VIM
17d ago
What would be long term results? Being general is not any more cushy job with spiffy uniform, only people who believe in their cause and are ready to die will strive for such positions. Do the forces of freedom have plan B for case when decapitation strike succeeds, all targets are elliminated, but the enemy still refuses to surrender?
This "decapitation strategy" seems like a function of the post-GWOT American toolkit, which consists of
- World class ISR and targeting
- High quality but low quantity targeted munitions delivered by the world's greatest airforce
- Zero tolerance for casualties
It's a great strategy for creating the appearance of victory at a low cost against tribesmen with no air defenses. In terms of actually producing victory, however, as far as I can tell it has never worked except when some significant faction within the targeted regime is secretly working for the enemy. The Onion released an article all the way back in 2006 titled "Eighty Percent Of Al-Qaeda No. 2s Now Dead"; twenty years later, Al Qaeda is more powerful than ever with control over Syria and a significant portion of the Sahel.
If you prefer a more recent example, we've seen this whole song and dance before with Operation Rough Rider and to a lesser extent, Operation Prosperity Guardian. Trump issues dire threats, carrier groups moved into position, Yemen was obliterated with constant airstrikes for over a month, Houthi officials were assassinated yet the Houthi drone and missile capabilities remained intact and Trump ultimately backed down having achieved basically nothing.
If this sort of strategy went nowhere against Yemen then why would there be any expectation of success against Iran, which is larger, more powerful and more populous by several times?
VIM
17d ago
I doubt that Yamamoto or Nelson saw it that way. Decapitation strikes were historically limited more by capability than by “traditional rules.”
Or by the practical benefits. Assassinations in WW2 were rare in part because it was understood that they could easily backfire and lead to more capable leaders replacing those assassinated, with this understanding extending all the way up to Hitler himself. Assassination was reserved for unusually capable, dangerous and likely irreplaceable leaders like Yamamoto or Reinhard Heydrich.
VIM
23d ago
Counterexample: the Canadian Trucker Protest was completely despised by the media yet managed to totally turn the tide of vaccine passports and lockdowns. China's Zero COVID policy was also overturned by the largest nonviolent protests since Tiananmen 1989 and obviously they didn't have a sympathetic media to draw upon. Or for a protest unrelated to COVID, the Iranian headscarf protests basically reversed the practical enforcement of the "morality codes".
It seems to help when the protests have a very specific and clear goal as opposed to something vague like "fighting inequality"
VIM
1mo ago
This claims there were "fewer encounters and apprehensions" but says nothing about deportations.
VIM
1mo ago
Largest deportation wave in fifty years
Most secure border in a generation
Where is the evidence of this?
VIM
1mo ago
JPM isn't bankrupt but the "monetary crank" portfolio of gold, silver and bitcoin still easily outperforms the S&P or JPM stock.
VIM
1mo ago
"There's a scuffle" and "in the confusion" seem to be doing an enormous amount of heavy lifting.
By this sort of logic, an armed citizen could confuse the ICE agents for a gang of kidnappers from a distance and open fire, killing several. Would that be a "reasonable determination" too, because "there was a scuffle" and "the shooter was confused"?
VIM
1mo ago
He was clearly struggling from being pepper sprayed in the face but he did nothing whatsoever to prevent an agent from taking his weapon or to justify another agent shooting him in the back after he was disarmed
VIM
1mo ago
In this case "allowing them to disarm you" ended with Pretti getting summarily executed
VIM
1mo ago
Except the Soviet tanks couldn't even handle their neighbors and wound up bogged down in Afghanistan whereas the Chinese tanks similarly couldn't make it past Vietnam. A massive military and nukes are worthless without the massive economy to back it up; the Communists never figured out economics and were perpetually gimped in that respect. The Soviets only achieved significant conquests when they were fueled by American lend lease.
The real growth in Communism didn't come from Soviet tanks imposing it by force, it came from anti-imperialist movements adopting it pragmatically after America chose to back the European imperial powers after WW2 for some reason. Ho Chi Minh famously was a fan of the American system until they turned him away.
VIM
1mo ago
Should we have resisted global communism?
Communism is a completely dysfunctional, unworkable system. America could resist global communism the same way it resisted European imperialism, by providing an example of a successful alternative instead of beating the communists by copying them. Or as John Quincy Adams put it,
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence, has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign Independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. The frontlet upon her brow would no longer beam with the ineffable splendor of Freedom and Independence; but in its stead would soon be substituted an Imperial Diadem, flashing in false and tarnished lustre the murky radiance of dominion and power. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.
The past century of American imperial domination have proven Adams right.
VIM
1mo ago
One notable factor is that hyperinflation wasn't crashing the economy before now.
Plenty of regimes have survived hyperinflation combined with large protests. Venezuela's regime is basically inferior in every aspect to that of Iran yet they had no problem squashing proportionally far larger protests more than once while enduring far worse economic conditions without much issue.
Another notable factor is the level of violence, and the size of the protests despite that violence.
It seems like the violence led to the size of the protests rapidly collapsing, considering how they seem to have tapered off before stopping entirely
VIM
1mo ago
I love that you had to specify "thousands" and "on American soil" to exempt Iran and Russia killing or facilitating the deaths of thousands of Americans other places. And confusing willingness with capability.
Yes, because there is categorical difference between killing occupying soldiers in combat and killing civilians in a terrorist attack.
Ever heard of WWII? The Cold War? We stopped being isolationist a long time ago.
You're proving my point; before the Cold War America had no problems with the Middle East. From the perspective of the average American as opposed to a Lockheed executive or a lobbyist for a foreign country it has been all cost for no benefit. Isolationism produced superior results to imperialism.
VIM
1mo ago
How is this any more a "serious revolution" than the last dozen Iranian protest waves that were crushed, some of which had even higher turnout than this one?
VIM
2mo ago
Could you quantify these "first world standards"? Because from where I'm sitting, the Israelis killed more Gazans in the average day prior to the "ceasefire" than the Iranians killed protesters even using the highest death projections despite the Iranian population sitting between 50x and 100x that of Gaza.
VIM
2mo ago
Besides the obvious previously mentioned example of Hamas, the USAF bombed Yemen relentlessly for over a year (over a decade counting the civil war) to basically no effect whatsoever, including under Trump. They failed to disable Houthi air defenses and nearly lost multiple jets including an F-35 as a result.
VIM
2mo ago
Air power works on opponents who are at least moderately sophisticated and organized...
I think the way it works well is in combination with good intelligence to wage assassination campaigns against enemy leadership and important weapons systems. You can’t destroy an enemy organization, but you can degrade them and scare whoever the next guy is. I think the right way to think of it might be like a correction for a dog. If you just assassinate their top 10 guys every time they cross some line, they’ll keep filling those spots but the next 10 guys might start to think twice about being as oppositional.
I know everyone seems to have forgotten but the US tried this against the Houthis. First Biden and then Trump bombed Yemen for over a year to stop them from attacking ships or launching missiles at Israel, they blew up a bunch of Houthi leaders including the "top missile guy" yet in the end the targets were replaced and the missiles continued even as Trump basically signed a separate peace that didn't even oblige the Houthis to stop firing missiles.
My suspicion is that an extended campaign against Iran would resemble the Yemen campaign, with the exception that Iran, unlike the Houthis, have the firepower to actually kill a significant number of Americans if they're backed into a corner.
VIM
2mo ago
Oh, I think Iran and Russia are just as much enemies of the American people as Al Qaeda is.
Sorry, could you remind me when Russia or Iran killed thousands of Americans on American soil? I seem to have forgotten.
Regardless, can we do the math on how many people was Assad killing? I think it was more.
Assad was fighting a civil war against hardened Salafis backed by half of the Middle East and the CIA whereas Al-Jolani is sending death squads to slaughter civilians protected by lightly armed militias to sell their families into slavery. If the death toll is even comparable it would indicate that the Al Qaeda terrorist is far worse than the secular dictator.
There's no great option here.
There is, actually; stay out of it entirely! Don't fund or provide air support for Al Qaeda!
For the overwhelming majority of American history, the US stayed out of Middle Eastern conflicts and miraculously during that time never had to fear the risk of conflict with Iran or Syria. It's only after the decision was made to support a certain new country that suddenly America found itself obligated to support head chopping Al Qaeda terrorists.
VIM
2mo ago
Weird that the regime has taken the nationwide comms blackout to a new level and been gunning people down then.
Not that weird, if they were actually on the verge of overthrowing the regime then they would be the ones seizing control of communications and gunning down the IRGC instead of the reverse.
VIM
2mo ago
Iran and Russia are only enemies of the American regime, Al Qaeda is an enemy of the American people.
The Al Qaeda guy is currently having ethnic and religious minorities thrown off of buildings, is that better than Assad?
VIM
2mo ago
By all accounts the protests are smaller than in past years (way back in 2009 the opposition could draw out half a million people at a single march!) but much more violent. No real prospect of overthrowing the regime and I can't really think of an explanation for the way the protesters are acting except to conclude that they're being intentionally lured by Mossad to be slaughtered in order to bait Trump into doing their dirty work.
This seems to be Israel's preferred strategy under Trump: pick a fight you can't win alone, get people killed and then hope that Trump will stumble onto the escalation ladder and win the fight for you. Unlike some of their other decisions this one is at least rational since their domination of the American political system is unlikely to last much longer and they could well be faced with an indifferent if not hostile administration by 2029.
VIM
2mo ago
This is famously what they thought about Syria, which is now controlled by Al Qaeda. I've yet to hear how any serious explanation for how Al Qaeda running Syria is better for America or Americans than Assad
VIM
2mo ago
Syria is a case of a LACK of Western intervention, however. Assad got a ton of support from Russia and Iran, which is why he really started losing when both of those countries had to focus on more immediate problems.
The leading alternatives to Assad were Al Qaeda and ISIS. It seems patently obvious that the Western-backed forces were objectively worse in nearly every way compared to Assad unless you're a Salafist, an Erdogan fan or an Israel-prioritizer (as in, elevating the narrow interests of Israel above all other considerations).
VIM
2mo ago
Given these circumstances, I now wonder a bit what Mossad is playing at.
The goal isn't to install Pahlavi, the goal is to collapse the country Libya style. Bait Iranian protesters into a hopeless slaughter after Trump said he wouldn't allow Iran to slaughter protesters as a pretense to drag Trump into it. If the goal was actually to support a revolution then loudly telegraphing their support makes no sense but if the goal is to get them killed so that Trump looks weak if he doesn't start dropping bombs then it makes perfect sense.
They're probably blowing a lot of assets in the process, but from their perspective it's better to go for broke while they still have total American support than to wait and risk an Iranian comeback under a future Tucker-like isolationist or even a Mamdani-like anti-Zionist Presidency.
Last I checked France and Britain hadn't received a hundred billion in direct aid, nor did the US expend a fifth of the global missile interceptor supply on their behalf. Any intervention on their behalf involved the (theoretical) prospect of American benefit and when it didn't America was just as happy to crush them as in the Suez Canal Crisis.
and before you ask, Lend Lease was just 33 billion and that was, as the name implies, a loan.
More options
Context Copy link