Yet another war, this time with Iran

[DrZoidberg]

IRGC has started using child soldiers.

11-year-old Alireza Jafari killed at checkpoint after IRGC recruitment call involving children

Is the UN going to say anything about it, I wonder ...

Could you please find a more random and dodgy source for your news? I think it would be hard

 

[DrZoidberg]

We don't have a ground force large enough to deploy in the first place.

Full occupation of Iran is unrealistic. More limited use of ground forces (for example on Kharg) is not.

Only way to "finish this" is a deal with IRGC for a secular government.

The raison d'être for IRGC is to guard the "Islamic Revolution". They won't allow a secular government, which means they need to be defeated.

Are you seriously suggesting that by taking Kharg this will defeat the IRGC?

Without a full occupation of Iran. They won’t be defeated. And we’re not going to even take Kharg with a simple Marine Battalion that is being sent there.

Not that Trump is smart enough to know that it’s not enough. He’s such a moron, I wouldn’t put it past him to invade with too few troops.

And what the fuck would be the point of taking it? It’s not going to give him control over the oil. The infrastructure will be destroyed. We would just take over a hulk of a city.

Kharg Island is how Iran makes payroll. We don't have to seize it. For these purposes, we just have to destroy it.

Do you know why Iran uses Kharg as their main oil export hub? It seems strategically stupid. Iraq wrecked it during the Iran Iraq war.

They have to have a good reason to keep putting their balls on an anvil

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But can US generals be that stupid?

We've already done this. The Generals that say *this* is a very bad idea get removed and then they cycle Generals until they find a guy that says "Yeah... we can do that. Occupy Iraq? 150k troops tops, back by Xmas!"

I mean they have to understand all of that and somehow take all that into account, or simply refuse orders and tell Vance to 25th.

Vance isn't the solution. He seems to be possibly insane.

I have a suspicion they have a plan they think could work.

There is no plan that would work. It is simple. Being a sitting duck is being a sitting duck. There is no "plan" that turns a sitting duck into a fortified duck. We don't have the naval forces in place, we don't have the armaments in place. The best we can do is blow up Kharg, which isn't a great idea either. The US has gone the written script for aerials bombardments, but we are getting to the point where those things aren't very useful now.

But it gets worse. If you look at it, while portions of the assault seem planned, the fact that the US is just now mobilizing marines (in very small quantity) is a sign they thought this was supposed to be over already. That worries me the most. They are reacting poorly to the consequences of a poorly thought out plan. The US generally owns the airspace in Iran... but that isn't warrantied. Especially if they have a heads up on an incursion of Marines.

Plan A was "Tehran in 3 days via mossad "protesters" taking over after assassination of the top officials"
But I wonder what was their plan B, considering that they must have known that plan A was plausible at best.
The reason why I suspect that they have some kind of plan B is because I don't think generals are collectively stupid...
But I don't think they are that stupid to send people on suicide mission.

No one, but Putin and Xi, is saying "no" to Trump. Western leaders are really uncertain how to manage this idiot. They were hemming and hawing as this all got started, but have pushed away as it becomes clear there is no plan. At some point you've got to think someone will say "No." However:

• ridiculous tariffs against China that would have fucked over the American economy.
• using ICE as goons, assaulting US civilians
• tear down a part of the White House?!
• threaten NATO
• Iran War

That pretty much leaves us at nuclear weapon launch at Iran and invading Greenland. And as things stand, it feels like no one is going to stop this madness. We are hurtling towards a crisis for no fucking reason!

 

[ZiprHead]

Montana Senate candidate says he will introduce bill to draft Graham if elected

 

[southernhybrid]

https://wapo.st/4m1Ocft

There is more in the "gifted" article but I have no idea if WaPo will ask for your email to let your read the rest. Wasn't there a member here who voted for Trump and implied I was nuts for thinking his toadies wanted to move us toward a theocracy? Well, it sure looks like the drunken, incompetent guy in charge of the military is trying to force evangelical Christianity on the troops.

The defense secretary is upending decades-old norms, current and former leaders say, with some cautioning that his proselytizing violates the Constitution and undermines troop cohesion.

U.S. military leaders have long understood the power and perils of invoking faith — especially in wartime.


Facing the Germans in World War II, Gen. George Patton ordered a chaplain to write an interfaith prayer for troops to say on the battlefield.

It took just a week in September 2001 for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to change the name of the campaign against terrorism from Operation Infinite Justice to Operation Enduring Freedom — a switch meant to clarify that the U.S. was not in a religious war.


And as chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the late 2000s, with troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, Navy Admiral Mike Mullen kept Mass off his public schedule, aiming to keep the particulars of his Catholic faith private.


But those longtime norms are being upended by the proselytizing Christian campaign of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, say multiple former high-ranking military officials and experts on religion and law. Rather than boosting cohesion through a more universal spiritual uplift, they say, the new approach violates the Constitution and undermines the bonds of mutual respect between troops that are essential, especially in wartime.

Every month at the Pentagon, Hegseth hosts evangelical worship services that legal experts say are unprecedented. His social media profile and public comments routinely espouse his understanding of Christianity, which is one that would dominate American life and cast those who disagree with him as God’s enemies. He has brought clergy from his small Christian denomination to preach at the Pentagon, including a prominent pastor who says women shouldn’t have the right to vote.

And in recent weeks, the war with Muslim-majority Iran has only made Hegseth’s approach more stark.
On Wednesday at the Pentagon, Hegseth prayed for U.S. troops to inflict “overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy … We ask these things with bold confidence in the mighty and powerful name of Jesus Christ.” Later that day, his department announcedmilitary chaplains would no longer wear their rank on their uniform and instead would wear religious insignia.

 

[barbos]

. Western leaders are really uncertain how to manage this idiot.

US generals can't be dumber than western "leaders"

 

[southernhybrid]

More potential war crimes by the felon in chief! Gifted article not behind a pay wall.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/...e_code=1.XFA.gjXP.a3aIWaRiKDNE&smid=url-share

Iranian officials have condemned a string of U.S. military attacks on several universities across the country and warned of possible retaliation against U.S. universities in the region.

The attacks on Iranian academic institutions come as the country’s critical infrastructure increasingly becomes a target in the U.S.-Israeli air war against Iran. Strikes on energy installations have plunged parts of the capital into darkness and enveloped it in toxic fumes. Other recent attacks hit a water reservoir in southwestern Iran and a steel plant in central Isfahan, and set fire to parts of a petrochemical complex in northwestern Tabriz.

The semiofficial news agency Fars reported that 20 universities and dormitories had been attacked in the monthlong war.

“Israel and its partner in crime believe that knowledge can be bombed away,” Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said in a statement that only indirectly referred to the United States — part of Iranian officials’ efforts to portray Washington as serving Israeli interests by starting a war with Iran.


Intentional attacks against educational institutions may be considered a war crime under international law.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

. Western leaders are really uncertain how to manage this idiot.

US generals can't be dumber than western "leaders"

Both have smart ones and dumb ones. However, the generals are not leading Trump. Trump is leading them and likely won't take critical advice when he ought to if it disagrees with his madman aspirations. To put this in perspective, remember Trump1 wanted the military to attack US civilians. Trump2 is angrier and more forceful and he has his military-type people killing civilians and is using lawfare. He's gotten rid of generals who won't obey him and his administration calls following the laws of war politically correct.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

. Western leaders are really uncertain how to manage this idiot.

US generals can't be dumber than western "leaders"

Trump is the US Generals' boss.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

https://wapo.st/4m1Ocft

There is more in the "gifted" article but I have no idea if WaPo will ask for your email to let your read the rest. Wasn't there a member here who voted for Trump and implied I was nuts for thinking his toadies wanted to move us toward a theocracy? Well, it sure looks like the drunken, incompetent guy in charge of the military is trying to force evangelical Christianity on the troops.

The defense secretary is upending decades-old norms, current and former leaders say, with some cautioning that his proselytizing violates the Constitution and undermines troop cohesion.

U.S. military leaders have long understood the power and perils of invoking faith — especially in wartime.


Facing the Germans in World War II, Gen. George Patton ordered a chaplain to write an interfaith prayer for troops to say on the battlefield.

It took just a week in September 2001 for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to change the name of the campaign against terrorism from Operation Infinite Justice to Operation Enduring Freedom — a switch meant to clarify that the U.S. was not in a religious war.


And as chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the late 2000s, with troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, Navy Admiral Mike Mullen kept Mass off his public schedule, aiming to keep the particulars of his Catholic faith private.


But those longtime norms are being upended by the proselytizing Christian campaign of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, say multiple former high-ranking military officials and experts on religion and law. Rather than boosting cohesion through a more universal spiritual uplift, they say, the new approach violates the Constitution and undermines the bonds of mutual respect between troops that are essential, especially in wartime.

Every month at the Pentagon, Hegseth hosts evangelical worship services that legal experts say are unprecedented. His social media profile and public comments routinely espouse his understanding of Christianity, which is one that would dominate American life and cast those who disagree with him as God’s enemies. He has brought clergy from his small Christian denomination to preach at the Pentagon, including a prominent pastor who says women shouldn’t have the right to vote.

And in recent weeks, the war with Muslim-majority Iran has only made Hegseth’s approach more stark.
On Wednesday at the Pentagon, Hegseth prayed for U.S. troops to inflict “overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy … We ask these things with bold confidence in the mighty and powerful name of Jesus Christ.” Later that day, his department announcedmilitary chaplains would no longer wear their rank on their uniform and instead would wear religious insignia.

It is quite something that Hegseth is emoting Exodus era Yahweh... but invoking hippy beatnik Jesus Christ. Things get real ugly quickly when these religious psychopaths believe they have a religious based mandate.

God didn't protect the soldiers in the war against the Nazis. Won't do so in this conflict either. I'm starting to think Hegseth and the other idiots the GOP allowed to be put in the Cabinet believe otherwise.

 

[Derec]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

To you, "beauty" is apparently in the AI slop.

 

[Derec]

We are playing right into China’s and Russia’s hands. We cannot handle these nations alone. We need allies that we can rely on and we have alienated them.

It was stupid for Trump to alienate our allies, yes. The whole tariff and Greenland clusterfuck was completely useless and only caused harm.

Furthermore the real problem is that if we lose international credibility, the dollar will be affected and could lose its status as a reserve currency. The economic impact would be horrific.

For the entire world, because there is no reserve currency that can step in. China and the EU have plenty of their own problems for Yuan and Euros to be realistic there.

 

[Derec]

Taking Kharg cannot happen in isolation. Kharg cannot be taken or held in isolation.

No, it would have to be after the capabilities of the regime have been depleted that they cannot target it.
Or alternatively, Kharg infrastructure is disabled just enough that it cannot be used by the Regime to make money, while still be intact enough to be quickly restored after the war to benefit the new government.
Then the whole Kharg invasion would be a misdirection.

 

[Derec]

The U.S. could never have defeated Germany without the Soviets.

They are also the ones who worked with the Nazis at first. Remember Molotov-Ribbentrop?

 

[Derec]

It is IRGC with theocracy or IRGC without theocracy.

The whole point of IRGC is to protect the theocracy. At most you could get less ideological officers to defect and form breakaway units, and then challenge those loyal to the Regime. But that would not be IRGC anymore, no more than the Confederate Army was United States Army even though it was composed of former US Army soldiers and officers (Robert E Lee fought in the Mexican-American war for example).

 

[Derec]

Are you seriously suggesting that by taking Kharg this will defeat the IRGC?

Taking or disabling Kharg would definitely remove a major funding source for the Regime IRGC protects. Soldiers tend to get restless if they don't get paid.
It will not be enough, of course, and it will not end in a fortnight, but removing a source of income for the regime will be a major step forward.
It certainly is a better strategy than what you suggested, to capitulate to the Regime and pay them reparations.

I disagree that a full occupation will be necessary, but we shall see.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

To you, "beauty" is apparently in the AI slop.

Only if by beauty, you mean a rational point.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Taking Kharg cannot happen in isolation. Kharg cannot be taken or held in isolation.

No, it would have to be after the capabilities of the regime have been depleted that they cannot target it.
Or alternatively, Kharg infrastructure is disabled just enough that it cannot be used by the Regime to make money, while still be intact enough to be quickly restored after the war to benefit the new government.
Then the whole Kharg invasion would be a misdirection.

That doesn't take into account that Kharg doesn't operate in isolation. The whole oil infrastructure could be undermined by Iran even if Kharg were occupied. It could be a misdirection, sure, which is why it is odd that you brought it up as an example counterargument that needs more context of total strategy.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is IRGC with theocracy or IRGC without theocracy.

The whole point of IRGC is to protect the theocracy. At most you could get less ideological officers to defect and form breakaway units, and then challenge those loyal to the Regime. But that would not be IRGC anymore, no more than the Confederate Army was United States Army even though it was composed of former US Army soldiers and officers (Robert E Lee fought in the Mexican-American war for example).

Wanna rebrand, fine, but they are who you need to deal with for a non-theocratic regime without 1 million plus US boots in Iran.

I didn't say it was easy or maybe even possible, I said they were in charge and who needed to be dealt with.

 

[Derec]

I’m sure that Derec would refer to any male candidate who slept his way to the top with the moniker “heels up”, don’t you think?

Yes, such behavior would be relevant for any white male candidate. Note that Kamala did not "sleep her way to the top" and nobody claimed that. But if, say, Gavin Newsom or Pete Buttigieg as young aspiring politicians were sleeping with a mayor twice their age and he/she put them on two state boards, then that would surely have been also worth mentioning.

Note that you had to cherry pick a single comment from several years ago among many others that are about Kamala's policies to try to make Toni's point. And even that was not about her sex/race, but about her behavior. Swing and a miss.