5 ms·

Trump already said he was just going to bomb all their infrastructure so the economy of the country couldn't function if they didn't negotiate and then it's jus

Trump already said he was just going to bomb all their infrastructure so the economy of the country couldn't function if they didn't negotiate and then it's just going to be a mass refugee crisis. It would be a mass refugee crisis anyway with a protracted ground invasion, but more Americans would die, so Trump is choosing to get it over with the easy way for America at least if they won't negotiate. IMHO, This is pretty much the strategy the Khans used in the 13th century when they encountered arrogant Islamist Sultans emboldened with the bravery of their faith who refused to capitulate. They killed all the islamic people in Baghdad and then proceeded to fill all their canals and burn all their books. This decisively ended the Islamic golden age and Europe was able to survive after a very difficult 14th century where it would probably have been easily crushed by Islamists from the East had the Khans not set them back at least a few centuries. Truly one of the big turning points in World History. Oh yeah, we can't do this to Russia because they have nukes, but the Ukrainians are trying to do it piecemeal.

jacquesm 6mo ago
> Oh yeah, we can't do this to Russia because they have nukes Why would the US want to bomb an ally?
- marcus_holmes 6mo ago
  It's not an alliance - the Russians are supplying Iran with intelligence and material. It's just that Trump is Putin's biggest fan for some reason.
  - FpUser 6mo ago
    Ability to recognize sarcasm is missing
    - marcus_holmes 6mo ago
      In Ukraine, the USA and Russia are definitely allied. So sarcasm misplaced, I think.
      - FpUser 6mo ago
        Cut the BS please. The only ally US has is itself. The rest are either vassals or adversaries.
        marcus_holmes 6mo ago
        True enough, if only recently
        ef3dfd 6mo ago
        Wtf are you naive? The states have played a clever game post WW2. But the mask has slipped under Trump.
Quarrelsome 6mo ago
What this current administration is doing speaks much more of a lack of strategy than what the Khans did in the 13th century. Not having any sort of counterplay to Iran's one big move (the blocking of the straight), in a nation of some of the brighest minds on the planet, speaks volumes of how advisors are clearly not being listened to. The powers of the once mighty Republic have seemingly been vested in the hands of a bunch of incompetent nepo babies.
- randomNumber7 6mo ago
  > in a nation of some of the brighest minds on the planet You mean the people who voted for trump or those who voted for the democrats? Are there some causal reasons you think americans are smarter than people in other countries?
  - Quarrelsome 6mo ago
    > You mean the people who voted for trump or those who voted for the democrats? I'm not talking about plebs, I'm talking about people who know their shit and work at government level. We could just look at the invention of the past century and pluck out relevant events like the moon landing, electronic computer, transistor or ARPANET. Clearly there are smart people living in that nation. They have the talent to draw from to get good advice about stuff like: what Iran's first response might be to an aerial assault. > Are there some causal reasons you think americans are smarter than people in other countries? I never said that. I said America is home to SOME of the brightest minds in the world. That sentence does not apportion all the brightest minds to that nation. What you read is clearly something different from what I wrote. Do you have a chip on your shoulder?
    - randomNumber7 6mo ago
      Your argument was that you could use your bright minds to win against the iranians. That implies they are brighter than the iranians. I think america clearly had better opportunities for bright people in the past. Maybe some moved also there so the proportion is a little higher than in other places.
alpaca128 6mo ago
> he was just going to bomb all their infrastructure That's usually the idea ever since bombs were a thing. It just so happens that it's harder to actually pull off than to say it.
- Quarrelsome 6mo ago
  and nor does it result in victory without the follow up of a ground assault. I'm legit baffled by the US engaging in a war that suffers exactly the same negative properties as the Saudi's war in Yemen. You don't even have to learn from history, the Saudi/Yemeni conflict is still active today. Air campaigns alone are entirely insufficient, especially if your enemy has mountains.
RobotToaster 6mo ago
Are we just going to ignore the fact that targeting civilian infrastructure is yet another war crime?
- free652 6mo ago
  That's dual use infrastructure. Its also used for military and goverment purposes, right? The same as China providing weapons components to Russia, masking them as "civilian".
  - kergonath 6mo ago
    "The Russians did it as well" is not a fantastic excuse for a war crime… You might want to think this through a bit more.
    - shiroiuma 6mo ago
      What's the problem. The Russians do stuff that you say are "war crimes", and what happens to them? Nothing. So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes? There's obviously no penalty against doing them, so they're not really war crimes.
      - Planktonne 6mo ago
        Not being punished for something doesn't mean it isn't a crime, and doesn't mean it isn't wrong. Children have a more developed sense of ethics than that.
      - dygd 6mo ago
        > So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes? Attacking civilian infrastructure is defined as a war crime by the Geneva Conventions. It's not something a person on the internet made up.
        shiroiuma 6mo ago
kergonath 6mo ago
> Trump is choosing to get it over with the easy way for America at least if they won't negotiate That is… not the easy way. That’s how you get a nightmare for decades to come, endless waves of refugees and a limitless supply of terrorists. Though, to be fair, there is no easy way of doing what Trump claims he wants to do. Which is why it’s spectacularly stupid to do it in the first place. I mean, they did not expect retaliation in the strait of Hormuz. Amateur hour does not even begin to describe it. Spectacularly stupid is probably way too kind. If you must learn from the Khans, you’ll find that decapitation is not enough. You need people to put in place of the former leadership, and enforcers so that the underlying power structure stays in place to serve the new masters. The reason why is that, as the US learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan, it takes a bloody lot of soldiers to keep a whole population in check. Trump does not want to do the former and does not have the latter.
- randomNumber7 6mo ago
  He could use nukes but it would likely create a fallout.
  - 8note 6mo ago
    the firebombings of japan were much more destructive and killed more civilians than the nukes did. there's no reason to think nuking would do anything more than the existing bombing campaign. what changed in japan was the soviet army arriving
bjourne 6mo ago
That was standard practice for much of recorded history. Surrender now or we will kill you all. Alexander the Great did it to Tyre and Sidon. The Romans did it to Jerusalem. The Israelis did it to Gaza. The orange madman and his henchmen have made it very clear that they don't give a shit about the rules of warfare.

jacquesm 6mo ago

> Oh yeah, we can't do this to Russia because they have nukes Why would the US want to bomb an ally?

marcus_holmes 6mo ago
It's not an alliance - the Russians are supplying Iran with intelligence and material. It's just that Trump is Putin's biggest fan for some reason.
- FpUser 6mo ago
  Ability to recognize sarcasm is missing
  - marcus_holmes 6mo ago
    In Ukraine, the USA and Russia are definitely allied. So sarcasm misplaced, I think.
    - FpUser 6mo ago
      Cut the BS please. The only ally US has is itself. The rest are either vassals or adversaries.
      - marcus_holmes 6mo ago
        True enough, if only recently
        ef3dfd 6mo ago
        Wtf are you naive? The states have played a clever game post WW2. But the mask has slipped under Trump.

Quarrelsome 6mo ago

What this current administration is doing speaks much more of a lack of strategy than what the Khans did in the 13th century. Not having any sort of counterplay to Iran's one big move (the blocking of the straight), in a nation of some of the brighest minds on the planet, speaks volumes of how advisors are clearly not being listened to. The powers of the once mighty Republic have seemingly been vested in the hands of a bunch of incompetent nepo babies.

randomNumber7 6mo ago
> in a nation of some of the brighest minds on the planet You mean the people who voted for trump or those who voted for the democrats? Are there some causal reasons you think americans are smarter than people in other countries?
- Quarrelsome 6mo ago
  > You mean the people who voted for trump or those who voted for the democrats? I'm not talking about plebs, I'm talking about people who know their shit and work at government level. We could just look at the invention of the past century and pluck out relevant events like the moon landing, electronic computer, transistor or ARPANET. Clearly there are smart people living in that nation. They have the talent to draw from to get good advice about stuff like: what Iran's first response might be to an aerial assault. > Are there some causal reasons you think americans are smarter than people in other countries? I never said that. I said America is home to SOME of the brightest minds in the world. That sentence does not apportion all the brightest minds to that nation. What you read is clearly something different from what I wrote. Do you have a chip on your shoulder?
  - randomNumber7 6mo ago
    Your argument was that you could use your bright minds to win against the iranians. That implies they are brighter than the iranians. I think america clearly had better opportunities for bright people in the past. Maybe some moved also there so the proportion is a little higher than in other places.

alpaca128 6mo ago

> he was just going to bomb all their infrastructure That's usually the idea ever since bombs were a thing. It just so happens that it's harder to actually pull off than to say it.

Quarrelsome 6mo ago
and nor does it result in victory without the follow up of a ground assault. I'm legit baffled by the US engaging in a war that suffers exactly the same negative properties as the Saudi's war in Yemen. You don't even have to learn from history, the Saudi/Yemeni conflict is still active today. Air campaigns alone are entirely insufficient, especially if your enemy has mountains.

RobotToaster 6mo ago

Are we just going to ignore the fact that targeting civilian infrastructure is yet another war crime?

free652 6mo ago
That's dual use infrastructure. Its also used for military and goverment purposes, right? The same as China providing weapons components to Russia, masking them as "civilian".
- kergonath 6mo ago
  "The Russians did it as well" is not a fantastic excuse for a war crime… You might want to think this through a bit more.
  - shiroiuma 6mo ago
    What's the problem. The Russians do stuff that you say are "war crimes", and what happens to them? Nothing. So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes? There's obviously no penalty against doing them, so they're not really war crimes.
    - Planktonne 6mo ago
      Not being punished for something doesn't mean it isn't a crime, and doesn't mean it isn't wrong. Children have a more developed sense of ethics than that.
    - dygd 6mo ago
      > So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes? Attacking civilian infrastructure is defined as a war crime by the Geneva Conventions. It's not something a person on the internet made up.
      - shiroiuma 6mo ago

kergonath 6mo ago

> Trump is choosing to get it over with the easy way for America at least if they won't negotiate That is… not the easy way. That’s how you get a nightmare for decades to come, endless waves of refugees and a limitless supply of terrorists. Though, to be fair, there is no easy way of doing what Trump claims he wants to do. Which is why it’s spectacularly stupid to do it in the first place. I mean, they did not expect retaliation in the strait of Hormuz. Amateur hour does not even begin to describe it. Spectacularly stupid is probably way too kind. If you must learn from the Khans, you’ll find that decapitation is not enough. You need people to put in place of the former leadership, and enforcers so that the underlying power structure stays in place to serve the new masters. The reason why is that, as the US learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan, it takes a bloody lot of soldiers to keep a whole population in check. Trump does not want to do the former and does not have the latter.

randomNumber7 6mo ago
He could use nukes but it would likely create a fallout.
- 8note 6mo ago
  the firebombings of japan were much more destructive and killed more civilians than the nukes did. there's no reason to think nuking would do anything more than the existing bombing campaign. what changed in japan was the soviet army arriving

bjourne 6mo ago

That was standard practice for much of recorded history. Surrender now or we will kill you all. Alexander the Great did it to Tyre and Sidon. The Romans did it to Jerusalem. The Israelis did it to Gaza. The orange madman and his henchmen have made it very clear that they don't give a shit about the rules of warfare.