re: Trump says U.S. will destroy Kharg Island unless Hormuz reopened immediately

quote:

---

Proving my point instantly

---

It was pretty clear that the point was proven because you stated the obvious. Are you retarded?

quote:

---

Trump says U.S. will destroy Kharg Island unless Hormuz reopened immediately

---

I think the limit of his patience has been reached.

quote:

---

Take Kharg and hold it how? Defend it how?

---

I don’t see why we need to put a single US ground unit on that island. If the intent is just to interdict the flow of oil we could blow all the related infrastructure off the map using B52s and they’d be years in getting it back up and running.

Taking and holding it doesn’t eliminate their regime and doesn’t remove the nukes so why do it unless they really want to escalate to a full ground war?

Theres also the issue of Iran promising to blow up all the desalinization plants in UAE, SA, Kuwait and Qatar if we do this but no one on here cares about all of our allies not having drinking water in the region so its not even worth arguing about.

Wait. They had three days, which we extended five days, which we then extended 10 days, but now they have no time left…

quote:

---

If the intent is just to interdict the flow of oil we could blow all the related infrastructure off the map using B52s and they’d be years in getting it back up and running.

---

That would be insanity.

If our goal is to have the people rise up, this plan would tank that goal

And it would cripple the world economy by making oil prohibitively expensive.

quote:

---

This is my problem with it, and it's what I've pointed out multiple times. The MAGA faithful continue to do mental gymnastics to justify it but everyone else sees through it. If he blows it up, it's because he threatened to and followed through. If he reverses course, extends deadline, or otherwise TACOs, it's because he's a masterful negotiator and the talks are going well! He can't lose!

---

I'm not neccesarily defending Trump here, just asking about the line of thinking relative to the extension of deadlines. I don't know if you're a parent but let's say that your kid came home with a progress report that showed a D or an F even. You sit them down and tell them if their grade isn't picked up to at least a C by the end of the grading period, you're going to punish them with whatever x,y,z punishment you choose. Let's say that some time goes by and you check the parent portal and your kid is doing much better and has scored well on the next 3 assignments after the come to Jesus meeting. End of the grading period comes and they've achieved the metrics you set out for them to hit. Are you a TACO parent if you don't hammer them with the punishment anyway even after they essentially met your demands?

quote:

---

It’s the art of the deal

---

quote:

---

If our goal is to have the people rise up, this plan would tank that goal

---

The people arent gonna rise up unless we knock out the IRGC and that will require a full scale ground invasion we dont have the munitions to fight nor should we.

Even then theres no telling what would replace the mullahs so its not like thats some primrose path either.

quote:

---

And it would cripple the world economy by making oil prohibitively expensive.

---

As opposed to the ground invasion we're about to launch? I was proposing bombing as preferable to a ground invasion, I dont think we should be in Iran period.

But no, Iran only provides 5% of global oil output so their removal doesnt destroy the global oil market and would greatly strengthen our relative economic position as the world would require US output not contingent on the gulf states until the issues are settled and the shipping is safe again.

Interdicting the strait of Hormuz is what destroys the global oil market and that is already happening regardless of what we do or dont do with Kharg.

If I had faith that your analogy was representative of what was happening in Iran, sure, I'd be happy. The constant changing course and bluster makes me believe that isn't the case, though. Talks were going well, but we're going to bomb your power plants, but a deal is coming soon, but we're going to destroy Kharg Island. We're getting a "gift" of Iran not indiscriminately bombing ships in the strait, but we're in complete control. It's especially important to have a good grip on the optics in asymmetrical warfare like this. Loudly announcing what you're going to do then allowing the IRGC to control the narrative (or give the appearance of such) is a loss.