Author Topic: Israel vs Iran  (Read 25216 times)

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7842
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #100 on: June 26, 2025, 10:23:51 AM »
Hegseth lost his mind at reporters this morning, complaining that they're so obsessed with being anti-Trump that they're disparaging the pilots of the mission and how dare anybody suggest that this mission couldn't have been a total success. Also, he claimed this was the most complex and secretive operation in history. It was an airstrike. That they advertised four days in advance. We all knew it was coming, we just didn't have a to-the-minute time. Also, he blew up at a Fox News reporter for asking a question.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lsj3wr4itl2g

https://www.sabinorecovery.com/alcoholic-rage-syndrome/

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25760
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #101 on: June 26, 2025, 11:02:04 AM »
Hegseth lost his mind at reporters this morning, complaining that they're so obsessed with being anti-Trump that they're disparaging the pilots of the mission and how dare anybody suggest that this mission couldn't have been a total success. Also, he claimed this was the most complex and secretive operation in history. It was an airstrike. That they advertised four days in advance. We all knew it was coming, we just didn't have a to-the-minute time. Also, he blew up at a Fox News reporter for asking a question.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lsj3wr4itl2g

https://www.sabinorecovery.com/alcoholic-rage-syndrome/

To be fair, since Hegseth didn't leak the entire mission on signal to reporters before and during implementation, this might actually be the most secretive mission he's been involved with.

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #102 on: June 26, 2025, 11:11:01 AM »
Yup, so complex and secretive. It makes the Normandy invasion look like child's play.

2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #103 on: June 27, 2025, 06:15:03 AM »
To get back to the initial topic, I feel that Israels current strategy is not the genocidal "kill all the others", but more like cripple the enemies to the point that they are no longer a threat. Civilians are collateral damage. They know that if it ends up with a million Palestinians dying they have a big problem. So lets hope they care enough about that to avoid it.

The strategy doesn't work with Hamas, because they are funded by Iran. But if they destroy Iran's ability to support them I'm not sure it will be so impossible. What will Iran do if their power and oil infrastructure is destroyed. I definitely feel this was the strategy all along, and nukes are again just the excuse to act.

For now the Iranian regime has committed the ultimate sin for authoritarian regimes, which is to look weak. So other parties, like China could step in and prop them up similar to Pakistan. Take over the oil production and let them run the rest. If that would happen it would be very unlikely they could continue their extremist agenda as the foreign powers would not allow them to.
Or it will turn into an impoverished version of itself and keep doing token terrorist actions, but not being any significant military threat.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #104 on: June 27, 2025, 09:12:03 AM »
Defense Secretary Hegseth seems to have a thin skin when it comes to criticism from reporters.

After that press conference, a CNN fact checker commented on it.  Hegseth complained that the "minimal damage" claim had "low confidence", and that the news media didn't report the confidence level.  The fact checker found that the news media did state the information has low confidence.  That said, I have heard this information repeatedly with no confidence level mentioned at all.

Fordow is an Iranian nuclear enrichment facility under a mountain.  Overhead images don't show scale, but the 3 tunnel entrances are like the long angle of a right triangle, with the impact site (of the MOP, aka bunker buster bombs) near the right angle.  There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

I suspect the "minimal damage" to nuclear enrichment facilities won't hold up.  There's an open question how much enriched uranium Iran managed to get out of the facilities before they were hit, and I have no idea about that.  Iran could still have 400kg of 60% enriched uranium, which is an amount only found in countries with nuclear weapons programs.

mtnrider

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Location: Frozen tundra in the Northeast
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #105 on: June 27, 2025, 09:48:09 AM »
Hegseth lost his mind at reporters this morning, complaining that they're so obsessed with being anti-Trump that they're disparaging the pilots of the mission and how dare anybody suggest that this mission couldn't have been a total success. Also, he claimed this was the most complex and secretive operation in history. It was an airstrike. That they advertised four days in advance. We all knew it was coming, we just didn't have a to-the-minute time. Also, he blew up at a Fox News reporter for asking a question.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lsj3wr4itl2g

https://www.sabinorecovery.com/alcoholic-rage-syndrome/

To be fair, since Hegseth didn't leak the entire mission on signal to reporters before and during implementation, this might actually be the most secretive mission he's been involved with.

I've heard multiple reports that Hegseth wasn't in the loop during the planning.  I guess they do learn.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25760
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #106 on: June 27, 2025, 10:26:29 AM »
Hegseth lost his mind at reporters this morning, complaining that they're so obsessed with being anti-Trump that they're disparaging the pilots of the mission and how dare anybody suggest that this mission couldn't have been a total success. Also, he claimed this was the most complex and secretive operation in history. It was an airstrike. That they advertised four days in advance. We all knew it was coming, we just didn't have a to-the-minute time. Also, he blew up at a Fox News reporter for asking a question.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lsj3wr4itl2g

https://www.sabinorecovery.com/alcoholic-rage-syndrome/

To be fair, since Hegseth didn't leak the entire mission on signal to reporters before and during implementation, this might actually be the most secretive mission he's been involved with.

I've heard multiple reports that Hegseth wasn't in the loop during the planning.  I guess they do learn.

How do we achieve operational security?  Don't tell the secretary of defense what we're doing because he's an incompetent alcoholic!  Brilliant!

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4015
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #107 on: June 27, 2025, 12:13:39 PM »
There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

What video is that?  The one shown at their press conference was of a test, not of Fordow.  Right bomb, but just feet to penetrative, not 100 meters.

Or, was it this one?
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/explosion-illuminating-night-sky-video-predates-us-strike-irans-fordow-plant-2025-06-25/

mtnrider

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Location: Frozen tundra in the Northeast
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #108 on: June 27, 2025, 01:29:35 PM »
Hegseth lost his mind at reporters this morning, complaining that they're so obsessed with being anti-Trump that they're disparaging the pilots of the mission and how dare anybody suggest that this mission couldn't have been a total success. Also, he claimed this was the most complex and secretive operation in history. It was an airstrike. That they advertised four days in advance. We all knew it was coming, we just didn't have a to-the-minute time. Also, he blew up at a Fox News reporter for asking a question.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lsj3wr4itl2g

https://www.sabinorecovery.com/alcoholic-rage-syndrome/

To be fair, since Hegseth didn't leak the entire mission on signal to reporters before and during implementation, this might actually be the most secretive mission he's been involved with.

I've heard multiple reports that Hegseth wasn't in the loop during the planning.  I guess they do learn.

How do we achieve operational security?  Don't tell the secretary of defense what we're doing because he's an incompetent alcoholic!  Brilliant!

Ha! 

Trump himself posted the strategy on his social media platform:  I'm making up my mind about bombing you.  I guess Hegseth could have posted the actual tactics to a random user on Signal.

Also, Trump insists on branding the Israel-Iran conflict the "12 Day War."*  As in, the US was involved in the 12 day war.  Not "special operation", not "limited engagement", not "imminent threat".  War.  Who has to declare war?  Congress!

* I guess twice as much of a win as the 6 day war?

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #109 on: June 27, 2025, 01:31:39 PM »
Defense Secretary Hegseth seems to have a thin skin when it comes to criticism from reporters.

After that press conference, a CNN fact checker commented on it.  Hegseth complained that the "minimal damage" claim had "low confidence", and that the news media didn't report the confidence level.  The fact checker found that the news media did state the information has low confidence.  That said, I have heard this information repeatedly with no confidence level mentioned at all.

Fordow is an Iranian nuclear enrichment facility under a mountain.  Overhead images don't show scale, but the 3 tunnel entrances are like the long angle of a right triangle, with the impact site (of the MOP, aka bunker buster bombs) near the right angle.  There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

I suspect the "minimal damage" to nuclear enrichment facilities won't hold up.  There's an open question how much enriched uranium Iran managed to get out of the facilities before they were hit, and I have no idea about that.  Iran could still have 400kg of 60% enriched uranium, which is an amount only found in countries with nuclear weapons programs.

The problem with living in this "post-truth" world created by Trump and his ilk is that nothing they say is believable. What they say COULD be true, but I have no inclination to believe anything they say because of all the obvious, outright lies they constantly  spew.

From my prior career, I knew immediately that Trump was lying (duh) when he said the sites had been "obliterated." It was nighttime, with no satellite flyovers. There was NO way to know hours after the attack whether anything had been successful. And yet he claimed it to be so. It will take weeks to try to assess how successful these attacks were, and there will likely never be a high level of confidence, because that location is closed off.

I'm no explosives expert, but the display of a "bright light" above-ground does not give me confidence it has destroyed the hardened bunker hundreds of feet below solid rock; it conveys the opposite. For what it's worth, I have seen the "low confidence" caveat mentioned numerous times on the news channels I have watched and read, including left-leaning outlets.

Anyway, none of it matters to me, because the whole attack was nothing more than an ego/vanity project for Trump as far as I'm concerned. It does absolutely nothing to further or secure U.S. interests. Probably the opposite.

mtnrider

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Location: Frozen tundra in the Northeast
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #110 on: June 27, 2025, 02:33:40 PM »
Defense Secretary Hegseth seems to have a thin skin when it comes to criticism from reporters.

After that press conference, a CNN fact checker commented on it.  Hegseth complained that the "minimal damage" claim had "low confidence", and that the news media didn't report the confidence level.  The fact checker found that the news media did state the information has low confidence.  That said, I have heard this information repeatedly with no confidence level mentioned at all.

Fordow is an Iranian nuclear enrichment facility under a mountain.  Overhead images don't show scale, but the 3 tunnel entrances are like the long angle of a right triangle, with the impact site (of the MOP, aka bunker buster bombs) near the right angle.  There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

I suspect the "minimal damage" to nuclear enrichment facilities won't hold up.  There's an open question how much enriched uranium Iran managed to get out of the facilities before they were hit, and I have no idea about that.  Iran could still have 400kg of 60% enriched uranium, which is an amount only found in countries with nuclear weapons programs.

The problem with living in this "post-truth" world created by Trump and his ilk is that nothing they say is believable. What they say COULD be true, but I have no inclination to believe anything they say because of all the obvious, outright lies they constantly  spew.

From my prior career, I knew immediately that Trump was lying (duh) when he said the sites had been "obliterated." It was nighttime, with no satellite flyovers. There was NO way to know hours after the attack whether anything had been successful. And yet he claimed it to be so. It will take weeks to try to assess how successful these attacks were, and there will likely never be a high level of confidence, because that location is closed off.

I'm no explosives expert, but the display of a "bright light" above-ground does not give me confidence it has destroyed the hardened bunker hundreds of feet below solid rock; it conveys the opposite. For what it's worth, I have seen the "low confidence" caveat mentioned numerous times on the news channels I have watched and read, including left-leaning outlets.

Anyway, none of it matters to me, because the whole attack was nothing more than an ego/vanity project for Trump as far as I'm concerned. It does absolutely nothing to further or secure U.S. interests. Probably the opposite.

Quote
"post-truth" world created by Trump and his ilk

My understanding is that this is part of the Project 2025 strategy.  People don't know what to believe so become cynical - and believe nothing.  From anyone.

Totally agree.  It seems like they sacrificed the strategy for a high-viz tactic.  I assume the IAEA regulators are going to be kicked out of Iran now, so we can only rely on intelligence.

The bombs could have completely destroyed the facilities.  But given the days/weeks of advanced notice, the uranium was probably gone.  And Iran now knows that they should get a bomb soon or risk getting bombed again.  After all, North Korea and Russia get praise from Trump, not bombs.  Maybe they'll buy a nuke from Russia?

I wonder why Israel went down this path.  I'm sure they wanted to take out the source of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis - I've heard it said that Iran was willing to fight Israel until the last Hezbollah fighter was standing, but not when Iran itself was attacked. One would think that since Israel has skin in the game they would be more wary of a strategy with a high probability of Iran getting a nuke - and becoming untouchable.


Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #111 on: June 29, 2025, 08:24:24 AM »
.  Who has to declare war?  Congress!

The last time Congress declared war was 1942. Since then, US military has been deployed in sustained combat or direct military engagement abroad more than 30 times. I believe these presidential actions are fairly well split between Democrats and Republicans.

Congress deflects political criticism by abandoning their responsibilities when convenient, which is why they have transfered authority to wage war to the Executive branch, and then criticize whatever actions are taken based on political expedience. They are spineless hypocrites, and the public has no recourse against this. When pressed occasionally by the citizenry to reassume their responsibilities Congress’ reaction is a collective “fuck you”.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #112 on: June 30, 2025, 02:56:53 AM »
There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

What video is that?  The one shown at their press conference was of a test, not of Fordow.  Right bomb, but just feet to penetrative, not 100 meters.

Or, was it this one?
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/explosion-illuminating-night-sky-video-predates-us-strike-irans-fordow-plant-2025-06-25/
No, not that one.  Massive ordinance penetrators (MOP) don't explode on the surface, but rather delay detonation until they're 60+ meters underground.  The mushroom cloud in that video image shows a surface explosion, not an MOP hitting a surface.

The MOP uses fins at the back to control its flight after being dropped.  In the video I saw, those fins are visible, and when the front of the MOP hits the ground, all fins retract to be flat.  The shape of the bomb also looks like the pictures of a MOP I've seen.  I'll search around and see if I can find it again.

UPDATE: found it.  This is the same video I saw, but presented differently.  I saw the slow motion impact of the MOP, followed by the slow motion explosion out the tunnel entrance.  This video, narrated by the Head of the Joint Chiefs, shows the exact same footage at full speed.  Notice how the fins at the back of the MOP fold up just before the MOP enters the ground.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JstxcHjjvd4
« Last Edit: June 30, 2025, 03:08:48 AM by MustacheAndaHalf »

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4015
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #113 on: June 30, 2025, 08:13:01 AM »
There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

What video is that?  The one shown at their press conference was of a test, not of Fordow.  Right bomb, but just feet to penetrative, not 100 meters.

Or, was it this one?
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/explosion-illuminating-night-sky-video-predates-us-strike-irans-fordow-plant-2025-06-25/
No, not that one.  Massive ordinance penetrators (MOP) don't explode on the surface, but rather delay detonation until they're 60+ meters underground.  The mushroom cloud in that video image shows a surface explosion, not an MOP hitting a surface.

The MOP uses fins at the back to control its flight after being dropped.  In the video I saw, those fins are visible, and when the front of the MOP hits the ground, all fins retract to be flat.  The shape of the bomb also looks like the pictures of a MOP I've seen.  I'll search around and see if I can find it again.

UPDATE: found it.  This is the same video I saw, but presented differently.  I saw the slow motion impact of the MOP, followed by the slow motion explosion out the tunnel entrance.  This video, narrated by the Head of the Joint Chiefs, shows the exact same footage at full speed.  Notice how the fins at the back of the MOP fold up just before the MOP enters the ground.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JstxcHjjvd4

Yeah, that is a *test video,* not anything to do with Fordow.  The tunnel is just a few meters below the impact point.  The bomb is marked with a test pattern, for visibility.

There are also camera angles in that video from inside the tunnel, as the bomb emerges.

This is far less than the 80-90 m the bomb would have had to penetrate.  Which is far past its design rating, although I have seen nothing about expectations given multiple hits.

Here is a version of that video from Wright-Patterson AFB's website.  Here, with the full frame, it's clearly labeled as a test.
https://www.wpafb.af.mil/Skywrighter/Skywrighter-Archive/V3N9Skywrighter/videoid/968143/
« Last Edit: June 30, 2025, 08:17:30 AM by reeshau »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #114 on: June 30, 2025, 08:54:44 AM »
There's a new slow motion video showing the impact of the MOP on the mountain, looking past one of the tunnel entrances.  Despite the distance between the tunnel entrance and the impact, it doesn't take long for the explosion to blast out of the tunnel entrance.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine stated that one of his pilots called it the brightest light he had ever seen - it was like daylight after the bombs exploded.

What video is that?  The one shown at their press conference was of a test, not of Fordow.  Right bomb, but just feet to penetrative, not 100 meters.

Or, was it this one?
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/explosion-illuminating-night-sky-video-predates-us-strike-irans-fordow-plant-2025-06-25/
No, not that one.  Massive ordinance penetrators (MOP) don't explode on the surface, but rather delay detonation until they're 60+ meters underground.  The mushroom cloud in that video image shows a surface explosion, not an MOP hitting a surface.

The MOP uses fins at the back to control its flight after being dropped.  In the video I saw, those fins are visible, and when the front of the MOP hits the ground, all fins retract to be flat.  The shape of the bomb also looks like the pictures of a MOP I've seen.  I'll search around and see if I can find it again.

UPDATE: found it.  This is the same video I saw, but presented differently.  I saw the slow motion impact of the MOP, followed by the slow motion explosion out the tunnel entrance.  This video, narrated by the Head of the Joint Chiefs, shows the exact same footage at full speed.  Notice how the fins at the back of the MOP fold up just before the MOP enters the ground.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JstxcHjjvd4

Yeah, that is a *test video,* not anything to do with Fordow.  The tunnel is just a few meters below the impact point.  The bomb is marked with a test pattern, for visibility.

There are also camera angles in that video from inside the tunnel, as the bomb emerges.

This is far less than the 80-90 m the bomb would have had to penetrate.  Which is far past its design rating, although I have seen nothing about expectations given multiple hits.

Here is a version of that video from Wright-Patterson AFB's website.  Here, with the full frame, it's clearly labeled as a test.
https://www.wpafb.af.mil/Skywrighter/Skywrighter-Archive/V3N9Skywrighter/videoid/968143/

My bad, I stand corrected.  Your comments are accurate about this being a test video.  When you said near the surface, I thought you meant a another test where they shot it into concrete, and showed the detonation from above.  It also explains why the video was during daylight, and how they got great camera angles on the MOB exploding.

Now I still need to reconcile the B-2 pilot comment, "those are the brightest explosions I've ever seen".  It would help to know if the bright explosion was out the front tunnel, hundreds of meters away, or directly upwards.

BBC verify mentioned there is heavy construction equipment near Fordow right now, presumably for the damage caused there.

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #115 on: June 30, 2025, 12:13:37 PM »
Now I still need to reconcile the B-2 pilot comment, "those are the brightest explosions I've ever seen".  It would help to know if the bright explosion was out the front tunnel, hundreds of meters away, or directly upwards.

As I said previously, wouldn't a "bright explosion" visible from the sky above suggest the opposite of a successful strike against a deeply buried underground bunker? Those weapons are supposed to penetrate as deep as possible before exploding. A successful strike should look more like the ground just caving into a crater, with debris being flung far and wide from the perimeter (and little or no visible light).

2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #116 on: June 30, 2025, 10:18:53 PM »
From what I understood, these bombs are not suitable to penetrate solid rock. That is why they dropped two at the same place. The first to fracture the rocks and the second to go deep inside. The first one could have produced that bright flash. I do feel sad that we got to the point where everyone is just blatantly lying about it and people are accepting the "truths" according to affiliation. But if next year Iran has the bomb, at least we know who to blame.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #117 on: July 01, 2025, 07:46:06 AM »
My understanding is that Iran's nuclear bunkers were built 60-100 feet deeper than the limits of the MOP, even if it was only covered by loose soil.

From Wikipedia:
Quote
Penetration: (debated) There is debate regarding the penetration capabilities of the bomb. The US Air Force has said that the GBU-57 can penetrate up to 200 ft (60 m) of unspecified material before exploding. The BBC reports that analysts at Janes say the weapon can penetrate about 200 ft (60 m) of earth or 60 ft (18 m) of concrete. This is consistent with a separate source which suggests penetration of up to 60 ft (18 m) into reinforced concrete with a compressive strength of 5,000 psi (34 MPa) and 8 ft (2.4 m) into 10,000 psi (69 MPa) reinforced concrete.

It is also thought that the Iranians engineered 20,000 psi concrete for Fordow. So basically if the MOB can penetrate 200ft of soil OR 60ft of normal concrete OR 8ft of 10,000psi concrete, then it is unlikely the MOB caused more than a minor earthquake to a bunker under 260-300ft of solid rock, then encased in several feet of 20k psi concrete.

So by the stats alone, the strike was merely a warning shot. Iran's lack of any major retaliation wasn't weakness, it was gloating that their bunker had defeated the US's best conventional bunker buster. It seems the point of the Israeli airstrikes was to open up a hole in Iranian air defenses so that American B2s could drop the MOP unharassed, and I wonder if the attack was coordinated beforehand. Perhaps the person or people who leaked the intelligence assessment had watched the administration receive warning that the bunker buster wouldn't work, and then watched them make the decision to do it anyway for political profit.

Side effect:
Now would be a great time for the Iranians to sprint toward full enrichment, because the Trump administration might be hesitant to do anything after guaranteeing to us all that the facilities were "obliterated".

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4015
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #118 on: July 01, 2025, 09:01:32 AM »
https://www.npr.org/2025/06/25/nx-s1-5444307/did-america-bunker-busting-bombs-fail-reach-iran-nuclear-target#:~:text=Based%20on%20satellite%20imagery%2C%20it,air%20operations%20in%20recent%20memory.

"Jeanloz says that it's not just the strength of the rock. Changes in the geologic structure can also cause the bomb to change direction even as it moves through the Earth.

'If there's any variations ... including fractures or gaps, that can deflect the trajectory into the ground,' he says. Those same variations can disperse any blast from the bomb.

It's clear that American planners were aware of these kinds of challenges. Rather than dispatching one or two GBU-57s, they sent 12 to drop on Fordo. Based on satellite imagery, it looks like they may have been dropped in pairs, with the first weapon fracturing the rock to increase the penetrating depth of the second. The bombers also appeared to target Fordo's ventilation system, a possible weak point.

The weapons likely created a powerful shockwave in the rock that would have traveled deep underground, rattling the facility below.

But Jeanloz says those shockwaves weaken quickly as they move into the rock. Fordo's position directly under the ridge of the mountain probably maximized that protection.

In fact, going deeper is a simple solution to the threat of bunker-busters. A major conclusion from the 2005 study was that 'it's cheaper and easier for someone to dig deeper than it is to penetrate through that depth,' he says."

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #119 on: July 01, 2025, 09:33:33 AM »
Now I still need to reconcile the B-2 pilot comment, "those are the brightest explosions I've ever seen".  It would help to know if the bright explosion was out the front tunnel, hundreds of meters away, or directly upwards.
As I said previously, wouldn't a "bright explosion" visible from the sky above suggest the opposite of a successful strike against a deeply buried underground bunker? Those weapons are supposed to penetrate as deep as possible before exploding. A successful strike should look more like the ground just caving into a crater, with debris being flung far and wide from the perimeter (and little or no visible light).
When I searched to learn the size of the impact site, one of the articles further down looked more detailed than the rest, a website called "The War Zone".
https://www.twz.com/air/gbu-57-massive-ordnance-penetrator-strikes-on-iran-everything-we-just-learned

The reason MOPs (massive ordinance penetrators) have never been used in combat before... is because they were built for Fordow, specifically.  The original design didn't enter production until the Fordow site was recognized as a threat, at which point all of the improvements focused on targeting Fordow (for the past 15 years).  MOPs have been improved for years, with the goal of destroying Fordow at some point.

The MOPs targeted two ventilation shafts, which already had 3 holes before the strike (see above article).  Iran constructed a concrete cap over each ventilation shaft, which was the target of the first MOP.  It probably exploded close to the surface to destroy the concrete cover, which might also be the bright explosion seen by the pilots.  What surprised me is the next four MOPs at each site went down the ventilation shaft!  (Star Wars, eat your heart out).  They had an extra MOP in case something went wrong with one of the others, for a total of 6 MOPs per ventilation shaft.


Iran has sent heavy construction equipment to the impact site, without trying to reopen the tunnel entrances.

Quote
The imagery was collected by Maxar Technologies on Sunday. Maxar said it “reveals ongoing activity at and near the ventilation shafts and holes caused by last week’s airstrikes on the Fordow fuel enrichment complex.”
...
“We have observed that the Iranians have also rapidly repaired the bomb cratering damage on the main entrance road from only a few days prior. However, there are yet no indications of any efforts to reopen any of the tunnel entrances,” [Former nuclear inspector David] Albright posted on X.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/30/middleeast/satellite-imagery-iranian-nuclear-site-latam-intl

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #120 on: July 01, 2025, 09:39:54 AM »
From what I understood, these bombs are not suitable to penetrate solid rock. That is why they dropped two at the same place. The first to fracture the rocks and the second to go deep inside. The first one could have produced that bright flash.
I thought this, looking at the 6 holes in the ground.  But actually, all three holes existed before the U.S. attacked, as part of the ventilation shafts for Fordow.  The U.S. destroyed the concrete cap with one MOP, and then sent five more (!) into each ventilation shaft at specific angles.


I do feel sad that we got to the point where everyone is just blatantly lying about it and people are accepting the "truths" according to affiliation. But if next year Iran has the bomb, at least we know who to blame.
Who, specifically, is "blatantly lying" about the bomb damage at the Fordow enrichment site?

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #121 on: July 01, 2025, 09:45:18 AM »
For those interested in going deep on the geopolitics and military issues of Iran, Israel, and the Middle East situation, Lex Fridman’s new podcast would be worthwhile: https://lexfridman.com/podcast/

Iran War Debate: Nuclear Weapons, Trump, Peace, Power & the Middle East

“Debate on Iran war between Scott Horton and Mark Dubowitz. Scott Horton is the author and director of the Libertarian Institute, editorial director of Antiwar.com, host of The Scott Horton Show, and for the past three decades, a staunch critic of U.S. foreign policy and military interventionism. Mark Dubowitz is the chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, host of the Iran Breakdown podcast, and a leading expert on Iran and its nuclear program for over 20 years.”


For those not familiar, Fridman has interviewed many world experts on subject ranging from politics to philosophy to technology and beyond. His schtick is to remain independent/apolitical. It’s long-format (usually 2-4 hours per podcast) and usually excellent.

The 2 debaters in this episode have considerable expertise, know each other well, and get into pretty heated arguments about facts vs. fictions that I found mesmerizing. And they make complex issues understandable.


2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #122 on: July 02, 2025, 03:30:33 AM »

I do feel sad that we got to the point where everyone is just blatantly lying about it and people are accepting the "truths" according to affiliation. But if next year Iran has the bomb, at least we know who to blame.
Who, specifically, is "blatantly lying" about the bomb damage at the Fordow enrichment site?
It's everyone. Trump announced it was successful right away, even though there is no evidence. Democrats are raising that leaked report saying it's a failure.
The only true answer would be that we don't yet know what the result is, but that is not something that you can throw around in the press. Meanwhile the leaders of Iran and Israel both just declared victory.

I understand that it's a PR strategy, but I just can't believe there are actually many people who know better repeating it, just because it suits them. Call me old fashioned, but I would give more credit to leaders who are truthful even if it's bad news, than those that lie for a short term morale boost. The people knowing the truth is a pillar of democracy.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #123 on: July 02, 2025, 05:41:09 AM »
Quote from: MustacheAndaHalf link=topic=137608.msg3372808#msg3372808 date[b
[/b]=1751384394]

I do feel sad that we got to the point where everyone is just blatantly lying about it and people are accepting the "truths" according to affiliation. But if next year Iran has the bomb, at least we know who to blame.
Who, specifically, is "blatantly lying" about the bomb damage at the Fordow enrichment site?
It's everyone. Trump announced it was successful right away, even though there is no evidence. Democrats are raising that leaked report saying it's a failure.
The only true answer would be that we don't yet know what the result is, but that is not something that you can throw around in the press. Meanwhile the leaders of Iran and Israel both just declared victory.

I understand that it's a PR strategy, but I just can't believe there are actually many people who know better repeating it, just because it suits them. Call me old fashioned, but I would give more credit to leaders who are truthful even if it's bad news, than those that lie for a short term morale boost. The people knowing the truth is a pillar of democracy.

I think it’s helpful to put all this in perspective and—as much of an asshole as Trump is—none of this is really unique or new.

Iran has played a dangerous game of highlighting their development of the tools and materials needed to complete a nuclear bomb “quickly” but without formally having one for many years, while simultaneously a) issuing threats against Israel and the US, b) establishing and arming powerful armies like Hamas, Houthis, and Hezbolah, and c) supporting low-level armed attacks against Israel and US assets in the Gulf. That shit gets old—and the argument that Iran is some kind of a scared, misunderstood victim is “not true”.

Iran (or more correctly, Iran’s current leadership) is an enemy acting aggressively. This “is true”.

The deal Iran should take is to allow a Western-backed consortium to establish and maintain their peaceful nuclear power plants at market prices—which is what they’ve always said they really wanted—and allow the kind of verification work The West needs to conduct to ensure they’re not playing games with the bomb. They have demonstrated deadly political gamesmanship when they’ve been allowed to “enrich uranium”, etc. on their own and should not be trusted with that in the future.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #124 on: July 02, 2025, 02:50:34 PM »
The deal Iran should take is to allow a Western-backed consortium to establish and maintain their peaceful nuclear power plants at market prices—which is what they’ve always said they really wanted—and allow the kind of verification work The West needs to conduct to ensure they’re not playing games with the bomb. They have demonstrated deadly political gamesmanship when they’ve been allowed to “enrich uranium”, etc. on their own and should not be trusted with that in the future.
When offered exactly this deal a decade ago, Iran accepted it. There were inspectors and everything.

Iran was prevented from continuing the deal when the US withdrew from it a few years later. So Iran cannot currently do what you suggest Iran should do, because of the US administration. From their history, we know they would it they could.

If I were in their shoes, I'd decide Iran should build a atomic bomb. They just received an unprovoked attack on the homeland that probably killed hundreds, annihilated much of their air defense capability, and assassinated key political leaders. From their perspective, Iran faces an existential threat from two nuclear-armed, religiously-radicalized enemies who have shown no desire to negotiate, and they have no effective military deterrent against further aggression. I'd also be hitting up Iran, Russia, and China to buy as many conventional arms as oil sales could support. These would be the logical things to do, from the Iranian perspective, after such an attack as we saw last month.

rocketpj

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #125 on: July 02, 2025, 03:08:07 PM »
When offered exactly this deal a decade ago, Iran accepted it. There were inspectors and everything.

This exactly.  Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal that Iran had accepted and was complying with.  Now there is no deal, and nobody has any reason to believe that any deal with the US in any circumstance is worth more than it's potential value as firestarter or toilet paper. 

The US does not respect negotiated and ratified treaties.  Sure, sometimes they respect treaties, depending on who is in power, but the whole point of treaties is they are supposed to provide a foundation of predictability to people and countries can make plans and make reasonable risk assessments.  At present, the US as a state has zero respect for any treaties, anywhere. 

Iran, and every other country that might find itself subject to the random wrath or bullying of the USA, has every incentive in the world to get a nuclear bomb as quickly as possible.  It is extremely clear that negotiation is utterly, completely pointless with the USA at this time, and in practice at any time.  The only rational response is to build effective countermeasures and disincentives, so the US will go bully and bomb someone else instead.

I think that a lot of US-centric people don't really grasp just how badly your international reputation has been damaged.  You cannot be trusted, will not respect any agreements you do make, and will randomly attack and bully whoever you want.  That is apparently how the US public wants it to be - at least the US leadership - so the rest of us have to look at the situation with clear eyes and make other plans.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #126 on: July 02, 2025, 04:46:13 PM »
When offered exactly this deal a decade ago, Iran accepted it. There were inspectors and everything.

This exactly.  Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal that Iran had accepted and was complying with.  Now there is no deal, and nobody has any reason to believe that any deal with the US in any circumstance is worth more than it's potential value as firestarter or toilet paper. 

The US does not respect negotiated and ratified treaties.  Sure, sometimes they respect treaties, depending on who is in power, but the whole point of treaties is they are supposed to provide a foundation of predictability to people and countries can make plans and make reasonable risk assessments.  At present, the US as a state has zero respect for any treaties, anywhere. 

Iran, and every other country that might find itself subject to the random wrath or bullying of the USA, has every incentive in the world to get a nuclear bomb as quickly as possible.  It is extremely clear that negotiation is utterly, completely pointless with the USA at this time, and in practice at any time.  The only rational response is to build effective countermeasures and disincentives, so the US will go bully and bomb someone else instead.

I think that a lot of US-centric people don't really grasp just how badly your international reputation has been damaged.  You cannot be trusted, will not respect any agreements you do make, and will randomly attack and bully whoever you want.  That is apparently how the US public wants it to be - at least the US leadership - so the rest of us have to look at the situation with clear eyes and make other plans.
Yep. Ask a Native American about treaties, if you can find one.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #127 on: July 03, 2025, 12:53:54 AM »

I do feel sad that we got to the point where everyone is just blatantly lying about it and people are accepting the "truths" according to affiliation. But if next year Iran has the bomb, at least we know who to blame.
Who, specifically, is "blatantly lying" about the bomb damage at the Fordow enrichment site?
It's everyone. Trump announced it was successful right away, even though there is no evidence. Democrats are raising that leaked report saying it's a failure.
The only true answer would be that we don't yet know what the result is, but that is not something that you can throw around in the press. Meanwhile the leaders of Iran and Israel both just declared victory.

I understand that it's a PR strategy, but I just can't believe there are actually many people who know better repeating it, just because it suits them. Call me old fashioned, but I would give more credit to leaders who are truthful even if it's bad news, than those that lie for a short term morale boost. The people knowing the truth is a pillar of democracy.
Donald Trump and a few news organizations is "everyone"?  That's not what that word means.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #128 on: July 03, 2025, 01:18:33 AM »
...
If I were in their shoes, I'd decide Iran should build a atomic bomb. They just received an unprovoked attack on the homeland that probably killed hundreds, annihilated much of their air defense capability, and assassinated key political leaders. From their perspective, Iran faces an existential threat from two nuclear-armed, religiously-radicalized enemies who have shown no desire to negotiate, and they have no effective military deterrent against further aggression. I'd also be hitting up Iran, Russia, and China to buy as many conventional arms as oil sales could support. These would be the logical things to do, from the Iranian perspective, after such an attack as we saw last month.

Playing a weak hand aggressively only works when others can't see your cards.  It's a bluff.  In the "12 day war", Israel did hit military and nuclear enrichment targets.  The U.S. limited itself to hitting underground facilities for which its MOP were designed.  Both Israel and the U.S. were holding back, in order to keep the possibility of dialogue open.

Today, Iran has just demanded the International Atomic Energy Commission stop monitoring nuclear enrichment sites in Iran.  So they are following the plan you suggest, while also putting various unreasonable conditions on negotiations.

If the situation gets bad enough, Trump might green light attacking Iran's oil production and storage.  That would make a significant impact on Iran's economy.  If Israel also targeted export/import shipping, Iran's economy could plunge still further (side note: Iran's largest trading partner, by far, is China).  The downside is a spike in world oil prices, both from losing Iran's production and the risk Iran closes the straight of Hormuz (used by Iran and other countries to export oil & gas).

My guess is Iran has a month to make progress on negotiations, but maybe Trump will give them another 60 days, like earlier this year.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #129 on: July 03, 2025, 06:47:08 AM »
When offered exactly this deal a decade ago, Iran accepted it. There were inspectors and everything.

This exactly.  Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal that Iran had accepted and was complying with.  Now there is no deal, and nobody has any reason to believe that any deal with the US in any circumstance is worth more than it's potential value as firestarter or toilet paper. 

The US does not respect negotiated and ratified treaties.  Sure, sometimes they respect treaties, depending on who is in power, but the whole point of treaties is they are supposed to provide a foundation of predictability to people and countries can make plans and make reasonable risk assessments.  At present, the US as a state has zero respect for any treaties, anywhere. 

Iran, and every other country that might find itself subject to the random wrath or bullying of the USA, has every incentive in the world to get a nuclear bomb as quickly as possible.  It is extremely clear that negotiation is utterly, completely pointless with the USA at this time, and in practice at any time.  The only rational response is to build effective countermeasures and disincentives, so the US will go bully and bomb someone else instead.

I think that a lot of US-centric people don't really grasp just how badly your international reputation has been damaged.  You cannot be trusted, will not respect any agreements you do make, and will randomly attack and bully whoever you want.  That is apparently how the US public wants it to be - at least the US leadership - so the rest of us have to look at the situation with clear eyes and make other plans.

You make good points when taken from the perspective of Iran and its nuclear program. But how do you view Iranian leadership in terms of its domestic and broader international behavior?

Iran’s regime is brutal domestically, victimizing its civilian population, especially women, like it was the 1400s. Until very recently the Ayatollah’s regime had funded militias like Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza, the Houthis, and Hezbollah. These groups are essentially Iranian proxies—what’s called the “Axis of Resistance”.

Let’s quickly recap the greatest hits of the Axis in the 21st century:

Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Gaza)
   •   Launched thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel, including during major conflicts in 2008-2009, 2012, 2014, and 2021
   •   Conducted suicide bombings and terrorist attacks during the Second Intifada (2000-2005)
   •   Built extensive tunnel networks for smuggling weapons and launching attacks
   •   The October 7, 2023 attack on Israel that killed over 1,200 people and took approximately 240 hostages
   •   Developed increasingly sophisticated rocket capabilities, including longer-range missiles

Houthis
   •   Seized control of much of Yemen in 2014-2015, leading to ongoing civil war
   •   Attacked commercial shipping in the Red Sea, escalating in late 2023/early 2024
   •   Targeted U.S. and allied naval vessels in the Red Sea region

Hezbollah
   •   Engaged in the 2006 war with Israel, launching thousands of rockets
   •   Provided military support to Syrian government forces since 2013
   •   Conducted or supported terrorist attacks globally
   •   Significant exchanges of fire on Israel following October 7, 2023

IN ADDITION to the “Axis”, the Ayatollah was a major supporter of Bashir Al Assad in Syria, the Russian puppet. Assad’s rule was characterized by ongoing war crimes, murder, systematic starvation campaigns, brutal imprisonment of political opponents, and the destruction of much of Syria’s infrastructure and society during the prolonged civil war that began in 2011.

OK—so while busy with all this—Iran was ALSO playing the game of the nuclear bomb “threshold state”: having enriched uranium FAR beyond what’s needed for energy production, building underground nuclear facilities, and developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering a bomb—all while continuing the rhetorical campaign of calling for the complete destruction of Israel and “the great satan” America.

——

Now, I see Trump as a loudmouth idiot bull in a china shop, so you’ll get no defense of him per se from me. But anyone paying attention to the world in the last few decades knows a defense of Iran as “just playing by the rules” is the height of naïveté voiced by those wearing blinders. The propaganda that leads to such a conclusion is astounding.

In the past 9 months, Israel (with support) devastated Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in Gaza and Hezbollah in Syria; Al Assad and his regime fell and the Russian military base is gone; the Houthis have been sidelined by the Americans; Iran’s defenses have been all but eliminated and it’s nuclear program, at a minimum, set back notably.

I understand and honestly appreciate the negative reactions directed at America by people in many countries outside of Russia, China, NK, and Iran. And I am taken by the awful plight of the Palestinians. But the world is a dangerous place so you have to ask yourselves 2 questions:

1. Is the world better off without a powerful Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Al Assad, and nuclear-threshold Iran?

2. If you’re pissed at America for doing the dirty work, but you still need to face all the threats in the world, who will you be aligning yourself with in the future?

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #130 on: July 03, 2025, 08:36:53 AM »
You make good points when taken from the perspective of Iran and its nuclear program. But how do you view Iranian leadership in terms of its domestic and broader international behavior?
...
I understand and honestly appreciate the negative reactions directed at America by people in many countries outside of Russia, China, NK, and Iran. And I am taken by the awful plight of the Palestinians. But the world is a dangerous place so you have to ask yourselves 2 questions:

1. Is the world better off without a powerful Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Al Assad, and nuclear-threshold Iran?

2. If you’re pissed at America for doing the dirty work, but you still need to face all the threats in the world, who will you be aligning yourself with in the future?
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples. Both Israel and the US bombed densely-populated Iranian cities on and off for years, have targeted Iranian infrastructure via cyber-warfare, and have used sanctions to impoverish the population - which in a country of 92 million people translates to at least many thousands of premature deaths each year. The US even shot down an Iranian airliner once, by mistake they say, but imagine our incredulity if the Iranians did the same and claimed an oopsie. Iran's assessment of the threat from the US is certainly colored by the two decade war of regime change in Iraq, which was based on lies about 9/11, killed at least 100,000 Iraqis, was marked by human rights abuses and bombings/shootings of civilians, and impoverished the entire country. Overall, the US shows a decades-long propensity to attack majority-Muslim countries which goes beyond any explanation about oil (the US is energy independent) and seems more closely related to fundamentalist Christianity in the US.

I honestly prefer not to play the "who did worse" cheerleading game or engage in scorekeeping about which empire killed more people. Nations do not have a character like individuals do. They simply engage in geopolitics on various levels; diplomatic, economic, military, intelligence. They are guided mostly by self-interest, and are only morally constrained by the reactions of their own populations, to the extent their own populations can acquire accurate information about what their government is doing and be free to express displeasure at their governments' actions.

This is why access to accurate news sources and freedom to assemble, speak, and change government have been considered crucial components to any reasonable plan to make the world more peaceful and just, and to make nations less warlike. Yet the U.S. over recent decades has contradicted these assumption. The U.S. by any objective measure has been quite warlike toward various Muslim nations/ethnicities in the Middle East, despite being a free democracy with plenty of access to information.

At some point, we must consider that the moral indifference of most Americans and Israelis toward the genocide in Gaza, and the moral indifference of most Iranians toward the heinous crimes committed by Hamas and Hezbollah and Bashar Assad, are both enabled by that great morphine of morality - religious extremism. The perpetual conflict cycle is driven not by money or ambition, but by tens of millions of people on both sides who think something literally magical will happen if they can control the "Holy Land".

Each year, hundreds of thousands of Americans spend tens of billions of dollars to travel to Israel and "walk in the footsteps of Jesus" because they believe doing so has spiritual significance. The same could be said for the Israelis at the Western Wall, or the Muslims at the Al Asqua Mosque. As each of their prayers for health or prosperity or peace fail to be answered, both Muslims and Christians/Jews arrive at the conclusion that it is the presence of the other which threw off the magic, and a war of elimination is the only solution.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #131 on: July 03, 2025, 09:49:43 AM »
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples.
A bit less than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed since Oct 7 2023.  Are you rounding that up to "hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

Also, notice how you lump "The U.S. and Israel" together, and then don't specify who killed "at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza".  Did the U.S. kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza?

This is called "What about-ism", when you mention Iran's crimes, then immediately pretend the U.S. has done similar things.  You're distracting from the problems Iran has created, and trying to make a false equivalence with the U.S., while also making incorrect associations and statements of fact.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #132 on: July 03, 2025, 10:20:33 AM »
You make good points when taken from the perspective of Iran and its nuclear program. But how do you view Iranian leadership in terms of its domestic and broader international behavior?
...
I understand and honestly appreciate the negative reactions directed at America by people in many countries outside of Russia, China, NK, and Iran. And I am taken by the awful plight of the Palestinians. But the world is a dangerous place so you have to ask yourselves 2 questions:

1. Is the world better off without a powerful Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Al Assad, and nuclear-threshold Iran?

2. If you’re pissed at America for doing the dirty work, but you still need to face all the threats in the world, who will you be aligning yourself with in the future?
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples. Both Israel and the US bombed densely-populated Iranian cities on and off for years, have targeted Iranian infrastructure via cyber-warfare, and have used sanctions to impoverish the population - which in a country of 92 million people translates to at least many thousands of premature deaths each year. The US even shot down an Iranian airliner once, by mistake they say, but imagine our incredulity if the Iranians did the same and claimed an oopsie. Iran's assessment of the threat from the US is certainly colored by the two decade war of regime change in Iraq, which was based on lies about 9/11, killed at least 100,000 Iraqis, was marked by human rights abuses and bombings/shootings of civilians, and impoverished the entire country. Overall, the US shows a decades-long propensity to attack majority-Muslim countries which goes beyond any explanation about oil (the US is energy independent) and seems more closely related to fundamentalist Christianity in the US.

I honestly prefer not to play the "who did worse" cheerleading game or engage in scorekeeping about which empire killed more people. Nations do not have a character like individuals do. They simply engage in geopolitics on various levels; diplomatic, economic, military, intelligence. They are guided mostly by self-interest, and are only morally constrained by the reactions of their own populations, to the extent their own populations can acquire accurate information about what their government is doing and be free to express displeasure at their governments' actions.

This is why access to accurate news sources and freedom to assemble, speak, and change government have been considered crucial components to any reasonable plan to make the world more peaceful and just, and to make nations less warlike. Yet the U.S. over recent decades has contradicted these assumption. The U.S. by any objective measure has been quite warlike toward various Muslim nations/ethnicities in the Middle East, despite being a free democracy with plenty of access to information.

At some point, we must consider that the moral indifference of most Americans and Israelis toward the genocide in Gaza, and the moral indifference of most Iranians toward the heinous crimes committed by Hamas and Hezbollah and Bashar Assad, are both enabled by that great morphine of morality - religious extremism. The perpetual conflict cycle is driven not by money or ambition, but by tens of millions of people on both sides who think something literally magical will happen if they can control the "Holy Land".

Each year, hundreds of thousands of Americans spend tens of billions of dollars to travel to Israel and "walk in the footsteps of Jesus" because they believe doing so has spiritual significance. The same could be said for the Israelis at the Western Wall, or the Muslims at the Al Asqua Mosque. As each of their prayers for health or prosperity or peace fail to be answered, both Muslims and Christians/Jews arrive at the conclusion that it is the presence of the other which threw off the magic, and a war of elimination is the only solution.

I think I’m a fairly average American atheist. I’m skeptical of what I see as a recency bias against American strategy since America has pretty consistently assumed a leadership role in the world since around WWII. That role essentially established The West’s “liberal world order”, knocked off the “threat” of communism, and led just about every country with half a brain to comprehend the effects of democratic capitalism. (I know…Trump is an asshole…) From WWII to date the world has also shed poverty at an amazing rate and countries that were worth less than dog shit in the day are now swimming in resources and their people are living twice as long. To accomplish what it did, especially when battling the USSR, America became Machiavellian to some extent primarily because it didn’t have the resources to “fight clean” and winning was seen as existential.

Fast forward to 2025 and the world now has the US; China (a communist factory created by Western consumers whose dictators want to dominate the world while severely suppressing its own population—let me know if I missed anything here); and wack stragglers from the Cold War, like Russia, Iran, NK, who resemble characters at a Star Wars bar more than anything—none of whom made anything of themselves in the past 70 years but some of whom have nukes and are intent on being a royal pain in the ass.

So what’s the plan?

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #133 on: July 03, 2025, 11:15:48 AM »
So what’s the plan?
Here's an attempt:

Objective 1: Prevent a world war.
Method 1: Make aid to Israel contingent upon peacemaking behavior and respect for human rights. Sign a new nuclear deal with Iran to resume inspections. Commit more resources to NATO until European countries are spending enough to defend themselves.

Objective 2: Prevent the spread of authoritarian government structures and the overthrow of democracies.
Method 2: Weaken the Russia-Belarus-Iran consortium by providing significant military support to Ukraine. Reduce Russian/Iranian revenues, and Western dependency upon their oil, by investing in alternative sources of energy and reducing energy intensiveness. Push military aid into Taiwan ahead of China's planned invasion, which will occur around May 2027, and encourage Fillipino military independence.

Objective 3: Address internal decay in the U.S.
Method 3: For starters:
  • Weaken the executive branch and take back Constitutional powers Congress ceded to the president, including tariffs and the waging of war. Make treaty violations an impeachable offense.
  • Require all members of Congress, all Supreme Court justices, the President, and all cabinet members to disclose all of their assets and tax returns annually, plus all of their sources of income, plus an explanation for any changes.
  • Go back to hand-counted paper ballot voting to eliminate the risk of election hacking.
  • Embark upon a plausible plan to bring the US's debt/GDP ratio down from 125% to 75% in ten years, and set up hurdles to undoing that legislation, such as requiring each member of Congress voting to violate budget rules or repeal the legislation to state words into a camera that they are voting to increase the debt.
  • Reform the judicial and law enforcement systems so that rich people cannot escape justice indefinitely through legal maneuvering and so that poor/middle class people are not railroaded into pleading guilty for crimes they didn't commit because they know they have no chance.
  • Regulate big tech companies that are harming the national interest. For example, require social media companies to verify ages, and repeal section 230 of the 1996 Communication Decency Act. Hold them to account for spreading foreign propaganda.
  • Make election day a national holiday.
   

Objective 4: Stop nuclear proliferation to prevent the next regional nuclear war.
Method 4: First, take steps that would prevent Israel from pre-emptively nuking Iran. This might be the most likely nuclear war scenario. As noted above, threaten to walk away if Israel does not take a constructive peace making role. Only then would Iran feel safe enough to abandon its own nuclear project and allow in inspectors. Second, work for the resolution of the Ukraine war in Ukraine's favor. This will prevent countries like Poland, Romania, Germany, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, etc. from building up nuclear arsenals to avoid the same fate, and demonstrate that a military alliance can win conventionally. Third, offer North Korea the same security guarantees and agreements as Iran. Finally, none of this can work if the US keeps behaving as we've done for the past 25 years, abandoning treaties, leaving sanctions and military attacks to the whim of a rotating cast of Presidents, and overthrowing countries like Iraq after weakening their WMD programs through diplomatic channels. Basically, the US has to become credible again, and on that note George W. Bush did even more damage than Trump. The Iraq war demonstrated the futility of negotiating with the U.S. and of giving up WMD's. Iran's nuclear program started just as the neocons in the US were talking about overthrowing Iran next. The U.S. will face its own reputation anywhere it tries to encourage nonproliferation, so structural changes like those described above will be needed to regain credibility.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #134 on: July 03, 2025, 03:20:25 PM »
So what’s the plan?
Here's an attempt:

Chip—I love the plan! Of course it wouldn’t be me if I didn’t have comments/questions so…

Objective 1: Prevent a world war. This is a big ask and not all the players are discussed below, but I agree with your vision.

Method 1: Make aid to Israel contingent upon peacemaking behavior and respect for human rights. I would make it contingent on a little more obedience to the US and review behavior on a case by case basis. Until recently they were surrounded by powerful forces calling for their destruction and there was the matter of Oct 7 so, I’m not feeling broad ultimatums here.

Sign a new nuclear deal with Iran to resume inspections.  Agree. Inspectors up their butts and no more enrichment, or ballistic missiles capable of delivering a nuke. If they want nuclear energy, The West will supply the equipment at market prices.

Commit more resources to NATO until European countries are spending enough to defend themselves. OK

Objective 2: Prevent the spread of authoritarian government structures and the overthrow of democracies.

Method 2: Weaken the Russia-Belarus-Iran consortium by providing significant military support to Ukraine. YES!!! But please don’t forget Obama bent over for Putin and did nothing about Crimea, which was a disgrace. The US needs to be consistent over time when dealing with thugs like Putin..

Reduce Russian/Iranian revenues, and Western dependency upon their oil, by investing in alternative sources of energy and reducing energy intensiveness. I don’t know how this would work as I see the demand for energy INCREASING DRAMATICALLY in the coming years.

Push military aid into Taiwan ahead of China's planned invasion, which will occur around May 2027, and encourage Fillipino military independence. I am still trying to understand how stupid we were to become ADDICTED to high-tech chips from a country like that, in their position. But, yeah, we have to do something.


Objective 3: Address internal decay in the U.S.
 
With the exception of the election recommendation, which is a state-by-state decision, the ideas below are EXCELLENT but require votes in congress. The political parties (RNC and DNC) have captured the legislative process and we need to get rid of them or at least neuter them. If we don’t they will prevent your vision for gaining traction.

Method 3: For starters:
  • Weaken the executive branch and take back Constitutional powers Congress ceded to the president, including tariffs and the waging of war. Make treaty violations an impeachable offense.
  • Require all members of Congress, all Supreme Court justices, the President, and all cabinet members to disclose all of their assets and tax returns annually, plus all of their sources of income, plus an explanation for any changes.
  • Go back to hand-counted paper ballot voting to eliminate the risk of election hacking.
  • Embark upon a plausible plan to bring the US's debt/GDP ratio down from 125% to 75% in ten years, and set up hurdles to undoing that legislation, such as requiring each member of Congress voting to violate budget rules or repeal the legislation to state words into a camera that they are voting to increase the debt.
  • Reform the judicial and law enforcement systems so that rich people cannot escape justice indefinitely through legal maneuvering and so that poor/middle class people are not railroaded into pleading guilty for crimes they didn't commit because they know they have no chance.
  • Regulate big tech companies that are harming the national interest. For example, require social media companies to verify ages, and repeal section 230 of the 1996 Communication Decency Act. Hold them to account for spreading foreign propaganda.
  • Make election day a national holiday.
   

Objective 4: Stop nuclear proliferation to prevent the next regional nuclear war.

Method 4: First, take steps that would prevent Israel from pre-emptively nuking Iran. This might be the most likely nuclear war scenario. As noted above, threaten to walk away if Israel does not take a constructive peace making role. Only then would Iran feel safe enough to abandon its own nuclear project and allow in inspectors. I honestly don’t believe the Iranians are trying to develop nukes because they’re afraid of Israel taking them out first. They have been incredibly aggressive for decades. But if I were leading the US I’d make sure Israel towed the line on this. Also, keep in mind Iranian leadership is essentially defenseless at this time, plus Russia and China gave them ZERO help, plus they no longer have Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah, or Al Assad, plus their economy is a shit show, plus their own people hate their guts. So…maybe in the mood to compromise…

Second, work for the resolution of the Ukraine war in Ukraine's favor. This will prevent countries like Poland, Romania, Germany, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, etc. from building up nuclear arsenals to avoid the same fate, and demonstrate that a military alliance can win conventionally. Agree.

Third, offer North Korea the same security guarantees and agreements as Iran. You’re killing it!

Finally, none of this can work if the US keeps behaving as we've done for the past 25 years, abandoning treaties, leaving sanctions and military attacks to the whim of a rotating cast of Presidents, and overthrowing countries like Iraq after weakening their WMD programs through diplomatic channels. Basically, the US has to become credible again, and on that note George W. Bush did even more damage than Trump. The Iraq war demonstrated the futility of negotiating with the U.S. and of giving up WMD's. Iran's nuclear program started just as the neocons in the US were talking about overthrowing Iran next. The U.S. will face its own reputation anywhere it tries to encourage nonproliferation, so structural changes like those described above will be needed to regain credibility. Everything you’re saying is on point and well taken. In a perfect world I’d be with you all the way. But there are really bad actors out there that hate The West for its success, hate America for leading it for 80 years, and have their own designs on geopolitics. China and their bitch Russia are the worst and are bad alternatives. America gets it wrong way too often. BOTH PARTIES get it wrong. Our history is a laundry list of horrors, including genocide of the natives, 400 years of slavery followed by 100 years of legal Jim Crow segregation, imprisonment of our own citizens during WWII, expulsion of Chinese workers by the thousands, deportation of 1.4M Mexicans in the 50s including thousands of citizens, the imprisonment of blacks for decades during Nixon’s War of Drugs, and a 20 year war in the Middle East. All this and American is still the #1 destination for those seeking a better life and the most important ally of countries who comprise more than 2/3rds of the world’s GDP. That’s big. And that’s why America doesn’t have to be good; it has to be better that the alternatives. This is not a great situation, but it is “truth”.

2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #135 on: July 03, 2025, 11:57:31 PM »
Quote
The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples. Both Israel and the US bombed densely-populated Iranian cities on and off for years, have targeted Iranian infrastructure via cyber-warfare, and have used sanctions to impoverish the population - which in a country of 92 million people translates to at least many thousands of premature deaths each year. The US even shot down an Iranian airliner once, by mistake they say, but imagine our incredulity if the Iranians did the same and claimed an oopsie. Iran's assessment of the threat from the US is certainly colored by the two decade war of regime change in Iraq, which was based on lies about 9/11, killed at least 100,000 Iraqis, was marked by human rights abuses and bombings/shootings of civilians, and impoverished the entire country. Overall, the US shows a decades-long propensity to attack majority-Muslim countries which goes beyond any explanation about oil (the US is energy independent) and seems more closely related to fundamentalist Christianity in the US.
Sorry, but this has nothing to do with Christianity. It's about self defense. Muslim culture is strongly poisoned against the West with the US at the head. Not because of what the US did, but because of what it is. Western liberal values are greatly feared and hated in Muslim countries, and the fact that not they but these non-Muslim countries dominate the world is unacceptable. I've known a lot of Muslims and most live with the fantasy that their original countries are actually strong and great and the west is just weak and evil/corrupt and should be brought under Islamic rule. In their thinking the west are the enemies of God and nothing we do short of converting will change that. Being reasonable and kind will be taken as weakness and proof that God is making us bow to their might and will just be an incentive to push further.
The only reason we are able to make alliances with some Muslim countries is that the leaders are actually not Muslims and only care about their own interests. Most of our animosity towards Muslim countries comes from the fact that they hate us with a passion. Not some Christian animosity towards other religions.

The only thing that is based on Christianity is the support for Israel. Not the conspiracy theory that Christians are hoping for the second coming of Christ in Israel, but simply because the whole bible is full of statements that God is for Israel and will bless those who bless it and curse those who curse it. They are the misguided older brother who nonetheless serves the same God.

The real solution for Iran is simple. They can end all their problem today if they acknowledge Israel's right to exist and promise to give up funding terrorist proxies. But of course such an admission is not acceptable for them as they have been telling this is the will of God for decades.

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4015
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #136 on: July 04, 2025, 06:40:19 AM »
Quote
The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples. Both Israel and the US bombed densely-populated Iranian cities on and off for years, have targeted Iranian infrastructure via cyber-warfare, and have used sanctions to impoverish the population - which in a country of 92 million people translates to at least many thousands of premature deaths each year. The US even shot down an Iranian airliner once, by mistake they say, but imagine our incredulity if the Iranians did the same and claimed an oopsie. Iran's assessment of the threat from the US is certainly colored by the two decade war of regime change in Iraq, which was based on lies about 9/11, killed at least 100,000 Iraqis, was marked by human rights abuses and bombings/shootings of civilians, and impoverished the entire country. Overall, the US shows a decades-long propensity to attack majority-Muslim countries which goes beyond any explanation about oil (the US is energy independent) and seems more closely related to fundamentalist Christianity in the US.
Sorry, but this has nothing to do with Christianity. It's about self defense. Muslim culture is strongly poisoned against the West with the US at the head. Not because of what the US did, but because of what it is. Western liberal values are greatly feared and hated in Muslim countries, and the fact that not they but these non-Muslim countries dominate the world is unacceptable. I've known a lot of Muslims and most live with the fantasy that their original countries are actually strong and great and the west is just weak and evil/corrupt and should be brought under Islamic rule. In their thinking the west are the enemies of God and nothing we do short of converting will change that. Being reasonable and kind will be taken as weakness and proof that God is making us bow to their might and will just be an incentive to push further.
The only reason we are able to make alliances with some Muslim countries is that the leaders are actually not Muslims and only care about their own interests. Most of our animosity towards Muslim countries comes from the fact that they hate us with a passion. Not some Christian animosity towards other religions.

The only thing that is based on Christianity is the support for Israel. Not the conspiracy theory that Christians are hoping for the second coming of Christ in Israel, but simply because the whole bible is full of statements that God is for Israel and will bless those who bless it and curse those who curse it. They are the misguided older brother who nonetheless serves the same God.

The real solution for Iran is simple. They can end all their problem today if they acknowledge Israel's right to exist and promise to give up funding terrorist proxies. But of course such an admission is not acceptable for them as they have been telling this is the will of God for decades.

I suggest you familiarize yourself more with the Crusades.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25760
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #137 on: July 05, 2025, 11:42:38 AM »
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples.
A bit less than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed since Oct 7 2023.  Are you rounding that up to "hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

60,000 is only a verified count of direct deaths from Israeli action (bombings, machine gun fire, etc.).  It doesn't include deaths caused by lack of hospitals, lack of sanitation, lack of drinking water, or starvation due to the Israeli blockade.  By every account, it is a serious undercount of the true number of dead.


Also, notice how you lump "The U.S. and Israel" together, and then don't specify who killed "at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza".  Did the U.S. kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza?

Israel has received decades of weapons technology, training, and billions in funding from the US.  Any action that Israel makes today in Gaza or the West Bank would not be possible without that background of aid . . . given this support it's hard to imagine a scenario where the US is separated from Israeli actions at this point.


This is called "What about-ism", when you mention Iran's crimes, then immediately pretend the U.S. has done similar things.  You're distracting from the problems Iran has created, and trying to make a false equivalence with the U.S., while also making incorrect associations and statements of fact.

What-about-ism is a rhetorical tactic where someone responds to an accusation by pointing out a similar or worse offense committed by another party, often to distract from the original issue. It is considered a logical fallacy because it does not address the validity of the initial claim.

That's not what @ChpBstrd did.  He clearly acknowledged the offenses that Iran has committed, and thereby addressed the validity of (by validating) the initial claim.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #138 on: July 05, 2025, 04:41:29 PM »
I guess I see blame all around given Iran/Hamas/Houthis/Hezbolah, Oct7, and the tough Israeli response. You feel for the Palestinian's who are damned at every turn.

But the blame game isn’t going to determine the future and the future doesn’t determine itself. Countries do.

I’m more concerned now that China/Russia/NK/Iran is neutralized in the region and that The West can organize it to its benefit and that of the various countries there. That’s the goal…but I don’t know the plan.

mtnrider

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Location: Frozen tundra in the Northeast
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #139 on: July 05, 2025, 06:40:16 PM »
So what’s the plan?
Here's an attempt:

Objective 1: Prevent a world war.
Method 1: Make aid to Israel contingent upon peacemaking behavior and respect for human rights. Sign a new nuclear deal with Iran to resume inspections. Commit more resources to NATO until European countries are spending enough to defend themselves.

Objective 2: Prevent the spread of authoritarian government structures and the overthrow of democracies.
Method 2: Weaken the Russia-Belarus-Iran consortium by providing significant military support to Ukraine. Reduce Russian/Iranian revenues, and Western dependency upon their oil, by investing in alternative sources of energy and reducing energy intensiveness. Push military aid into Taiwan ahead of China's planned invasion, which will occur around May 2027, and encourage Fillipino military independence.

Objective 3: Address internal decay in the U.S.
Method 3: For starters:
  • Weaken the executive branch and take back Constitutional powers Congress ceded to the president, including tariffs and the waging of war. Make treaty violations an impeachable offense.
  • Require all members of Congress, all Supreme Court justices, the President, and all cabinet members to disclose all of their assets and tax returns annually, plus all of their sources of income, plus an explanation for any changes.
  • Go back to hand-counted paper ballot voting to eliminate the risk of election hacking.
  • Embark upon a plausible plan to bring the US's debt/GDP ratio down from 125% to 75% in ten years, and set up hurdles to undoing that legislation, such as requiring each member of Congress voting to violate budget rules or repeal the legislation to state words into a camera that they are voting to increase the debt.
  • Reform the judicial and law enforcement systems so that rich people cannot escape justice indefinitely through legal maneuvering and so that poor/middle class people are not railroaded into pleading guilty for crimes they didn't commit because they know they have no chance.
  • Regulate big tech companies that are harming the national interest. For example, require social media companies to verify ages, and repeal section 230 of the 1996 Communication Decency Act. Hold them to account for spreading foreign propaganda.
  • Make election day a national holiday.
   

Objective 4: Stop nuclear proliferation to prevent the next regional nuclear war.
Method 4: First, take steps that would prevent Israel from pre-emptively nuking Iran. This might be the most likely nuclear war scenario. As noted above, threaten to walk away if Israel does not take a constructive peace making role. Only then would Iran feel safe enough to abandon its own nuclear project and allow in inspectors. Second, work for the resolution of the Ukraine war in Ukraine's favor. This will prevent countries like Poland, Romania, Germany, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, etc. from building up nuclear arsenals to avoid the same fate, and demonstrate that a military alliance can win conventionally. Third, offer North Korea the same security guarantees and agreements as Iran. Finally, none of this can work if the US keeps behaving as we've done for the past 25 years, abandoning treaties, leaving sanctions and military attacks to the whim of a rotating cast of Presidents, and overthrowing countries like Iraq after weakening their WMD programs through diplomatic channels. Basically, the US has to become credible again, and on that note George W. Bush did even more damage than Trump. The Iraq war demonstrated the futility of negotiating with the U.S. and of giving up WMD's. Iran's nuclear program started just as the neocons in the US were talking about overthrowing Iran next. The U.S. will face its own reputation anywhere it tries to encourage nonproliferation, so structural changes like those described above will be needed to regain credibility.

This is a completely well thought out and reasonable platform.  I might move Objective 3 up to number 2, assuming they are in priority order.  It might even have to be number 1.  I just don't think we can get much done in the world without getting our own house in order.

Another question is - how to help get this accomplished?

2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #140 on: July 06, 2025, 11:17:43 PM »
Quote from: reeshau link=topic=137608.msg3373495#msg3373495
...

I suggest you familiarize yourself more with the Crusades.
Seriously... You believe the crusades have anything to do with whatever is happening in the world today? Or that the beliefs from the Roman Catholic church at that time are similar to those of the US evangelicals?
Also, I feel you didn't even read your own wikipedia link as the crusades where far more reasonable as you may think in the face of Turkish aggression, although the execution was not very Christian by today's standards, but this was the middle ages.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2025, 10:08:24 PM by 2Cent »

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4015
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #141 on: July 07, 2025, 07:43:25 AM »
Quote from: reeshau link=topic=137608.msg3373495#msg3373495
...

I suggest you familiarize yourself more with [url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
the Crusades[/url].
Seriously... You believe the crusades have anything to do with whatever is happening in the world today? Or that the beliefs from the Roman Catholic church at that time are similar to those of the US evangelicals?
Also, I feel you didn't even read your own wikipedia link as the crusades where far more reasonable as you may think in the face of Turkish aggression, although the execution was not very Christian by today's standards, but this was the middle ages.

See, that's the thing.  There's always something on the other side, with enough history, that it's "their fault."

I'll point you to the end of the entry:

"The military threat presented by the Ottoman Turks diminished, making anti-Ottoman crusading obsolete in 1699 with the final Holy League."

While they were far from the influence in their heyday, they really ended in 1699.  You ask if something that old could still be an influence?  If you still celebrate Thanksgiving and Independence Day, then I say yes, it can be.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7753
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #142 on: July 07, 2025, 11:06:56 AM »
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples.
A bit less than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed since Oct 7 2023.  Are you rounding that up to "hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

60,000 is only a verified count of direct deaths from Israeli action (bombings, machine gun fire, etc.).  It doesn't include deaths caused by lack of hospitals, lack of sanitation, lack of drinking water, or starvation due to the Israeli blockade.  By every account, it is a serious undercount of the true number of dead.


Also, notice how you lump "The U.S. and Israel" together, and then don't specify who killed "at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza".  Did the U.S. kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza?

Israel has received decades of weapons technology, training, and billions in funding from the US.  Any action that Israel makes today in Gaza or the West Bank would not be possible without that background of aid . . . given this support it's hard to imagine a scenario where the US is separated from Israeli actions at this point.


This is called "What about-ism", when you mention Iran's crimes, then immediately pretend the U.S. has done similar things.  You're distracting from the problems Iran has created, and trying to make a false equivalence with the U.S., while also making incorrect associations and statements of fact.

What-about-ism is a rhetorical tactic where someone responds to an accusation by pointing out a similar or worse offense committed by another party, often to distract from the original issue. It is considered a logical fallacy because it does not address the validity of the initial claim.

That's not what @ChpBstrd did.  He clearly acknowledged the offenses that Iran has committed, and thereby addressed the validity of (by validating) the initial claim.

The topic was Iran, which ChpBstrd only covered briefly before discussing the U.S. extensively.  It was an attempt to shift the topic from Iran's crimes, to discuss U.S. crimes.  I stand by the claim this is what-about-ism, to focus on a topic not being discussed.

No news source is reporting "hundreds of thousands" of Palestinian deaths.  You speculating on what might have happened does not make it fact, any more than when ChpBstrd did it.  It was wrong to claim something not supported by any major news organization.

No news organization is claiming the U.S. killed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.  That is why I called out making stuff up by ChpBstrd, and now you.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25760
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #143 on: July 07, 2025, 11:23:21 AM »
Without a doubt, Iran's form of government represents the worst of totalitarian theocracy. They've been behind proxy wars that have killed literally millions in the Middle East and Africa, have aligned themselves with the totalitarian regimes in Russia and China, have materially supported terrorist groups targeting civilians, and have crushed any form of dissent at home. All the things you've noted.

The U.S. and Israel have committed similar crimes. The killing of at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the continued ethnic cleansing of the West Bank are the most recent examples.
A bit less than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed since Oct 7 2023.  Are you rounding that up to "hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

60,000 is only a verified count of direct deaths from Israeli action (bombings, machine gun fire, etc.).  It doesn't include deaths caused by lack of hospitals, lack of sanitation, lack of drinking water, or starvation due to the Israeli blockade.  By every account, it is a serious undercount of the true number of dead.


Also, notice how you lump "The U.S. and Israel" together, and then don't specify who killed "at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza".  Did the U.S. kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza?

Israel has received decades of weapons technology, training, and billions in funding from the US.  Any action that Israel makes today in Gaza or the West Bank would not be possible without that background of aid . . . given this support it's hard to imagine a scenario where the US is separated from Israeli actions at this point.


This is called "What about-ism", when you mention Iran's crimes, then immediately pretend the U.S. has done similar things.  You're distracting from the problems Iran has created, and trying to make a false equivalence with the U.S., while also making incorrect associations and statements of fact.

What-about-ism is a rhetorical tactic where someone responds to an accusation by pointing out a similar or worse offense committed by another party, often to distract from the original issue. It is considered a logical fallacy because it does not address the validity of the initial claim.

That's not what @ChpBstrd did.  He clearly acknowledged the offenses that Iran has committed, and thereby addressed the validity of (by validating) the initial claim.

The topic was Iran, which ChpBstrd only covered briefly before discussing the U.S. extensively.  It was an attempt to shift the topic from Iran's crimes, to discuss U.S. crimes.  I stand by the claim this is what-about-ism, to focus on a topic not being discussed.

No news source is reporting "hundreds of thousands" of Palestinian deaths.  You speculating on what might have happened does not make it fact, any more than when ChpBstrd did it.  It was wrong to claim something not supported by any major news organization.

No news organization is claiming the U.S. killed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.  That is why I called out making stuff up by ChpBstrd, and now you.

The exact number of Palestinian dead due to all causes is not known (nobody is tracking this), which is why news agencies aren't reporting it.

We do know that indirect deaths in war tend to range between 3 - 15 times direct deaths though (https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Crime-statistics/Global-Burden-of-Armed-Violence-full-report.pdf, https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2824%2901169-3).  Current death toll in Gaza is 57,418 recorded killed (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/18/gaza-tracker) with at least 14,222 missing and presumed dead (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/3/gaza-death-toll-rises-close-to-62000-as-missing-added).  Based on what we know, total (indirect + direct) deaths of Palestinians is most likely to range somewhere between 172,254 to 1,074,600.

So no . . . not making stuff up.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2025, 11:33:06 AM by GuitarStv »

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #144 on: July 07, 2025, 03:17:05 PM »
Guys, it’s an awful situation no matter how you view it.

The question remains: Now that we are where we are, what choices do we have to shape the future, and what are the best choices for the region, America and The West?

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8454
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #145 on: July 07, 2025, 03:41:14 PM »
The topic was Iran, which ChpBstrd only covered briefly before discussing the U.S. extensively.  It was an attempt to shift the topic from Iran's crimes, to discuss U.S. crimes.  I stand by the claim this is what-about-ism, to focus on a topic not being discussed.
I do not intend to engage in what-about-ism, which is why I agreed with the long list of crimes committed by the Iranian regime when I agreed with "all the things" @Ron Scott mentioned in their post.

I even upped the ante against Iran's ruling regime by attributing potentially millions of deaths to their four-and-a-half decades of war and terror. If you count the Iran-Iraq war, attribute some of the casualties in Syria to Iranian proxies, account for some fraction of the deaths caused by and among Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terror organizations, count a few of the casualties from the war in Yemen, and mark those numbers up by some amount for starvation, lack of medical care, poverty, and disease (always the main killers in conflicts)... then you're comfortably at a body count in the millions. It's undeniable; Iran is run by people with lots of blood on their hands.

None of this means the U.S. hasn't been eager to fight in this area, hasn't committed atrocities, or hasn't taken actions like the unprovoked invasion of Iraq which killed between 150,000 and 1 million civilians, depending on how we count.

The "topics" in the original context were 1) whether the world would be better off without the Iranian regime and their proxies, and 2) whose side are we supposed to be on. I feel I addressed these questions.
Quote
No news source is reporting "hundreds of thousands" of Palestinian deaths.  You speculating on what might have happened does not make it fact, any more than when ChpBstrd did it.  It was wrong to claim something not supported by any major news organization.

No news organization is claiming the U.S. killed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.  That is why I called out making stuff up by ChpBstrd, and now you.
As @GuitarStv notes, the true body count of large scale conflicts is hard to know, especially while the conflict is still hot and where record-keeping institutions have been disrupted. We still don't know exactly how many people perished in the bombings of Dresden, Germany or Tokyo, Japan. If the stench of death is coming from the rubble of a collapsed building, there is no way to know how many people it is coming from until the layers of concrete can be excavated. None of that forensics work is happening.

Plus, independent reporters are not free to roam Gaza and gather information for themselves. The enclave is under a strict military embargo. Almost all of the slight amount of information we have of what is actually occurring comes from censored military-embedded reporters. Al-Jazeera and other independent/sympathetic outlets have been banished. Literally hundreds of journalists have been killed, so I don't know where we expect to obtain their information.
Quote
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least 217 Palestinian, three Lebanese and two Israeli journalists have been killed in the ongoing conflict.

This article in Nature describes the difficulty in accounting for casualties when surveys cannot be performed, institutions break down, etc.

Also, there are media outlets and academics floating a six-figure death toll, so far. Here's a description of an article estimating over 64k "traumatic injury deaths" alone as of June 30, 2024. Consider doubling this to account for the year that has passed since then. 

Quote
According to findings announced by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and published in The Lancet journal, there were an estimated 64,260 “traumatic injury deaths” in Gaza between October 7, 2023 and June 30, 2024. The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza put the figure at 37,877 at the time.

This means the ministry has underreported the death toll due to violence by approximately 41%, the researchers found. As of October, the number of Gazans killed by violence was thought to exceed 70,000, the study said, based on the estimated underreporting rate.

The total death toll attributable to Israel’s military campaign is likely to be higher still, it said, as its analysis doesn’t account for deaths caused by disruption to health care, insufficient food, clean water and sanitation, and disease outbreaks.
And if the Hamas-run ministry cannot get hold of a body, it "in general" does not count toward their total:
Quote
In general, the ministry reaches its figures by counting the corpses of those killed.

Here's another media description of a letter in the Lancet, in which the authors suggest a "conservative" estimate for the all-causes excess mortality in Gaza:
Quote
The co-authors write that they started from the principle that "armed conflicts have indirect health implications beyond the direct harm from violence" to arrive at the death toll of 186,000. They therefore applied a "conservative estimate" of four indirect deaths per one direct death, basing their calculation on the figure of 37,396 deaths recorded on June 19 by the Gaza Health Ministry – the Palestinian territory has been run by the militant group Hamas since its June 2007 coup. It is difficult to gather accurate figures, write the co-authors, due to the difficulties encountered in carrying out daily assessments on the ground.

To arrive at their estimate of "four indirect deaths per one direct death", the co-authors relied on a report published by the Secretariat of the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development in 2008. The document states that in areas where there is armed conflict "studies show that between three and 15 times as many people die indirectly for every person who dies violently".

Additionally, both sides have incentives to under-report. Hamas wants to minimize the perceived consequences of their decision to attack Israel on October 7, 2023 and to not appear to be losing. Israel does not want the world to know they are starving the Gaza population and depriving them of water in the middle of a desert, because those are war crimes. As Al Jazeera notes,
Quote
In addition to the confirmed casualties, thousands of people are feared buried under the rubble. With few tools to remove the rubble and rescue those trapped beneath concrete, volunteers and Palestinian Civil Defence workers rely on their bare hands. There is no way to know how many people have perished under the rubble.

An estimated 85,000 tonnes of explosives have been dropped on Gaza, according to the Environmental Quality Authority of Palestine. Experts predicted it could take more than a decade to clear the debris left by the bombing, which totals more than 42 million tonnes, according to the UN Development Programme.

Until then, we can either choose to take unlikely-low numbers from the combatants at face value, or use estimation techniques that have proven useful in other conflicts where accurate day-by-day death reporting by an active media or intact civil government was not possible. Just like in Iraq, it seems likely that in a decade we'll have no better than a vague estimate of how many people died due to the Gaza war and food/water embargo, with a range band in the hundreds of thousands.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25760
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #146 on: July 07, 2025, 08:27:50 PM »
Now that we are where we are, what choices do we have to shape the future, and what are the best choices for the region, America and The West?

Best choices for the region?  Basically two options:
1 - Stop any continuing to attack on the Palestinian people.  Stop any ongoing and pre-planned illegal blockade of food and medical aid into the region.  End illegal occupation of Palestinian land by foreign nationals.  I don't see a reasonable way to ever negotiate without these things happening.  Then we would need to begin negotiations - ideally with some leverage on both parties to help reduce their tendencies to try to sabotage them.  Option 1 is harder. It's also likely best for America/the West/and the whole world in the long term.
2 - Ramp up Israel's annexation of Palestine.  Complete genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza and then move on to the West Bank.  This won't really make Israel closer to it's Arab neighbours, but probably won't make their current relationship any worse.  And who cares?  Once all of Palestine is Israeli it'll just be further away from them.  Rockets and missile strikes are already ineffective, and Israel has air superiority over the region.  Option 2 is easier for America and the West short term, with the side effect of also causing an entire martyred people with lasting hatred and every reason to become terrorists to be spread throughout the world.  This seems to be where we're headed.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #147 on: July 07, 2025, 09:16:53 PM »
Now that we are where we are, what choices do we have to shape the future, and what are the best choices for the region, America and The West?

Best choices for the region?  Basically two options:
1 - Stop any continuing to attack on the Palestinian people.  Stop any ongoing and pre-planned illegal blockade of food and medical aid into the region.  End illegal occupation of Palestinian land by foreign nationals.  I don't see a reasonable way to ever negotiate without these things happening.  Then we would need to begin negotiations - ideally with some leverage on both parties to help reduce their tendencies to try to sabotage them.  Option 1 is harder. It's also likely best for America/the West/and the whole world in the long term.
2 - Ramp up Israel's annexation of Palestine.  Complete genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza and then move on to the West Bank.  This won't really make Israel closer to it's Arab neighbours, but probably won't make their current relationship any worse.  And who cares?  Once all of Palestine is Israeli it'll just be further away from them.  Rockets and missile strikes are already ineffective, and Israel has air superiority over the region.  Option 2 is easier for America and the West short term, with the side effect of also causing an entire martyred people with lasting hatred and every reason to become terrorists to be spread throughout the world.  This seems to be where we're headed.

I don’t see the Saudis getting to where The West needs them to go (including big joint business ventures and security benefits to Israel) if we’re left with Option 2, so let’s stick with some version of Option 1.

Astoundingly, Trump just said Hamas was “willing to release more of the hostages” if a cease fire can be achieved. (You have to wonder if this thing EVER ends.) I say this as a heads-up, that Hamas is not reflected in your Options. After all they ARE the Iranian proxy who you will remember uses the Palestinians as human shields. They also kicked off the party last fall with hostage taking, rapes & murders and are obviously still standing as they’re the people The West needs to negotiate with.

How do we treat Hamas and their Iranian Ayatollah banker in the struggle people like to call “Israel v. Palestine” if the goal is real peace? They are the elephants in the room and if their rallying cry is still the infantile death-to-Israel-and-The-Great-Satan-America what is our response?

2Cent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #148 on: July 07, 2025, 10:25:28 PM »
Now that we are where we are, what choices do we have to shape the future, and what are the best choices for the region, America and The West?

Best choices for the region?  Basically two options:
1 - Stop any continuing to attack on the Palestinian people.  Stop any ongoing and pre-planned illegal blockade of food and medical aid into the region.  End illegal occupation of Palestinian land by foreign nationals.  I don't see a reasonable way to ever negotiate without these things happening.  Then we would need to begin negotiations - ideally with some leverage on both parties to help reduce their tendencies to try to sabotage them.  Option 1 is harder. It's also likely best for America/the West/and the whole world in the long term.
2 - Ramp up Israel's annexation of Palestine.  Complete genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza and then move on to the West Bank.  This won't really make Israel closer to it's Arab neighbours, but probably won't make their current relationship any worse.  And who cares?  Once all of Palestine is Israeli it'll just be further away from them.  Rockets and missile strikes are already ineffective, and Israel has air superiority over the region.  Option 2 is easier for America and the West short term, with the side effect of also causing an entire martyred people with lasting hatred and every reason to become terrorists to be spread throughout the world.  This seems to be where we're headed.
3. How about instead of genocide, move the Palestinians to Iran and other Arab countries. I'd be happy to chip in to pay for such a move.

rocketpj

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Israel vs Iran
« Reply #149 on: July 07, 2025, 10:29:45 PM »

How do we treat Hamas and their Iranian Ayatollah banker in the struggle people like to call “Israel v. Palestine” if the goal is real peace? They are the elephants in the room and if their rallying cry is still the infantile death-to-Israel-and-The-Great-Satan-America what is our response?

This seems to be a really hard thing for people to grasp, but violence begets violence.  The way to stop Hamas and the Ayatollahs is not to brutalize their people and drive more people into extremism.  If bombing things ended extremism the sheer volume of bombs dropped in the Middle East in the past 50 years by all parties would mean it is a tranquil utopia.

Here's a wild notion that nobody will embrace despite the likelihood it would work.  Instead of bombing the Palestinians into a genocide, why not treat the Palestinian people as humans and provide aid and opportunities for them.  Provide citizenship and a reliable legal structure to operate in.  Treat Hamas (and Al Qaeda, and ISIS, and Hezbollah) as the criminal organizations they have become.  Gather evidence and prosecute them where possible.  Not just for crimes against 'real people' like Israelis, but also for crimes against Palestinians or whoever.  Isolate the Hamas leadership and extremists as the people who are getting in the way of peace and prosperity instead of empowering them through continued violence. 

It would be really, really expensive to do - and for whatever reason the US and other countries are quite willing to spend $Billions to bomb the shit out of things but go into anaphylaxis at the thought of providing health care or education for nonwhite people in foreign countries.

Street gangs get local support and recruits by providing something that locals feel they don't get from the authorities - some kind of security, some kind of social programs, a feeling of belonging for young people.  Until 'we' offer something comparable, those gangs - from the Bloods and Crips to Hamas and Hezbollah - will continue to have traction.  And massive overreactions are the whole goal of outfits like Hamas.  They wanted the Israelis to go insane and murder thousands of Palestinians, because conflict and extremism is what they like and need to thrive.  To effectively beat them we need to do it differently.

It sounds impossible, but it's exactly what the Allied powers did after WWII - provided stability, law and financial support to their vanquished enemies.  For whatever reason the world chooses quite explicitly not to learn from the outcomes of that process, and instead stick to punitive (and profitable) violence and slaughter.  And somehow we wonder why the slaughter continues.