is likely less willing to make concessions now. Hell, even sanctions on it being able to sell oil have been lifted, which is a boon to their economy. They are in effective control of the strait, and justified in exercising it now. Yeah, other gulf countries may try to circumvent it with pipelines and whatnot, depending on how poorly they come out of this war - and it is not like you create a pipeline in a few days. Those are big engineering projects. If I were a betting man, which I am not, I think they will just resume their nuclear weapons program unchallenged after this, and will likely achieve it. It is clear that no one can stop them doing so. And frankly, they should. Every country that can have nuclear weapons should develop them, that much is very clear, as the last decade taught everyone.
- pas 7mo ago
  Obviously the current US Mobministration is almost impervious to shame, but of course they still have their own egoistic expectations to grapple with. They are not afraid to spend money (and blood) on a problem, even if it turns out to be bigger than expected. How much? We'll see. The neighbors are motivated to not live next to one more nuclear state. We'll see how much.
  - surgical_fire 7mo ago
    > They are not afraid to spend money (and blood) on a problem, even if it turns out to be bigger than expected. How much? We'll see. I agree, but it is unclear if "more money" is the answer here. Iran is a much tougher nut to crack than Afghanistan. Afghanistan is barely a country. Iran is an actual, functioning country, with a territory that is geographically very defensible. And on top of that, they have actually been preparing for this for decades. The ironic bit is that I thought the Iranian regime was on an irreversible decline, as the unrest amongst the population was growing in recent years. The analysis I have read point out that this attack actually further legitimizes the regime and takes steam away from internal unrest, especially if Iran comes out on top. Every authoritarian government needs an enemy. The US-Israel axis provided a very real, tangible one.
    - pas 7mo ago
      > The analysis I have read point out that this attack actually further legitimizes the regime and takes steam away from internal unrest, especially if Iran comes out on top. Yes. Unfortunately both things can be true (irreversible decline) and solidified regime due to any external intervention.
- hersko 7mo ago
  > Iran seemingly is coming out of this mess stronger than it was before. This is a wild take. Their top leaders and generals have been killed, they have no control over their own airspace, have their military and civilian infrastructure completely at the mercy of their enemies, and have no navy/airforce any more. Oh, and their currency collapsed. But other than that they are doing great.