4 ms·

Both Netanyahu and Trump have a vested interest in promoting the idea of how much influence Israel has over US foreign policy. For Netanyahu, the propaganda tha

Both Netanyahu and Trump have a vested interest in promoting the idea of how much influence Israel has over US foreign policy. For Netanyahu, the propaganda that he manipulated Trump into waging a war against Iran boosts his political image with some Israelis. (And it is near election season in Israel).

TurdF3rguson 4mo ago
I don't see how that's a win for him since the outcome was a stronger Iran.
- anukin 4mo ago
  Stronger how? The central command is gone.
  - nemomarx 4mo ago
    They seem to be heading towards control of the strait, and the tolls from that could be a pretty good pickup for whatever new government forms?
    - gizajob 4mo ago
      Not sure how the gulf states on the other side of the strait are going to feel about that.
      - nerfbatplz 4mo ago
        Oman doesn't seem to care, Qatar capitulated quickly, the UAE is a walking corpse, Kuwait is as well until they kick the 5th fleet out, Iraq is already majority Shia, Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to care much.
      - no-name-here 4mo ago
        Apparently not enough for them to intervene (militarily?) even now while they have both the US and Israel actively on their side there?
  - swat535 4mo ago
    I'm Iranian, now living in the west. Allow me to chime in.. So Iran doesn't have a central command, they've developed a mosaic system where the 30+ chains operate autonomously. It is also multi-layered (IRGC, Artesh, Basij, etc). The multi-layered design was developed after the revolution, when they realized that the regime should be protected in case of internal mutiny. IRGC specifically was put in place to protect the regime and it only responds to the Supreme Leader. Neither the president or the parliament control it. The mosaic system was started few years back after the assassination of Qasem Soleimani (though it possibly dates further, I can't confirm this). The biggest mistake US & Israel did was underestimating Iran, specifically their defensive capabilities. They've prepared for this war for 47 years, _literally_ praying for it. You had Abbas Araghchi on TV literally inviting American army into Iran for a ground invasion. What the West doesn't understand is that you can't really dismantle an ideology by dropping bombs on civilians. It didn't work in Afghanistan, it didn't work in IRAQ and it's not working with IRAN. The Shia martyrdom culture is misunderstood. I was not being hyperbolic when I said they have been praying for this war. Their motto is "Every day in Ashura, every land is Karbala". Anyway, I'll land it here for now. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashura - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karbala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karbala
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > They've prepared for this war for 47 years, _literally_ praying for it Is there an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran? Similar to American Evangelists hoping for Armageddon?
      - evanjrowley 4mo ago
        There is a potential for bias among Iranian converts to Christianity, but for those whose stories I've listened to, the common answer is yes, there is an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran.
      - jameshilliard 4mo ago
        > Is there an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran? It's more of a Jihad/Martyrdom ideology that's driving them. > Similar to American Evangelists hoping for Armageddon? That's a rather different issue, and luckily one that at least causes a lot less problems in practice. Sam Harris has some decent material on why this is(a lot of it comes down to important differences in doctrine).
  - avidphantasm 4mo ago
    They have proven to the world they have a deterrent akin to a nuclear weapon, but they can actually use it.
    - etiam 4mo ago
      Not denying they're getting great leverage from that. I still don't quite understand why the shortcut is supposedly so irreplaceable.
      - Exoristos 4mo ago
        Perhaps because modern economies are allergic to long-term planning.
        etiam 4mo ago
        Perhaps. And seemingly also a bit even to short-term reactive adaptation?
      - thisislife2 4mo ago
        It is not irreplaceable - you can avoid it as a shipping route and take a longer route. It's just more costly because it is a long route. Which means higher oil prices, which is universally unpopular everywhere with the citizens. (In oil-importing economies, oil prices have a rippling effect as any increase in oil prices increases the transportation cost of goods there by resulting in price increases of all such goods).
        etiam 4mo ago
        That's pretty much what I've been thinking. Maybe I'm underestimating how much more expensive, but it seems for most of those ships if they'd got going on an alternative route instead of crowding around the peninsula they'd be arriving soon. For all I know the goods they're carrying may already have been sold at a rate assuming the cheap freight of course...
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
- woodruffw 4mo ago
  It's simpler than this: Israel benefits from Iran needing to spend large amounts of money on its own infrastructure and civilian needs, rather than on military development. Getting a larger country (the US) to create those money sinks (in the form of a broadly unserious conflict) achieves that outcome. (The irony being that this is Iran's strategy w/r/t Hormuz as well.)
  - mikewarot 4mo ago
    > Israel benefits from Iran needing to spend large amounts of money on its own infrastructure and civilian needs, rather than on military development. Yeah, but the rest of the world is now going to pay for that, and more, with the $2million toll on oil through the Straight of Hormuz.
    - woodruffw 4mo ago
      Yes, to be clear that wasn't a normative (as in "this is good") appraisal.
- QQ00 4mo ago
  more like weaker iran than ever, now that the central command are gone, no leader at the top and no high level generals, the power at the hand of mid level thugs of the IRGC.
  - varjag 4mo ago
    Certain figures are gone but political and military organization appears mostly intact. Iran also emerged as potent enough to deliver stalemate to combined force of CENTCOM and Israel. Its standing certainly had improved next to the lows after decimation of its proxies and the fall of client regime in Syria.
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > no leader at the top and no high level generals, the power at the hand of mid level thugs of the IRGC One could argue a junta makes for a stronger Iran than the previous gerontocratic autocracy. Of course, we don't know. And I think it's silly to say Iran is stronger today than it was at the start of the war. But relative to America? At least in the region, I'd say one could argue that sensibly.
    - t-3 4mo ago
      It is stronger. The weapons capabilities only matter if people are willing to man them. The obvious interference in otherwise organic protests and the threats and the multiple bombings during negotiations united the people against outside threats. Without an enemy, they will fight each other as long as sanctions pressure is continued and internal conflicts are amplified.
  - iugtmkbdfil834 4mo ago
    The argument is interesting, because it happens to repeat administration's assertions. It also is interesting, because the argument itself attempts make peace with the idea that wiping out central command & leadership did not put US in a more favorable position in general. I guess I will just point out that 'weaker than ever' is doing a lot of work here without being specific on what strength means here. I don't want to put words in your mouth. It is quite ridiculous to watch though. There are ( well, were ) reasons as to why IC was very vocal about not doing what Trump admin's decided to do. And now they are looking to find a reason, any reason that can deflect the blame.. Why? No one likes a loser politician.. not even Trump's electorate. And it is hard to spin lost war AND higher gas prices AND higher inflation.
- Spooky23 4mo ago
  It’s not a win for Israel. It’s a win for him. The stronger Iran is, the more you need him. Netanyahu is Trump like - his core constituency is whack job Americans and the Israelis whom they firehose money at. The commentators and idiots running the government miss the forest for the trees. Iran is radically stronger than they were, even with the destruction rained down. The entire American military supremacy story is toast. The strategy of them and North Korea with respect to ballistic missiles and drones works. It’s Vietnam with missiles and drone. The US slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, “never lost a battle”, yet got whooped.
- t-3 4mo ago
  Netanyahu avoids domestic issues and stays in power through the continuation of the conflict. Israel continues to receive US money and weapons, and can continue to run a wartime economy, which has been lucrative for many.
QQ00 4mo ago
>Both Netanyahu and Trump have a vested interest in promoting the idea of... you mentioned what Netanyahu gained from this but what about trump?
- AnimalMuppet 4mo ago
  Maybe that it's not his fault? But that's at the price of not being in control. I don't know if he thinks that's a win...
  - QQ00 4mo ago
    considering Trump's personality, i don't think this is a win, his followers certainly wouldn't like that as well. I'm pretty sure this idea isn't even part of their stream of thoughts that trump is a puppet of bibi and this whole war was conducted following the command from Netanyahu.

TurdF3rguson 4mo ago

I don't see how that's a win for him since the outcome was a stronger Iran.

anukin 4mo ago
Stronger how? The central command is gone.
- nemomarx 4mo ago
  They seem to be heading towards control of the strait, and the tolls from that could be a pretty good pickup for whatever new government forms?
  - gizajob 4mo ago
    Not sure how the gulf states on the other side of the strait are going to feel about that.
    - nerfbatplz 4mo ago
      Oman doesn't seem to care, Qatar capitulated quickly, the UAE is a walking corpse, Kuwait is as well until they kick the 5th fleet out, Iraq is already majority Shia, Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to care much.
    - no-name-here 4mo ago
      Apparently not enough for them to intervene (militarily?) even now while they have both the US and Israel actively on their side there?
- swat535 4mo ago
  I'm Iranian, now living in the west. Allow me to chime in.. So Iran doesn't have a central command, they've developed a mosaic system where the 30+ chains operate autonomously. It is also multi-layered (IRGC, Artesh, Basij, etc). The multi-layered design was developed after the revolution, when they realized that the regime should be protected in case of internal mutiny. IRGC specifically was put in place to protect the regime and it only responds to the Supreme Leader. Neither the president or the parliament control it. The mosaic system was started few years back after the assassination of Qasem Soleimani (though it possibly dates further, I can't confirm this). The biggest mistake US & Israel did was underestimating Iran, specifically their defensive capabilities. They've prepared for this war for 47 years, _literally_ praying for it. You had Abbas Araghchi on TV literally inviting American army into Iran for a ground invasion. What the West doesn't understand is that you can't really dismantle an ideology by dropping bombs on civilians. It didn't work in Afghanistan, it didn't work in IRAQ and it's not working with IRAN. The Shia martyrdom culture is misunderstood. I was not being hyperbolic when I said they have been praying for this war. Their motto is "Every day in Ashura, every land is Karbala". Anyway, I'll land it here for now. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashura - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karbala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karbala
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > They've prepared for this war for 47 years, _literally_ praying for it Is there an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran? Similar to American Evangelists hoping for Armageddon?
    - evanjrowley 4mo ago
      There is a potential for bias among Iranian converts to Christianity, but for those whose stories I've listened to, the common answer is yes, there is an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran.
    - jameshilliard 4mo ago
      > Is there an apocalyptic religious movement in Iran? It's more of a Jihad/Martyrdom ideology that's driving them. > Similar to American Evangelists hoping for Armageddon? That's a rather different issue, and luckily one that at least causes a lot less problems in practice. Sam Harris has some decent material on why this is(a lot of it comes down to important differences in doctrine).
- avidphantasm 4mo ago
  They have proven to the world they have a deterrent akin to a nuclear weapon, but they can actually use it.
  - etiam 4mo ago
    Not denying they're getting great leverage from that. I still don't quite understand why the shortcut is supposedly so irreplaceable.
    - Exoristos 4mo ago
      Perhaps because modern economies are allergic to long-term planning.
      - etiam 4mo ago
        Perhaps. And seemingly also a bit even to short-term reactive adaptation?
    - thisislife2 4mo ago
      It is not irreplaceable - you can avoid it as a shipping route and take a longer route. It's just more costly because it is a long route. Which means higher oil prices, which is universally unpopular everywhere with the citizens. (In oil-importing economies, oil prices have a rippling effect as any increase in oil prices increases the transportation cost of goods there by resulting in price increases of all such goods).
      - etiam 4mo ago
        That's pretty much what I've been thinking. Maybe I'm underestimating how much more expensive, but it seems for most of those ships if they'd got going on an alternative route instead of crowding around the peninsula they'd be arriving soon. For all I know the goods they're carrying may already have been sold at a rate assuming the cheap freight of course...
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
woodruffw 4mo ago
It's simpler than this: Israel benefits from Iran needing to spend large amounts of money on its own infrastructure and civilian needs, rather than on military development. Getting a larger country (the US) to create those money sinks (in the form of a broadly unserious conflict) achieves that outcome. (The irony being that this is Iran's strategy w/r/t Hormuz as well.)
- mikewarot 4mo ago
  > Israel benefits from Iran needing to spend large amounts of money on its own infrastructure and civilian needs, rather than on military development. Yeah, but the rest of the world is now going to pay for that, and more, with the $2million toll on oil through the Straight of Hormuz.
  - woodruffw 4mo ago
    Yes, to be clear that wasn't a normative (as in "this is good") appraisal.
QQ00 4mo ago
more like weaker iran than ever, now that the central command are gone, no leader at the top and no high level generals, the power at the hand of mid level thugs of the IRGC.
- varjag 4mo ago
  Certain figures are gone but political and military organization appears mostly intact. Iran also emerged as potent enough to deliver stalemate to combined force of CENTCOM and Israel. Its standing certainly had improved next to the lows after decimation of its proxies and the fall of client regime in Syria.
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > no leader at the top and no high level generals, the power at the hand of mid level thugs of the IRGC One could argue a junta makes for a stronger Iran than the previous gerontocratic autocracy. Of course, we don't know. And I think it's silly to say Iran is stronger today than it was at the start of the war. But relative to America? At least in the region, I'd say one could argue that sensibly.
  - t-3 4mo ago
    It is stronger. The weapons capabilities only matter if people are willing to man them. The obvious interference in otherwise organic protests and the threats and the multiple bombings during negotiations united the people against outside threats. Without an enemy, they will fight each other as long as sanctions pressure is continued and internal conflicts are amplified.
- iugtmkbdfil834 4mo ago
  The argument is interesting, because it happens to repeat administration's assertions. It also is interesting, because the argument itself attempts make peace with the idea that wiping out central command & leadership did not put US in a more favorable position in general. I guess I will just point out that 'weaker than ever' is doing a lot of work here without being specific on what strength means here. I don't want to put words in your mouth. It is quite ridiculous to watch though. There are ( well, were ) reasons as to why IC was very vocal about not doing what Trump admin's decided to do. And now they are looking to find a reason, any reason that can deflect the blame.. Why? No one likes a loser politician.. not even Trump's electorate. And it is hard to spin lost war AND higher gas prices AND higher inflation.
Spooky23 4mo ago
It’s not a win for Israel. It’s a win for him. The stronger Iran is, the more you need him. Netanyahu is Trump like - his core constituency is whack job Americans and the Israelis whom they firehose money at. The commentators and idiots running the government miss the forest for the trees. Iran is radically stronger than they were, even with the destruction rained down. The entire American military supremacy story is toast. The strategy of them and North Korea with respect to ballistic missiles and drones works. It’s Vietnam with missiles and drone. The US slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, “never lost a battle”, yet got whooped.
t-3 4mo ago
Netanyahu avoids domestic issues and stays in power through the continuation of the conflict. Israel continues to receive US money and weapons, and can continue to run a wartime economy, which has been lucrative for many.

QQ00 4mo ago

>Both Netanyahu and Trump have a vested interest in promoting the idea of... you mentioned what Netanyahu gained from this but what about trump?

AnimalMuppet 4mo ago
Maybe that it's not his fault? But that's at the price of not being in control. I don't know if he thinks that's a win...
- QQ00 4mo ago
  considering Trump's personality, i don't think this is a win, his followers certainly wouldn't like that as well. I'm pretty sure this idea isn't even part of their stream of thoughts that trump is a puppet of bibi and this whole war was conducted following the command from Netanyahu.