4 ms·

America has lost its war with Iran

72 points by testing22321 4mo ago

sleepyguy 4mo ago
It ain't over until Bibi says it's over. Trump is pissing his pants trying to get out of this anyway he can but Bibi won't let him. I'm sure our military was against this from day one, but the Fox news host and the Real Estate developer thought they knew better but, in the end Bibi and Israel call the shots and America obeys.... Just saying...Junk away...
- tru3_power 4mo ago
  Let’s say this is the case it still does not explain what the real end game looks like. What do you think?
  - Danox 4mo ago
    The real game is that the US isn’t in charge, and the guy in the White House is in over his head along with his yes men and the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on.
    - ElProlactin 4mo ago
      > ...and the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on. This. Pax Americana is dead.
      - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
        Which makes "the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on" a euphemism for the rest of the world is gearing up for war.
  - sleepyguy 4mo ago
    I don't know. It's a quagmire where America finds itself with no good options. Bibi and Israel set in motion a trap that the USA can't easily escape. Netanyahu never believed America would back down, and America never believed it could lose. So what now? Do you surrender? Do you invade? Trump and Hegseth, being the fools they are, were never equipped to deal with a situation like this. The only outcome they seriously considered was Iranian surrender. They seemed convinced that Iran would fold, and gave little thought to what happens if it doesn't.
    - defrost 4mo ago
      > Bibi and Israel set in motion a trap that the USA can't easily escape. More accurately, they've been pushing this trap for decades and US presidents have been sidestepping it for decades. From that PoV it's always been easily avoided.
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > Do you surrender? Do you invade? Clearly the answer is you pay them off.
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > until Bibi says it's over There is enough frustration between Bibi and Trump that I could see Israel unilaterally trying to blow up this deal massively backfiring. (To the point that it might be in e.g. Hezbollah's strategic interest to goad them into it.)
- ulfw 4mo ago
  Meanwhile Murica distracts itself with idiotic 'wealth creation' ponzis like SPCX IPOs built on absolutely nothing of value and games for the simple people in front of the White House lawn
casey2 4mo ago
I think a serious news institution would not run this title even in an Opinions section.
- whynotmaybe 4mo ago
  In today's world where nuance is a disappearing diaphanous concept, the USA didn't win, so they lost.
  - ballsac 4mo ago
    Nuance has nothing to do with it. If you start a war and you don’t win, then you lose.
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > If you start a war and you don’t win, then you lose This is reductive. One can absolutely stalemate. Regardless of whether you start a war, if it ends with you worse off and the other party either where they were at the start or arguably better off, you lost. If all that happened was the Strait was reopened, I'd call it a stalemate. The fact that Tehran got reparations equal to a third of a trillion dollars–over $800 from every American and $1,100 from each and every voter–makes it an Irania victory and American defeat.
- enoint 4mo ago
  Why? The only question left is what humiliation awaits the USA in return for its blood, treasure and reputation?
- wavemode 4mo ago
  "America has lost" seems to be a matter of plain fact rather than opinion. What singular goal of this Iran invasion was achieved? It seems the US has gained literally nothing in this war, meanwhile causing trillions in global economic damage. It vaguely sounds as though there is some sort of nuclear deal in the works ... but the US already had a nuclear deal with Iran, that Trump tore up. So I guess you could squint and say that the US won something back that was previously foolishly discarded.
dragontamer 4mo ago
A bad peace will be better than this war. I know people want to stick this into some kind of winners vs losers discussion but I for one would be happy if it reliably ended. It's very difficult for me to think of such a terrible peace agreement that I'd personally reject it.
- amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
  It's just sad how much wealth and how many lives have been spent for absolutely nothing.
  - TacticalCoder 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - dragontamer 4mo ago
      So we are pretending that we care about Iranian civilians today? The Iranian civilians would never back a US / Israeli backed coup of their government. They distrust us because of the Shah / 1960s.
  - ulfw 4mo ago
    Sounds like the Trump Musk government since day one. The utter destruction of lives impacted by the 'DOGE' scandal alone...
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > A bad peace will be better than this war We're no longer in a position to unilaterally disengage. If the IRGC decides its political establishment is wrong and starts potting random shit again, we'll be dragged back in.
  - dragontamer 4mo ago
    I know Iran likely has a fractured government, but more assassinations vs various Iranian leadership won't exactly solve that issue. (Indeed, it's incredibly stupid that we assassinated so many leaders to the point that the peace deal is so shaky) This is as unified as Iran is going to get in the near future. So we gotta work with what we have.
golden-face 4mo ago
Even if the peace holds the whole thing feels like a definite L for the following reasons: Materiel - a huge amount of expensive and long lead time to replace missiles/interceptors expended - a $300,000,000 radar station destroyed - like 30 Reaper drones (approximately 1/5 of the total) - 1 AWACs destroyed and 3-5 others heavily damaged (we only have about 20 of them - tons of damage to infrastructure in the area (like refineries, ports, chemical plants) Geopolitical - primacy of American military power shown to be truly questionable (I consider this as the biggest part of the L; can't decide if it's an unforced error or it was bound to happen under any administration) - Iran now knows it can leverage its drones and missiles to influence the region and world; they don't even need a nuke anymore to project power I guess if there is a silver lining it's that the conflict has exposed how unprepared some of our doctrines and orders of battle are when dealing against an adversary that needs to operate on a more asymmetric level. But also it feels like that should be already known after years of monitoring the Ukrainian conflict.
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > Iran now knows it can leverage its drones and missiles to influence the region and world; they don't even need a nuke anymore to project power Tehran probably needs nukes to project power. As in reärm its proxies and have them go off and start being a nuisance again without real fear of facing any consequences for it. What Iran has learned–and globally demonstrated–is America is willing to pay more to its enemies than it's willing to spend defending its allies. (We're discussing arranging financing for Iran in an amount equal to what it costs us to support NATO for a decade.) [1] https://www.ft.com/content/088c14d3-f708-44d8-a306-7996aa5211de?syn-25a6b1a6=1 https://www.ft.com/content/088c14d3-f708-44d8-a306-7996aa521...
- newtonianrules 4mo ago
  If anything I think that demonstrating how worthless all this “war materiel” is, well it s a good thing. Can we please cut “defense” spending in half and just let me keep more of my own money or better yet stop going into so much debt?
- Simran-B 4mo ago
  … and let's not forget about Iran's Lego videos!
fyredge 4mo ago
As bad as the whole Iran situation has been, I'm glad that there are still rational actors pushing back within the military. If Trump had his way completely, I wouldn't put off the chance of an offensive nuke being used.
- pseudohadamard 4mo ago
  Well, until the dementia patient and the religious crackpot fire them and replace them with toadies.

72 points by testing22321 4mo ago

It ain't over until Bibi says it's over. Trump is pissing his pants trying to get out of this anyway he can but Bibi won't let him. I'm sure our military was against this from day one, but the Fox news host and the Real Estate developer thought they knew better but, in the end Bibi and Israel call the shots and America obeys.... Just saying...Junk away...

tru3_power 4mo ago
Let’s say this is the case it still does not explain what the real end game looks like. What do you think?
- Danox 4mo ago
  The real game is that the US isn’t in charge, and the guy in the White House is in over his head along with his yes men and the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on.
  - ElProlactin 4mo ago
    > ...and the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on. This. Pax Americana is dead.
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      Which makes "the rest of the world appears to be making arrangements and moving on" a euphemism for the rest of the world is gearing up for war.
- sleepyguy 4mo ago
  I don't know. It's a quagmire where America finds itself with no good options. Bibi and Israel set in motion a trap that the USA can't easily escape. Netanyahu never believed America would back down, and America never believed it could lose. So what now? Do you surrender? Do you invade? Trump and Hegseth, being the fools they are, were never equipped to deal with a situation like this. The only outcome they seriously considered was Iranian surrender. They seemed convinced that Iran would fold, and gave little thought to what happens if it doesn't.
  - defrost 4mo ago
    > Bibi and Israel set in motion a trap that the USA can't easily escape. More accurately, they've been pushing this trap for decades and US presidents have been sidestepping it for decades. From that PoV it's always been easily avoided.
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > Do you surrender? Do you invade? Clearly the answer is you pay them off.
JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
> until Bibi says it's over There is enough frustration between Bibi and Trump that I could see Israel unilaterally trying to blow up this deal massively backfiring. (To the point that it might be in e.g. Hezbollah's strategic interest to goad them into it.)
ulfw 4mo ago
Meanwhile Murica distracts itself with idiotic 'wealth creation' ponzis like SPCX IPOs built on absolutely nothing of value and games for the simple people in front of the White House lawn

casey2 4mo ago

I think a serious news institution would not run this title even in an Opinions section.

whynotmaybe 4mo ago
In today's world where nuance is a disappearing diaphanous concept, the USA didn't win, so they lost.
- ballsac 4mo ago
  Nuance has nothing to do with it. If you start a war and you don’t win, then you lose.
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > If you start a war and you don’t win, then you lose This is reductive. One can absolutely stalemate. Regardless of whether you start a war, if it ends with you worse off and the other party either where they were at the start or arguably better off, you lost. If all that happened was the Strait was reopened, I'd call it a stalemate. The fact that Tehran got reparations equal to a third of a trillion dollars–over $800 from every American and $1,100 from each and every voter–makes it an Irania victory and American defeat.
enoint 4mo ago
Why? The only question left is what humiliation awaits the USA in return for its blood, treasure and reputation?
wavemode 4mo ago
"America has lost" seems to be a matter of plain fact rather than opinion. What singular goal of this Iran invasion was achieved? It seems the US has gained literally nothing in this war, meanwhile causing trillions in global economic damage. It vaguely sounds as though there is some sort of nuclear deal in the works ... but the US already had a nuclear deal with Iran, that Trump tore up. So I guess you could squint and say that the US won something back that was previously foolishly discarded.

dragontamer 4mo ago

A bad peace will be better than this war. I know people want to stick this into some kind of winners vs losers discussion but I for one would be happy if it reliably ended. It's very difficult for me to think of such a terrible peace agreement that I'd personally reject it.

amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
It's just sad how much wealth and how many lives have been spent for absolutely nothing.
- TacticalCoder 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - dragontamer 4mo ago
    So we are pretending that we care about Iranian civilians today? The Iranian civilians would never back a US / Israeli backed coup of their government. They distrust us because of the Shah / 1960s.
- ulfw 4mo ago
  Sounds like the Trump Musk government since day one. The utter destruction of lives impacted by the 'DOGE' scandal alone...
JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
> A bad peace will be better than this war We're no longer in a position to unilaterally disengage. If the IRGC decides its political establishment is wrong and starts potting random shit again, we'll be dragged back in.
- dragontamer 4mo ago
  I know Iran likely has a fractured government, but more assassinations vs various Iranian leadership won't exactly solve that issue. (Indeed, it's incredibly stupid that we assassinated so many leaders to the point that the peace deal is so shaky) This is as unified as Iran is going to get in the near future. So we gotta work with what we have.

golden-face 4mo ago

Even if the peace holds the whole thing feels like a definite L for the following reasons: Materiel - a huge amount of expensive and long lead time to replace missiles/interceptors expended - a $300,000,000 radar station destroyed - like 30 Reaper drones (approximately 1/5 of the total) - 1 AWACs destroyed and 3-5 others heavily damaged (we only have about 20 of them - tons of damage to infrastructure in the area (like refineries, ports, chemical plants) Geopolitical - primacy of American military power shown to be truly questionable (I consider this as the biggest part of the L; can't decide if it's an unforced error or it was bound to happen under any administration) - Iran now knows it can leverage its drones and missiles to influence the region and world; they don't even need a nuke anymore to project power I guess if there is a silver lining it's that the conflict has exposed how unprepared some of our doctrines and orders of battle are when dealing against an adversary that needs to operate on a more asymmetric level. But also it feels like that should be already known after years of monitoring the Ukrainian conflict.

JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
> Iran now knows it can leverage its drones and missiles to influence the region and world; they don't even need a nuke anymore to project power Tehran probably needs nukes to project power. As in reärm its proxies and have them go off and start being a nuisance again without real fear of facing any consequences for it. What Iran has learned–and globally demonstrated–is America is willing to pay more to its enemies than it's willing to spend defending its allies. (We're discussing arranging financing for Iran in an amount equal to what it costs us to support NATO for a decade.) [1] https://www.ft.com/content/088c14d3-f708-44d8-a306-7996aa5211de?syn-25a6b1a6=1 https://www.ft.com/content/088c14d3-f708-44d8-a306-7996aa521...
newtonianrules 4mo ago
If anything I think that demonstrating how worthless all this “war materiel” is, well it s a good thing. Can we please cut “defense” spending in half and just let me keep more of my own money or better yet stop going into so much debt?
Simran-B 4mo ago
… and let's not forget about Iran's Lego videos!

fyredge 4mo ago

As bad as the whole Iran situation has been, I'm glad that there are still rational actors pushing back within the military. If Trump had his way completely, I wouldn't put off the chance of an offensive nuke being used.

pseudohadamard 4mo ago
Well, until the dementia patient and the religious crackpot fire them and replace them with toadies.