Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
- 36
- 1
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
But isn't it straightforward to consider the goals and whether they've been achieved or look like they're going to be achieved sometime soon? Has the US made gains and if so, where are they?
Was territory secured? No. Has a friendly government been installed? No. Have resources been secured? No, quite the opposite, resources have been threatened as fuel prices rise... Is there a plan to achieve victory? Probably not, Trump has been pursuing all kinds of ideas in quick succession - threats to bomb energy infrastructure, a blockade, some kind of diplomatic solution, escorts for the strait of Hormuz. It doesn't seem like there's any well-considered plan for victory.
Meanwhile Iran already seems to be picking the fruits of victory, announcing tolls for oil tankers, declaring sovereignty over cables in the straits of Hormuz. They seem to have secured some territory.
The closest thing to a success is the notion that Iran's missile and drone capabilities have been degraded. But they still seem to be capable of bombing the UAE, pipelines, oil tankers. The Iranians could also claim 'oh well we've degraded US air defences in the Gulf and burned through much of the US munition stockpile', that seems a draw at best for the US, considering both gains and losses.
On the other hand, I guess you might be right about Kagan and it's just shameless pandering to Democrat sensibilities so that he can try Real Regime Change in a few years. Maybe defeat-maxxing is the start of a revenge mythology, like how the Italians seethed about losing in Ethiopia and went back in under Mussolini?
More options
Context Copy link