3 ms·

I feel like getting obsessed about the strategic failure of this is missing the forest for the trees. Why did the U.S. assassinate the leader of a country acro

I feel like getting obsessed about the strategic failure of this is missing the forest for the trees. Why did the U.S. assassinate the leader of a country across the planet in the first place? Because Benjamin Netanyahu wanted us to because he needs our help to create instability in the region so Israel can expand further. That and the billionaire military industrial complex players felt like they wanted some more money. Name it what it is. Immoral, racist, and a repetition of the same bullshit we’ve been doing in the Middle East for decades. Calling it a strategic failure gives it more value than it deserves.

Closi 6mo ago
[flagged]
- stein1946 6mo ago
  Are you going to offer a “multi sided, unbiased and fairly sophisticated” view yourself or? The view that trump went to Iran because “regime awful” does not seem to qualify
  - Closi 6mo ago
    I don't think I need to? I don't need to offer my own analysis to know that "Netanyahu asked trump to go to war because he wanted to create instability and that it was because of the the military industrial complex" is the sort of analysis you get if your research is 2 or 3 facebook posts.
- deaux 6mo ago
  > or the longer term risk of the iranian nuclear programme. According to Netanyahu himself the state of the Iranian nuclear programme has been the same for 30 years: "they're right on the cusp of nuclear weapons". The logical conclusion is then that there is almost no risk, quite the opposite - there is stability. Note how completely different this is from e.g. NK. Despite being even much more closed off than Iran, the progression through the years was pretty accurate. Went from "they will want to get nukes" to "they've started working on nukes" to "they're close to nukes" to "they have nukes".
  - Closi 6mo ago
    I don't follow that conclusion - just because Israel has said there has been a risk for 30 years clearly doesn't mean that there isn't a real risk now.
dangus 6mo ago
More people need to read this NYT article. Not only is it astounding the detail and extent of these leaks from the situation room, but what you’re saying is even more true than you might realize. Netanyahu literally threw a presentation up on a conference call to to persuade Trump to do this for him. I’m having difficulty getting archive.is to work on my browser right now so here’s the plain link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/politics/trump-iran-war.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/politics/trump-iran-wa...
- SyneRyder 6mo ago
  Full article appeared to be accessible to me with a free account, didn't need an NYT subscription to read. Worth the read, thanks for sharing. EDIT: Worked on my phone, but now on my desktop it's asking for a subscription again. Either way, thanks for the link.
deaux 6mo ago
> I feel like getting obsessed about the strategic failure of this is missing the forest for the trees. Absolutely, but unfortunately I believe you are too. Headlines on the Epstein files and social media mentions of them are almost certainly down 70%+ since the assault on Iran. It was a great success!
- mindslight 6mo ago
  It's a shame too, because the two subjects appear eminently linked, and not just for the distraction effect. There's no real reason people can't be condemning this ill thought out war as being an outright result of the kompromat Mossad has on Trump.
jfengel 6mo ago
I don't doubt that Netanyahu is the reason, but I can't see how this helps Israel expand. He didn't need to attack Iran to get to Lebanon. True, Iran would have helped Hezbollah if it weren't kept busy, but he's not going to get his "buffer zone" anyway. It's just an opportunity to harass Lebanon. He certainly doesn't need to attack Iran to expand in the West Bank. He's building settlements as fast as he can. Attacking Iran punishes them for October 7th, and delays the next one of those. (Gaza is quiet for the moment, but nothing has actually changed.)

Closi 6mo ago

[flagged]

stein1946 6mo ago
Are you going to offer a “multi sided, unbiased and fairly sophisticated” view yourself or? The view that trump went to Iran because “regime awful” does not seem to qualify
- Closi 6mo ago
  I don't think I need to? I don't need to offer my own analysis to know that "Netanyahu asked trump to go to war because he wanted to create instability and that it was because of the the military industrial complex" is the sort of analysis you get if your research is 2 or 3 facebook posts.
deaux 6mo ago
> or the longer term risk of the iranian nuclear programme. According to Netanyahu himself the state of the Iranian nuclear programme has been the same for 30 years: "they're right on the cusp of nuclear weapons". The logical conclusion is then that there is almost no risk, quite the opposite - there is stability. Note how completely different this is from e.g. NK. Despite being even much more closed off than Iran, the progression through the years was pretty accurate. Went from "they will want to get nukes" to "they've started working on nukes" to "they're close to nukes" to "they have nukes".
- Closi 6mo ago
  I don't follow that conclusion - just because Israel has said there has been a risk for 30 years clearly doesn't mean that there isn't a real risk now.

dangus 6mo ago

More people need to read this NYT article. Not only is it astounding the detail and extent of these leaks from the situation room, but what you’re saying is even more true than you might realize. Netanyahu literally threw a presentation up on a conference call to to persuade Trump to do this for him. I’m having difficulty getting archive.is to work on my browser right now so here’s the plain link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/politics/trump-iran-war.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/politics/trump-iran-wa...

SyneRyder 6mo ago
Full article appeared to be accessible to me with a free account, didn't need an NYT subscription to read. Worth the read, thanks for sharing. EDIT: Worked on my phone, but now on my desktop it's asking for a subscription again. Either way, thanks for the link.

deaux 6mo ago

> I feel like getting obsessed about the strategic failure of this is missing the forest for the trees. Absolutely, but unfortunately I believe you are too. Headlines on the Epstein files and social media mentions of them are almost certainly down 70%+ since the assault on Iran. It was a great success!

mindslight 6mo ago
It's a shame too, because the two subjects appear eminently linked, and not just for the distraction effect. There's no real reason people can't be condemning this ill thought out war as being an outright result of the kompromat Mossad has on Trump.

jfengel 6mo ago

I don't doubt that Netanyahu is the reason, but I can't see how this helps Israel expand. He didn't need to attack Iran to get to Lebanon. True, Iran would have helped Hezbollah if it weren't kept busy, but he's not going to get his "buffer zone" anyway. It's just an opportunity to harass Lebanon. He certainly doesn't need to attack Iran to expand in the West Bank. He's building settlements as fast as he can. Attacking Iran punishes them for October 7th, and delays the next one of those. (Gaza is quiet for the moment, but nothing has actually changed.)