If anyone wants, here’s an extremely optimistic 2009 Brookings Institute white paper on how various hostile actions against Iran would play out based off numbers and history.
Chapter 3 analyses a “boots on the ground” invasion (the occupation would require a draft), Chapters 4-6 analyze American and Israeli airstrikes. Neither of them expect Iran to employ masses of drones or close the strait, and they consider ballistic missiles against US assets unlikely.
While they have an extreme western bias, there’s no way you can twist the numbers to look good.
Chapter 3 analyses a “boots on the ground” invasion (the occupation would require a draft)
Good luck, I’m defecting as soon as they don’t have eyes on me.
It makes it pretty clear how insanely unfeasible a ground invasion of Iran would be even with the most optimistic assumptions.
1.3 million just for the occupation of an 88 million pop country, and that number just comes from other occupations, without taking into consideration the terrain or people or last 50 years of preparation for asymmetrical warfare.
This is one psychotic document, jesus
Biden is as much of a Zionist as Netanyahu
You think?
Cool, crash the price of oil right be fore the election.
Biden is trying to make Harris lose. He hates her for taking his job.
Biden’s bitter at people realizing he’s too old. Pretty sure he was hoping to go out like feinstein.
Bibi just wants someone he can influence with shiney things rather than needing to pull strings.
What a fantastic democracy/republic we have in the USA 😭
Bibi for sure is. Biden’s barely functional.
Bibi is definitely trying to make Harris lose, but I think Biden is still functional enough before 5pm to hold a grudge.
the party of lesser evil driving the world towards WW3
But don’t you dare withhold or we’re going to make sure you get WW3 faster /assposting
Iran really should be preemptively striking Israel; I mean Israel is literally drawing up invasion plans.
The problem (aside from international relations nonsense) is that Iran’s air force and missiles won’t be able to inflict significant damage on Israel, which aside from the Iron dome has the strongest air force in the region.
We already saw that the dome cannot intercept Iranian missiles just days ago. Also, the math doesn’t work in favor of the dome given that they need 2 interceptors per missile. There’s also the issue of production capacity. Once it runs through the existing stockpiles of interceptors, making new ones at the rate they’re being consumed is not possible. For example, from 2008 to present, Lockheed Martin was able to produce 800 missiles, around 50 a year. https://armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2023/lockheed-martin-announces-delivery-of-800th-thaad-interceptor-missile-system
To counter the 180 missiles Iran reportedly launched, requiring up to 2 interceptors each, would have exhausted nearly HALF of all THAAD missiles ever produced. And that’s assuming there are enough launchers to even fire that many interceptors at once. The US is completely unprepared for the scale of war it is provoking around the globe.
Iran can absolutely cripple Israel by destroying its energy infrastructure.
I see. I assumed they could be intercepted by the iron dome as usual, but if not that changes things.
The key thing is that even if the iron dome was capable of reliably intercepting ballistic missiles, the math is always going to be in favor of the attacker.
They already proven twice it is not the case, they hit what they wanted to hit. Why do you people always have to take the US wars modus operandi as a standard, where an attack needs to wreck everything and kill as many civilians as possible? When is the attack “damaging”, when it’s doubletapping the rescuers?
They hit (some of) what they wanted to hit, but didn’t inflect significant damage. Which is why a preemptive strike would be meaningless; those only matter when they can seriously reduce the enemy’s ability to wage war. Iran simply doesn’t have anything that can seriously reduce Israel’s ability to wage war in one attack.
deleted by creator
Yemen has proven this is not worth a hill of beans.
I mean Yemen didn’t inflict serious military damage on Israel so they in fact prove my point. They caused evacuations, but I’ve yet to hear of the IDF suffering real damage. It’s always been the Israeli economy, which is also good work but not really what we’re talking about.
The port of Eliat is bankrupt.
The economy of Israel is in a tailspin from the combined efforts of Yemen, and Hezbollah.
But yeah, sure, an economy being destroyed isn’t military damage.
Let me guess, the blockade of the south during the civil war didn’t accomplish anything, right?
But yeah, sure, an economy being destroyed isn’t military damage.
It’s not when the question is whether Iran can or should do a preemptive strike.
It sucks when current events happen just minutes later proving your propaganda wrong.
Fine, then the fact that Iran hit many of the targets has become public despite the Israelis best attempt to censor that information from coming out should tell you everything you need to know.
So should the fact that Iran got through with their first attack despite preemptively giving the targets to US/Israel, and that US did most of the interceptions at the cost of 1 billions dollars, and Israel used up most of its stock of ammunition.
By the by, given the cost of the ballistic missiles and the cost of the interceptors, hitting nothing is still a success. Not that that is relevant to this conversation give the fact that we know they did hit quite a few of their targets.
EDIT: Speaking of, a drone attack from Hezbollah hit a mess hall for a military base in Haifa. 67 confirmed casualties reported so far. Iron Dome didn’t even detect it.
Iran punched through Toilet Paper Dome and David Sling twice now. The second time, Iran dropped a (probably hypersonic) missile right down in Mossad HQ’s front yard, which is being actively covered up and lied about to maintain the illusion of invincibility. Israel is also lying about damage at Nevatim. Any serious attack from Iran can easily hit all strategic targets in Israel. Iran has shown an uncanny amount of patience and it should be clear to Isnt’real that’s coming to an end. They know they’re vulnerable and Bibi’s hands are shaking out of fear.
First ever actual preemptive strike.
It’s called deescalation through escalation.
America supports it when Israel does it, that means it’s okay.
Iran, go right ahead. Lebanon, go right ahead. Hamas, go right ahead.
Israel and America have already stated this is a perfectly valid reasoning. The rules of war go both ways.
Again: If America is the world ethics, these actions are perfectly valid. This is what America does.
This is what America does.
Except it isn’t. USA does not preemptively attack countries which plan to attack USA, since nobody is doing that. USA wrecks and coups countries because they are either trying to leave the US hegemonic control or the ones that are simply appealing targets for imperialism.
Removed by mod
Yes i know what you meant and that’s why i corrected you so you don’t accidentally whitewash US imperialism by suggesting they are even in the slightest bit justified. US does not attack people because they hate US. People hate US because it attack them, motive being imperialism, always and everywhere. And you just went like “fuck off”. Sad and disappointing.
Kamala could invoke 25th, if she doesn’t agree with it
if she doesn’t agree with it
SHUT UP! Why couldn’t you let him have that little bit of naivette?
Seriously though, its a damn fine idea, if only the US and the DNC weren’t totally bat-shit on this front. Why does a little thing like reality have to be so un-cooperative?
deleted by creator
hey, lets do some buddy-buddy attacking sovereign nations with a GENOCIDAL STATE!
Just the thing to endear your party to the electorate before an election. For Republicans, a war actually does this. Not so sure about Democrats.
Since i’m in south america, i will grab the popcorn and watch the gringos fighting with brown people for the nth time.
I was certain you’d be bored of it by now. But at least it’s not another one of our “Roosevelt Corollary” adventures.
Why is
still president?Because the term isn’t up yet and taking him down for being unable to perform his duties would be greatly damaging to US optics-based politics.
You’re right. But how is it not damaging to US optics-based politics to have a dementia addled old man start a war with Iran?
I don’t know, i never seen starting a war being damaging to US politics, it usually gets their numbers up.
That’s when the war is harmless to US interests. This war has the potential to increase Iranian influence (and decrease US influence) in the region. That is, to put it lightly, not good for oil shareholders.
Nearly all of those wars were also lost. This also didn’t harm them in the least, even genocidal scum like Cheney are just hidden for few years and them publicly rehabilitated by the opposing party. USA is more and more resembling one big Holden Bloodfest.
Good point. But why does no one care about his pudding brain? I just can’t understand. The whole country was like, yeah he’s unfit. They after he dropped out no one cares.
Peak idealism in politics. For some reason they are completely unable to think in a cathegory of system, it’s all just comic book to them where colorfully dressed people run around and the rest of the grey world is a background that just happen, no agency, no reason, it just is. So despite having a really clear indication, that is completely identical politics of Biden and Harris they think problem is gone because person is gone. This didn’t happen in year or 4, that was trained by long decades.
Vice President Joe Biden meets with Israeli Prime Minister
Joe Biden has been demoted to Vice President ?
According to Fox News, President Obama is still president and so is Traitor Trump. Everyone is president, depending upon who is watching at the moment to stir up one kind of hatred or another.
I think the Whitehouse is currently on Code Wilson.
stalin shouldn’t have stopped at berlin
Hey, remember when democrats were saying Trump is crazy for trying to start a war with Iran?
I remember when Democrats gave a fuck about 1 thing. Now they care about 0 things.
Imagine this:
-A democrat who supports genocide.
-A democrat who is championing Trump’s border policy.
That’s where we are now. That’s who democrats are now.
But I’m a ‘tankie’ for pointing that out, I guess.
Have fun explaining your way out of how your supported a candidate who supported genocide and deportations, liberals. ❤️
I remember when Democrats gave a fuck about 1 thing.
What’s that?
I don’t even know, I was just trying to give a little on all that I took. lmfao
Yep. And when Kamala wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college because swing stat voters actually don’t support GENOCIDE the Dems won’t show a degree of self awareness or accept any responsibility, they will just blame Jill Stein voters
I say let them attack iran. It will be the final thrashing before the American empire collapses completely.
Removed by mod
I’m saying that we had tens of millions of people mobilized in the streets before the Iraq war and those powerful entities did not give a Kentucky fried fuck about the will of the people. I don’t see hardly anyone protesting this latest war so I hate to say it but they are going to do whatever they want. And if the decide to attack Iran it will be the gravesite of empire. Because the entire region will attack Saudi oil infra, US bases will be obliterated, Russia has already signalled solidarity with Iran, it will be a total disaster.
And trust me, I’m not wishing for this outcome at all, I’m just pontificating on the results such an action would create
Ahhhhhh, sorry, I misinterpreted your comment. It seems we agree. I’ve been trying to get this knee jerk reactionary bullshit out of me, but it’s pretty hard in this climate lmfao
No worries at all comrade it’s difficult to convey things on the Internet , I mean we’re talking to strangers with no facial expressions so as a communication medium it’s pretty limited. But still and all, we’re on the same team. Fuck war. Fuck the empire, fuck genocide and fuck all the libs and actual fascists that are enabling it
- There are two choices in the United States 2024 election. No third party stands a ghost of a chance of winning. No, not even if the 30,000 people you can reach on Lemmy all vote for Timothy Greenparty.
- A Trump victory in 2024 would not only be just as bad if not worse for the citizens of Gaza than Harris would, but also pose an existential threat to a large number of vulnerable Americans (trans people, immigrants, women seeking abortions).
- Given the margins of victory in 2016 and 2020, Kamala might not win if leftists don’t vote for her.
- Snoozing fascism for four years is better than inviting it through the door now, and buys us time to build our defenses for when it comes back.
I’d like to focus my counterargument. Which of these statements do you disagree with?
What are you doing to stop fascism outside of voting for the lesser fascist?
Fascism cannot be defeated through the ballot box. It is capitalism in decay, when capitalist democracy becomes unviable and the capitalist ruling class choose capitalism over democracy.
So, none of the above, but you’re still not going to vote?
I’m dismissing your framing; I dont live in a swing state, dont try to convince me to vote for the lesser fascist.
My question is, do you care about stopping fascism or do only you care about delaying it for another four years?
Do you care enough about stopping fascism to put in work to stop it outside of election day and trying to post your way into getting people to vote? Like, seriously, are you interested in putting in actual work to prevent fascism in the US in our lifetimes? This isn’t a gotcha I’m trying to set a baseline.
I’d like to ask what are you doing to stop fascism? You’re actively stopping people from voting for the only person who can defeat Orange Hitler, so what are you doing to make up for that?
I’m doing about 20 hours of work a week as part of a socialist org, in service of building up a center of power to actually be able to challenge the lesser and greater fascist.
I’m thinking long term, because I’m not satisfied with “just vote for the less fascist party every four years as each party keeps getting more fascist” If all the work you’re doing is within the confines of bourgeois sham-democracy you’ll never be able to defeat fascism. Fascism is capitalism in crisis. You can either find a magic cure to stop the contradictions of capitalism from heightening or you can move toward defeating it.
The latter is the only one that has been demonstrated to actually work.
I sure hope Brown Hitler beats Orange Hitler.
What a vibrant fucking democracy you amerikkkans sure have over there. Whatever meaningless, bootlicking bourgeois electoralism you choose, let’s hope you don’t get everyone else on earth killed as a result of your endless and unapologetic imperialism, invasions, coups, proxy wars and many genocides.
Is it guilt that keeps you from reading your own history and understanding that all this mass murder that amerikkka has been inflicting on the world for hundreds of years is not driven by the individual incoherent puppets your political system forces you to choose from, but from the very nature of your capitalist empire? Fascism is the product of capitalism in crisis. It’s not a thing you can vote against, since you have absolutely no meaningful input in the decisions of the worlds most violent military empire (and you know it). What kind of political system creates a revolving door for endless marches of psychotic war criminals and even puts a few of them on the menu every few years? Obviously not a system that opposes fascism.
lol You support fascism. Look in the mirror, you dumb bitch. You are the problem. You are a Nazi.
I do so love it when leftists who have never interacted with me beyond reading a single comment tell me what I believe
