[War] Trump surrenders to Iran in a humiliating defeat

Just due to media saturation, or did you have some personal connection to the embassy?

 

I know you are not equating the two. You clearly separated moral and good idea from the start. You said it is moral to attack Iran to depose the regime. Clearly it has been a horrible idea and a disaster, as you implied.

But my point is that moral has to consider the harm of your intentions and actions. I think that is where we disagree. A just cause and a moral one look at more than one side of the ledger. Entering a war to take out the Iranian regime with very little chance of doing so is neither just nor moral.

There was zero appetite for what regime change actually requires. And even if there was (because Iran had directly attacked the US), the chance of success would still be low. Full occupation is no guarantee. Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq proved that at enormous cost. What the Trump admin attempted was an "epic fury" bombing campaign and a hope that the people would rise up. That had a success rate of ZERO percent.

So they started a war on unjust grounds, with no credible path to regime change, and the harms followed: Iranian civilians bombed, the region destabilized, and the world now held hostage to Iranian control of a critical energy corridor... That is where we are today, with potential greater harms if this escalates to bombing all energy infrastructure or wiping out a whole civilization. On paper, that was predicted through decades of simulation and war games. The stated war crimes were not simulated. Those are on top.

So choosing to act with good intentions, knowing the likely outcomes, does not make the action moral. It makes it wishful at best, and immoral because of the harms it was always going to cause.

p.s. We do not know the real reasons why this admin started this war. That was never actually debated before it started. It could be regime change, it could be for Israel, it could be for political reasons, it could be to satisfy someone's ego or need for revenge.

 

I think we arrived early for the party.

From a declassified CIA document:

“The military coup that overthrew Mossadeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government...”

Obama in 2013:

“In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.”

https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/politics/cia-iran-1953-coup

 

I am FAR from a supporter of the Iranian government. The Persians are exceptionally warm and kind people and a free and thriving Iran would be wonderful for the Iranians and the Middle East and USA.

However - I have heard this justification before. I heard it about Iraq… Afghanistan… Syria and Libya and even Egypt.

Ask yourself- when is the last time that the USA or her allies invaded a Middle Eastern nation, or supported an uprising… that ended up being a positive?

I remember Libya - and having a congress woman tell me how this was “best for Libyans”. I sat and listened as my wife and her aunt were lectured about “freedom” and what the Middle East needed. My wife finally spoke in Arabic and when the Congress woman said they didn’t understand, my wife spoke Aramaic. When that didn’t work, my wife in English said “You stupid entitled *****.” It made for an awkward party but my wife didn’t care.

My point being- we don’t make it better for anyone there. We don’t have the will to stay and build the area.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

Yep, half a world away, they're still just Jews.

 

Trump: "I would've won Vietnam very quickly if I were president. Look at Venezuela. I took it over in 45 minutes."

OK Gramps. Time for your nap.

 

Is the Strait of Hormuz open yet??

 

If the US was actually using its soft power effectively I do think there are ways we could influence some of these countries, and ALOT of countries in Africa to gradually transform into reasonable global partners. The thing is, the US, and the politicians that have been in power in the past that have wanted to act, don't have the patience, and having the power of the bomb makes that open seem faster, and more seductive.

That's where I would have a qualm with the "America First/America Alone" crowd that wants to be all sanctimonious about the US just retreating into the corner which all of those people don't REALLY want. Tucker Carlson and MTG don't really want the US to retreat from the world. They just want the attention shifted from one ally to another (IE Ukraine to Russia) because they have vested interests.

But to your point about the Congresswoman displaying ignorance for Libyans, I totally get that. It's why we have a State Department because that is the first line of representation of the US to their counterparts and other nations we are trying to influence with our soft power. People in Congress don't have the background, and training that a State official will. At best their background is as an attorney.

Given my work in consulting, I've worked with the State Department before. One of the things we provide is negotiations training, and one of our consultants you'd probably know if you wanted MSNBC when they need to interview someone regarding high level negotiations like the JCPOA, etc. The State Dept. WAS filled with some of the smartest people in government, and most well trained to influence appropriately.... and (not to keep picking on Trump here but) Trump has completely gutted that institution to the point where I don't think it'll ever go back. Most of the folks we trained are now back in corporate America, and have kind of given up on their prior careers.

But if there is one thing I would want to see the next President do its rebuild the State Dept. and make a case to the US and the world about the need for the US to re-engage these countries and stress the need for long slow building relationships because what we had now only has one lever to pull to influence.... and that is bombs, bullets, and bloodshed.

 

The Strait of Hormuz has always been open.

 

The Strait: Open yet?

 

Word on the Street is that the Strait of Iran wherever the **** that is is wide open.

 

FIFY

 

35% is still way too high.

 

Trump can't read or write above a 6th grade level, so they identify with him.