Brace Yourselves For War Between Iran and Israel

Joan said:
The truth is we will never know, as always in the so called fog of war, all sides lie, to the damage inflicted...All for public propaganda consumption.
Click to expand...
The thing that really has concerned me over the course of human conflicts over thousands of years is. The more lives lost, the more this is celebrated as a victory and celebration as the ultimate conquest...We call it a Memento Mori...the living to celebrate the death of another. In the thousands and thousands....And after millennia, nothing changes. Wash Rinse and repeat the cycle begins again. No dialogue no innovation to solve problems, no dialogue. All black and white thinking and rule of law. The image of George Bush, the child, floats before my mind in a historic moment for US history, standing on the rubble of the twin towers. Either you are with us or against us.

What a lesson for the future of world diplomacy in the 21st century.
 
Joan said:
This analysis from Alastair Crooke...Posted yesterday
Click to expand...
Regarding the various videos being posted without any comment:

Especially if it is a longer video that you already watched, it seems to be a good idea to summarize the main points that stood out for you or at least post an AI summary. It helps in deciding whether to watch the video and informs those who do not have the time.

Here is the AI summary of the above video:

The Escalating Tensions: Analyzing the U.S.-Iran Conflict and Its Global Implications​

In recent days, the political landscape surrounding the U.S.-Iran conflict has been marked by a series of alarming statements and actions, primarily from the Trump administration. These developments have created a sense of whiplash, as the narrative shifts rapidly from negotiation to potential military confrontation.

The Shift in U.S. Strategy​

Initially, the U.S. approach towards Iran involved negotiations aimed at limiting its nuclear enrichment capabilities. However, this strategy has evolved into a more aggressive stance, demanding zero enrichment and the dismantling of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. This shift was notably highlighted just before a significant Israeli military action, indicating a possible preemptive strategy to limit Iran's response options.

The Maximalist Position​

The U.S. has adopted a maximalist position regarding Iran, which includes not only the nuclear program but also the threat posed by Iran's ballistic missiles. This escalation in rhetoric suggests a move towards unconditional surrender from Iran, a stance that many analysts view as unrealistic and indicative of a fundamental misunderstanding of Iran's political landscape and military capabilities.

Misconceptions About Iran's Military Capabilities​

Contrary to claims that Iran has no air defenses, evidence suggests that Iran is strategically holding back its more advanced air defense systems in anticipation of a potential U.S. or Israeli attack. The Iranian military has been observed to be preparing its defenses, including the deployment of upgraded missile systems, while also engaging in limited strikes against Israeli targets.

The Reality of Military Engagement​

Reports indicate that while Israel has conducted operations against Iranian positions, the effectiveness of these strikes has been overstated. The narrative that Israeli aircraft can operate freely over Iran is misleading, as there is little evidence to support such claims. Instead, Iran appears to be managing its military resources carefully, preparing for a prolonged conflict if necessary.

The Political Landscape in the U.S.​

The internal political ramifications of a potential military conflict with Iran are significant. Many within the Republican base, including prominent figures like Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, express concerns that an attack on Iran could fracture the MAGA coalition. This coalition, which includes a diverse group of voters disillusioned with endless wars, may turn against Trump if he pursues military action.

Public Sentiment and Polling Data​

Recent polls indicate that a majority of Americans, across party lines, oppose military action against Iran. Only 16% support an attack, highlighting a disconnect between the administration's aggressive rhetoric and public sentiment. This growing opposition could have serious implications for Trump's political future, especially as midterm elections approach.

Global Reactions and Implications​

The international response to the escalating tensions has been equally significant. Both Russia and China have condemned U.S. actions at the United Nations, labeling them as illegal and provocative. This reaction underscores a broader geopolitical shift, as nations observe the potential for a significant realignment in global power dynamics.

The Symbolic Importance of the Conflict​

The conflict with Iran is not merely a regional issue; it symbolizes a challenge to Western hegemony. The outcome of this confrontation could reshape international relations and influence how countries align themselves in the future. The silence from many global actors suggests a cautious wait-and-see approach, as the world watches how the U.S. navigates this precarious situation.
Click to expand...
 
axj said:
Indeed. Not entering a military alliance with Russia (and/or China) and not announcing their nukes - either of those two actions could have probably prevented the current war. Hard to explain it any other way tha
Click to expand...
Possibly the fact that leader in 2003 nixed the nuclear weapons option, publicy, and has stood by it, makes it VERY difficult to say they have them. If he publicly removed the injunction against them now, that would be to Isreals favour. Plus, whatever they think of Tulsi, they probably surmise she doesn't support war against Iran, and leaving her with DNI egg on her face is possibly not helpful for Iran. /Maybe Iran will explode a nuke in Isreal and blame it on the Israelis./ just some thoughts.
 
anartist said:
Possibly the fact that leader in 2003 nixed the nuclear weapons option, publicy, and has stood by it, makes it VERY difficult to say they have them.
Click to expand...
As has been mentioned, a simple way for Iran to circumvent that is to say that they are legally justified now to exit the Non-Proliferation-Treaty after the US attack (some of them are already saying that) and then announce that Iran just received nuclear weapons from another country. It would be a lie of course, though maybe they really did get their nukes from another country - only much earlier.
 
I think the best analysis of Trump's attack on Iran so far - Scott Ritter on Judge Napolitano. He explains Iran's likely/surprising rationale for not entering into a military agreement with Russia. The Judge is incensed - it's a war crime, unconstitutional, unlawful and an impeachable offense. Scott - theatrics that put our military people in danger for unjustifiable reasons. Complete failure of purpose.

[32:12]
 
daddycat said:
Were any Iranians injured or killed by the US bombings?
Click to expand...
WhiteMountain said:
I saw last night they claimed all facilities were evacuated and there were no injuries. Not sure if true (governments lie in war) or if there has been an update.
Click to expand...
If that's true, then I'm more upset about the Yemen bombings by the US than this bombing of Iran that hurt nobody.
 
So far it looks like Tulsi Gabbard hasn’t looked so good in this. She is one of the people quite a number of people were unsure/suspicious about, including me. Yes, it is hard to tell since there could be strategic reasons for why she is saying/behaving like she does, and all that, I know, but just want to mention that.
 
Last edited:
axj said:
Regarding the various videos being posted without any comment:

Especially if it is a longer video that you already watched, it seems to be a good idea to summarize the main points that stood out for you or at least post an AI summary. It helps in deciding whether to watch the video and informs those who do not have the time.

Here is the AI summary of the above video:
Click to expand...
Call me a dinosaur, but the use of AI to interpret an event text or whatever, could be fraught with conflict. It does not allow individual opinions or thought. It is the master of all the information available at this time. It destroys the individual in the mind and thinking process, it is a tool and nothing more. It has the ability to travel the information highway because of social and political restraints on humanity to have free access and ability. to be dependant on a machine, to give accurate information beggars belief in my mind.

And of course it depends on the programmer, some alien thought process infiltrating the mind of the system programmer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom