The US are incapable of finishing the job. That's what they tried to do in Iraq and look how it turned out. Iran is much more organised, has a competent secret police, is huge and better armed than Iraq was. It's physically impossible to carpet bomb the country like Israel is trying to do to Lebanon, so whatever you do you can be sure that there will be plenty of armed partisans. If the central power disintegrates, there will be a mess of Kurdish forces, the remains of governmental armies, and you can expect other interesting groups to show up along the borders with Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if the US were lead by competent people with a decent strategy it would be worse than a long shot. And they are not.
They are also incapable of forming a coalition. They pushed the Saudis and all the Gulf states, who hate Iran with a passion to the moderate "maybe starting a war was not such a good idea" camp. The latest noises about forcing them to make friends with Israel is exactly what you would do if you wanted to be absolutely sure that they will never help you. The noises about annexing Greenland and Canada made sure that nobody in Europe is going to be part of any coalition there willingly.
That's what happens when you take stupid decisions on your own because you're a big bully boy and allies are for chumps.
Destroying what remains of their missiles and drones and forcibly reopening the straits is absolutely possible. Estimates vary, but so far about 50% of their offensive capabilities seem to have been destroyed. Continue combat operations and destroy the rest. Escort ships trapped in the Gulf out. Maintain the blockade on Iranian ports to apply maximum economic pressure on the theocracy. I don't care about the internal politics of Iran. If the country descends into chaos or civil war, so be it. Hopefully, this may result in a collapse of the so called Islamic Republic. It is for the Iranians to decide what government they want, so long as it does not interfere with global and in particular U.S. interests.
> Destroying what remains of their missiles and drones and forcibly reopening the straits is absolutely possible.
They don’t need missiles to keep the Gulf pretty much closed, they just need drones. They have what, 1000 km of coast line with convenient mountains nearby? The choke point is 30 km wide, you don’t need more than shaheeds to prevent enough ships from sailing through that the others either stop trying or pay.
And you won’t prevent rockets or drones from reaching that coast line unless you have absolute control over the interior. Look at how much trouble Israel has with getting rid of rockets in the Gaza Strip.
> Continue combat operations and destroy the rest.
Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate that it is much easier said than done.
> Escort ships trapped in the Gulf out.
That is going to be very impractical as long as they can just send marine, submarine, or aerial drones. Not unfeasible, but very difficult. The Huthis are still making trouble in the Red Sea, and there is an actual coalition to deal wit them there. Being locals with this kind of terrain is a massive advantage. There is a reason why anybody sane was saying that it was a stupid strategy.
> Maintain the blockade on Iranian ports to apply maximum economic pressure on the theocracy.
Which also applies maximum pressure on most of the world. That will become untenable quickly. Of course, the Russians are happy, though.
> I don't care about the internal politics of Iran.
You cannot solve a problem if you don’t understand it and the situation that caused it. Bush thought he could and he was wrong. Trump thinks he can and he is deluded.
> this may result in a collapse of the so called Islamic Republic
And I thought you guys were against regime change and forever wars. In the real world, it caused a rally-around-the-flat effect and a hardening of the government’s position and its grip on the country. I hope the Iranians can get out of this nightmare at some point, but it is not a given, and it is not the strategy most likely to lead to that outcome.
> so long as it does not interfere with global and in particular U.S. interests
lol. The US serve only the oligarch class’ interest. If you are serious about that, fix your government. It might not be as dire as the Islamic republic, but it is disintegrating.
What do you think is wrong with it? I can see how both conservatives and progressives could have reasons to be unhappy with it, but dropping this in like that is not very productive. There are many, many texts in the Vatican archives that are much worse than this.
> if you strip those out it sounds like any Democrat podcast
The fact that the bloody Pope sounds like what appears to be a left-wing party in the US' Overton window should be a big kick in the arse. In most of the rest of the west, these are classical conservative values, and indeed more aligned with the gospel than anything coming from the Republican Party these days. As a leftist, I find Magnifica Humanitas to be interesting, because it's a view point that is rooted in a rich history and profound thinking. But that's not a socialist doctrine at all. Its situation is very close to Rerum Novarum: it was more social than what the capitalist magnates wanted, but it was really far from things like communism or revolutionary socialism. Leo XIV does not hide his admiration for Leo XIII, and he sees many similarities with the state of the society they live in. On that, I think I agree with him.
I think FAANG developers would be better equipped than taxi driver to manage this. And besides, I don't think I am really against some kind of professional certification like actual engineers do. Right now SWE do not manage any of the downsides of what they inflict upon the world, and it's a damn shame. That said, having a limited number like taxi medallions in some cities would be stupid, even though I can see how it might make sense in a city.
I agree with you that it requires scrutiny and the process must be open and fair, like most things in a working democracy. I also think that it is not out of line to have mechanisms to ensure whoever is in a situation to kill, mug, kidnap or ransom you has no interest in doing so.
"I also think that it is not out of line to have mechanisms to ensure whoever is in a situation to kill, mug, kidnap or ransom you has no interest in doing so."
The problem in practice seems that those mechanisms get hijacked by the very people whom they should prevent from being in that service.
IDK about NYC, but here in Central Europe, taxi services regulated by municipal governments were consistently treating their customers worse than Uber/Bolt. Outright murders were rare, but sexual harassment, fraud, verbal abuse, even "minor" things like the cars smelling of tobacco smoke were worse. Occassionally, there were cars set on fire or brandishing of weapons when those drivers got into conflicts. That's not ancient history and people still remember.
That happens when guys with deep pockets capture the regulatory services and make them into their own cash cow, using force of law to prevent any competition from emerging.
If you had a ballot about canceling Uber and going back to the old model here, that would lose by something like 15:85. The improvement in service and safety is just staggering.
> However, most people’s direct experience with taxicab drivers and the resulting improvement under Uber directly contradicts that sentiment
You can be both a victim and a bully, it's not mutually exclusive. A scam artist can get mugged or burglarised, and so on. In general, in civilised countries, being a horrible person does not prevent someone from being recognised as a victim.
Why tungsten? In terms of thermal conductivity, It’s way worse than silver and copper and on par with good aluminium alloys. Those are cheaper and much lighter (so again much cheaper to put into orbit).
reply