The IAEA has
formally declared that Iran is violating its nuclear obligations; and that is of course true and always was true, but it is shocking to see a UN agency admit it. The
Pentagon Pizza Index is through the roof. (
Also MacDill AFB, home of CENTCOM and SOCOM.)
Let us hope that the geniuses in these command centers have at least learned the lesson not to commit ground forces to these things. If we land a MEU(SOC) or a Ranger battalion on one of these facilities, it's going to be another sad decade.
Israel just struck Iranian nuclear facilities. Here's the IDF announcement:
ReplyDelete"The IDF launched a preemptive, precise, combined offensive to strike Iran's nuclear program.
"Dozens of IAF jets completed the first stage that included strikes on dozens of military targets, including nuclear targets in different areas of Iran.
"Today, Iran is closer than ever to obtaining a nuclear weapon. Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the Iranian regime are an existential threat to the State of Israel and to the wider world.
"The State of Israel has no choice but to fulfill the obligation to act in defense of its citizens and will continue to do so everywhere it is required to do so, as we have done in the past."
Link:
http://youtube.com/post/UgkxmKMnIfmvQDr6jL2JdYKiJ2_d1BN7wy2_?si=DCcctmKVdMsKY8ku
I’ve grown very tired of these wars. We’ve spent much American blood for nothing in these deserts.
ReplyDeleteAll the same, Iran has pushed it if anyone has.
DeleteI don't know what to think about them. All my life there have been endless news reports of bombings and beheadings and terrorist attacks and wars and then peace -- but, no, really it's war again. The enemy just needed a break to recruit, rearm, and train for the next campaign. Then there is the slow-motion conquest of Europe and a few bridgeheads here.
ReplyDeleteIt may be not terribly important for us (or it may, I don't pretend to know), but Israel cannot escape it. Right or wrong, I am glad we didn't conduct this attack. But if I were Israel's leader, I surely would have ordered it.
I had forgotten about the IAEA announcement on Iran when I saw the reports about the Israeli attacks last night.
ReplyDeleteIt's 6/18/25 and seems like the US is prepping to do something in Iran. We'll see how that goes. As events are covered in the newer post, I thought I'd bring up political commentary here.
ReplyDeleteHere's a song from 1980 to get the ball rolling: Vince Vance & the Valiants.
"Our people you've been stealin', now it's time for dealin' ..."
For me, we've been at war with the mullahs of Iran since 1979. I remember the hostage crisis and the failed rescue. It's not a new war or "war again," it is just the continuation of a war we've been in either openly or in the shadows for most of my life.
I hope the civilian casualties have been and continue to be minimal. I have nothing against the Iranian people. I hope they are able to establish a nation that puts its own people first and that becomes an ally and economic partner.
In fact, I suspect the Israelis have been so successful because they have had help from some kind of Iranian underground movement. I also hope that movement (if it exists) has prepared for when the regime falls.
For me, we've been at war with the mullahs of Iran since 1979.
DeleteI'd change the directionality of this: Iran has been at war with us since 1979. We've only desultorily responded in one-offs over the years, until possibly these days.
Trump has demanded Iran's "unconditional surrender," and in many pundit circles that's being interpreted--not unreasonably--as a demand for a WWII Germany and Japan unconditional and total surrender. I don't think that's what Trump means in his usage. I think he means that Iran must surrender unconditionally its building, its right to build, a nuclear weapon, and do so in an independently provable manner.
Eric Hines
Some commentators seem to think war with Iran will necessarily be just like war with Iraq or Afghanistan. War can take many forms. If we just use Clausewitz's definition of "policy by other means," it would seem that there would be as many forms of war as there are forms of policy. If the policy is simply to keep Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, it is likely that an air war alone could succeed. There might need to be some kind of clandestine teams on the ground for targeting, etc., but no more.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Israel is going more for regime change, but again, that doesn't mean something like Iraq or Afghanistan. It may well be enough for a similar team of clandestine operators and air strikes (I'm including missile & drones w/ air strikes) to create the conditions for the regime to fall. It does not necessarily mean anyone goes in to install a new regime.
So, while I would support regime change, and using clandestine operations and air power to create the conditions for it, I would not support the US going in to install a new regime.
I would really rather the US have no direct involvement, but I fear the B-2 & GBU 57/B may be needed to keep casualties at a minimum.
ReplyDeleteI think removing the regime and deciding what's next for Iran should be up to the Iranian people and we should generally stay out of it. I can see offering economic incentives and possibly, if the new regime is friendly, economic aid for a time.
CRNK may be a problem here, and it would be good if we could counter them and keep Iran's new government from staying in CRINK, but I don't really know what to do about that.