321–330 of 737 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ukraine also gave up its nukes. Look how that worked out for them and Europe.
Were they theirs? Germany has nukes too but they're not theirs, they're from the US. Germany can't say "fuck off" to the ~50k Americans stationed in the country, leave NATO and get to keep the nukes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Iranians (and their Houthi proxies) have made sustained attacks on them and don't seem to have hit anything. That's because the US has kept the surface combatants far back from the Persian Gulf for the duration of the war. As far as we know, they have attempted to run the strait twice and had to turn back because they were under sustained attack. I assume these ships can defend themselves for some period of time,…
> There is a reason the US Navy fled the Persian Gulf on Feb 26 and has not returned since. Two US Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers transited Hormuz a couple of weeks ago without damage and are still there last I heard. The Iranians were really upset, but couldn't do anything to stop it. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2-us-navy-destroyers-transit-st...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
American destroyers and aircraft carriers have been chased away from the Strait multiple times now. Hilariously the USS George HW Bush had to go the long way around Africa rather than risk transiting the Bab El Mandeb after the Houthis defeated the US Navy last year.
In what way were they chased away? Iran tried to sink them and didn't hit any shots, and many on Iran's side died trying. Many IRGC soldiers dying and not even scratching the paint on US vessels doesn't show US to be weak. > Hilariously the USS George HW Bush had to go the long way around Africa rather than risk transiting the Bab El Mandeb after the Houthis defeated the US Navy last year. Valuing the lives of your c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
American navy has blockaded countries all over the world, so it's more true that they closed international waters. Waters were open before America existed. If Americans would actually learn their history they would see that the USA blockade was the reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbour, as the Japanese needed the water to open and thought taking out Pearl Harbour would prevent the US Navy controlling the Pacific. Japan…
Nukes were not a response to Pearl Harbor. The framing in general of “Japan only took military action and the US sank to attacking civilians” is wrong too. Take a look at what Japan did to the Chinese during that time period if you think they were only attacking military targets. Japan also invaded an Alaskan island. https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2010/06/07/the-japanese-...
Much of the post-WW2 American-led world order was founded partially on the United States using its military to keep international waters open. It would be quite stunning Iran defeated the united states in this sense. The military might is there, but this administration clearly had no idea what they were getting themselves into and did not plan accordingly. (and does not have the will or public support to do so) The b…
The plan was for it to stay closed and have the US sell oil. The US is now exporting more oil than it has in a decade. Why can none of these supposedly smart people see this plan?
Trump thought it would go exactly as Venezuela and has no idea how to fix it. They tried to kill enough of Iran's leadership to get to somebody that would be subservient but it turns out nobody is left alive in Iran that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The power wasn't there in the first place if the administration couldn't defend Hormuz. It's all the same capital and resources that prior administrations had. The actual blunder was exposing that weakness to the world. We could have done nothing and reputation would've carried the idea that we could.
> The actual blunder was exposing that weakness to the world. The world already knew. The real strength of the prior admins was in simply not needing the military force. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal is a relevant example here. It didn't cost the US anything .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
American navy has blockaded countries all over the world, so it's more true that they closed international waters. Waters were open before America existed. If Americans would actually learn their history they would see that the USA blockade was the reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbour, as the Japanese needed the water to open and thought taking out Pearl Harbour would prevent the US Navy controlling the Pacific. Japan…
Why would you post such nonsense given how easy it is these days to determine bullshit? By the time of Pearl Harbor, Japan was formally aligned with Nazi Germany. Japan, Germany, and Italy signed the Tripartite Pact in Sept 1940 creating the Axis alliance. Pearl Harbor happened in Dec 1941, so Japan had been formally tied to Germany for more than a year. “The American navy closed international waters.” Not in the Pea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know enough about the current state of naval warfare but I've assumed this is related to the asymmetry that's emerged around protecting capital warships, especially in the scenario of a very narrow strait and a long enemy-controlled coastline. It's not the billion-dollar warships that transport oil, it's the much more fragile and unarmed tankers. Even if the US Navy begins full escort duty, it can't remain…
It's not even the strait that's the important geopolitical entity here. It's all the oil pumps and refineries in Saudi Arabia, Qatar or UAE. The US began to patrol the strait with Destroyers and immediately stopped when the scared Saudis immediately realized that Iran was about to attack Saudi oil rigs. -------- Iran has too many targets and the only thing that can stop them is the equivalent to an Israeli Iron Dome…
Much of the post-WW2 American-led world order was founded partially on the United States using its military to keep international waters open. It would be quite stunning Iran defeated the united states in this sense. The military might is there, but this administration clearly had no idea what they were getting themselves into and did not plan accordingly. (and does not have the will or public support to do so) The b…
You're not wrong, except that USA is/was not always literally "keeping waters open" for everyone. The Cuba blockade, which is another form of war and has dire consequences for the population, has been going on for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know enough about the current state of naval warfare but I've assumed this is related to the asymmetry that's emerged around protecting capital warships, especially in the scenario of a very narrow strait and a long enemy-controlled coastline. It's not the billion-dollar warships that transport oil, it's the much more fragile and unarmed tankers. Even if the US Navy begins full escort duty, it can't remain…
It's not even the strait that's the important geopolitical entity here. It's all the oil pumps and refineries in Saudi Arabia, Qatar or UAE. The US began to patrol the strait with Destroyers and immediately stopped when the scared Saudis immediately realized that Iran was about to attack Saudi oil rigs. -------- Iran has too many targets and the only thing that can stop them is the equivalent to an Israeli Iron Dome…
Wasn't Iron Dome coverage deteriorating due to low munitions? The cost asymmetry between drones and interceptors makes any drawn-out conflicts mutually punishing - unless someone on the future decides to gamble on another decapitation strike. The Iron Dome is great against improvised pipe-rockets, but less effective against ballistic missile salvos.