VIM
2d ago
Yeah, sometimes I get the impression people here are posting from a different universe.
The obvious conclusion I'd imagine the Chinese are taking from this is "they abandoned 5th Fleet HQ because they couldn't protect it from Iran so there's no way they'll stick around to try going toe-to-toe with us"
VIM
2d ago
So you decline to tell me WHEN this unconditional surrender took place? I'm asking so I can look it up and see if there is any merit to what you are saying. It's a very simple question. You claim that Syria "pretty much unconditionally surrendered to Israel" -- I am asking WHEN this unconditional surrender took place. What month and year?
December 8th, 2024.
Israel clearly has the power to roll in and cause mucho damage in Jordan; same thing with Egypt; same thing with Gaza; and same thing with Area A. But as the saying goes, one of these things is not like the others.
Like any conqueror, rather than causing mucho damage they would greatly prefer to absorb their territory with minimal resistance, like Area C. The current generation of Israeli leadership is also considerably less patient than that which made peace with the Jordanians and Egyptians (who, might I add, receive billions of American taxpayer dollars every year to stay at peace) and has demonstrated far less goodwill towards those who chose collaboration or submission.
VIM
5d ago
When exactly was this unconditional surrender?
They gave up as much territory as the IDF was willing to seize without even trying to fight for it and then stationed troops to prevent any other Syrians from trying to fight the invaders. I'd call that "unconditional surrender".
And what do you suppose is the reason for the failure you are alleging?
Because their ground forces are totally inept, because they have zero tolerance for casualties and because they have no coherent strategy for actually winning wars.
VIM
5d ago
He's increasingly popular with the "MAGA base" because if a member of the MAGA base feels betrayed they cease to identify as "MAGA" or even "Republican".
The coming midterms are probably going to be a generational slaughter for Republicans.
VIM
5d ago
Perhaps if Trump didn't want to lose voters for attacking Iran he should have ran on it and tried to justify it.
Of course, if Trump ran on "we've been at war with Iran for 47 years and under my administration we'll start a regional war" my guess is that he would have just straight up lost the election
VIM
7d ago
In this case, it's not that hard to know. Israel clearly has the power to roll in and crush Jordan; same thing with Egypt; same thing with Gaza; and same thing with Area A. But as the saying goes, one of these things is not like the others.
-
Syria is an obvious counterexample: they pretty much unconditionally surrendered to Israel and were rewarded by getting bombed into oblivion, having their territory seized, and just generally getting humiliated.
-
This is obviously not true. We've had a two year test case in which Israel tried and failed to roll in and crush Hamas, the smallest and weakest of its opponents.
Houthi air defenses were, to be fair, constantly being replenished by Iran. The Houthis are also a tribe who spent decades hiding out in the caves and mountains of Yemen, and still have forces concentrated there. The Iranians have a conventional military built along standard lines with standard bases, supply chains, etc.
Okay, so if the Houthi air defenses couldn't be stopped because of Iranian resupply then doesn't attacking Iran just move the problem a chain up to Iran getting resupplied by the Russians or Chinese? If anything it's a harder problem because the Houthis were nearly landlocked and reduced to smuggling in supplies by tiny fishing boats whereas Russia and China have fairly direct access even if they don't outright fly cargo planes directly to Iranian airports.
Also, the Iranians have a conventional military and an irregular force known as the IRGC which utilizes the exact sort of tactics (mobile launchers, mountain bases, ambush air defenses) that the Houthis used. Perhaps you've heard of them?
In addition, there were ways of defeating the houthis but they involve a return to the brutal counterinsurgency tactics of the mid-20th century that are still considered, for now, too inhumane.
I've seen this claim thrown around but it was put to the test in 2018 when Trump let the Saudis go full bore and while hundreds of thousands of Yemeni children died the Saudi gains were proportionally tiny. Even getting to the point where you could apply brutal counterinsurgency tactics of the mid-20th century would first require taking Houthi territory, which would require an actual, serious ground invasion with actual casualties.
The limiting factor on foreign intervention (usually) isn't public sympathy for the suffering of the countries being attacked but the cost in blood and treasure not being justified by the potential benefits of victory.
VIM
9d ago
Was Operation Rough Rider a great demonstration of American invincibility too? They brought in multiple carrier groups, bombed Yemen endlessly and assassinated plenty of Houthi leaders even up to the Houthi Prime Minister but the Houthi missile/drone capabilities were basically untouched and Trump effectively gave up after a month when stockpiles started running low.
So if this goes the same way and Iran is still firing missiles and drones a month at every country hosting American military assets, shutting down the Strait of Hormuz and possibly obliterating all of the soft oil infrastructure between the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea would you still consider it to be a great victory for Trump?
VIM
9d ago
The death of Khamenei has spurred protesters to rise up and assault the security forces of the failing regime!
VIM
9d ago
The US bombed Yemen for years and yet during Operation Rough Rider the Houthis nearly downed American jets before Trump ultimately chickened out and cut a deal.
If Rough Rider couldn't disable Houthi air defenses then why would anyone expect a similar operation against a much larger opponent to succeed?
VIM
9d ago
The desired end goal is to blow Iran to pieces and leave a bunch of squabbling separatist factions fighting each other, like Libya on steroids.
VIM
9d ago
Last I checked they've been firing missiles and drones more or less nonstop almost immediately after they were hit. At the current rate they're going to exceed the total from the 12 Day War within a few days and that was sufficient to drain global interceptor stockpiles by a quarter.
Another way to look at the current situation is that Dubai, Doha, Kuwait and Bahrain invested billions in American hardware under the premise that it would protect them and instead Trump evacuated and parked all of his assets as far as possible, leaving his hapless clients to get smoked.
VIM
10d ago
I'm not sure what difference he was supposed to make since he's 86 and if he dropped dead tomorrow of natural causes I doubt it would bring an end to the government
It increases the odds that the nuclear fatwa gets revoked if nothing else
VIM
11d ago
The current generation of Jewish leadership is clearly a lot dumber and more short sighted than their forefathers. Or put another way,
"Hard Times create Strong Jews
Strong Jews create Good Times
Good Times create Weak Jews
Weak Jews create Hard Times" <- You are here
VIM
11d ago
decisively proving that the 21st century definition of "antisemite" is "one disliked by Jews" rather than the inverse
and of course by that standard any "populist movement" is going to rub against the ruling establishment and Jews in or adjacent to said ruling ruling establishment will identify it as "antisemitic"
VIM
11d ago
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.
VIM
15d 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
15d 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
21d 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"
Essentially, yes.
No, I would define "unconditional surrender" as a state in which the party surrendering allows the other party totally unconditional access and control of their country without any attempt at resistance or in this case, actively preventing anyone else in the country from attempting to resist.
Israel did attempt to absorb the Sinai, they constructed several resorts during their occupation there and it was the preeminent position among the Israeli public including high level elites like Moshe Dayan. The only reason they didn't is because Egypt launched an attack that nearly wiped them out and forced them to resort to nuclear blackmail for American support. It was only after Egypt demonstrated the ability to put Israel's whole existence on the line that Israel was willing to make land concessions.
That's the consistent pattern with Israel, by the way: if you surrender without a fight they push as far as they can, like the West Bank, whereas if you give them a bloody nose they'll consider negotiations, as with Egypt. If Egypt had followed your advice after 1967 they never would have recovered the Sinai at all.
More options
Context Copy link