5 Takes On The Bombing of Iran

[gcode]

Glen Reynolds

(click No Thanks to read the article)

Competence. The most striking thing about the attacks was the extreme competence displayed by the Air Force, the Defense Department under Secretary Pete Hegseth, the various intelligence assets involved, the State Department, and the entire administration. There were no leaks. (How did they avoid leaks? Basically, they didn't tell any Democrats what was coming. Take note.)

Not only were there no leaks, but President Trump and the diplomatic apparatus kept the Iranians in the dark, giving the impression of waffling in the White House even as things were being lined up. They received unintentional help in this from Sen. Charles Schumer, who had been for some time pushing the "TACO" acronym — Trump Always Chickens Out — in the service of a storyline that Trump was all bluster and no follow-through. The Iranians, apparently dumb enough to believe Democrats and the mainstream news media (but I repeat myself) were snookered.

New Diplomacy: In dealing with the Iranians in the 1980s, Donald Regan told President Reagan that America had been repeatedly "snookered" by a bunch of "rug merchants." The Iranians were in fact very good at leading Americans down the garden path, invoking (often imaginary) splits between "hard-line" and "moderate" Islamists in their government as excuses for delay and backtracking.

In truth, as Henry Kissinger once said, "An Iranian moderate is one who has run out of ammunition." After these raids, and the many Israeli attacks that led up to them, all of Iran is out of ammunition.

We'll see if moderation follows. (I doubt it, as I think the "irrational regime hypothesis" applies heavily to Iran. See below.) But one thing that follows is that threats and deadlines from the Trump administration, unlike those from the Obama and Biden administrations, will be taken seriously in the future. Obama's "red line" was bluster; Trump's was not. He gave the Iranians a deadline and when they failed to comply, he destroyed their nuclear capability.

For a couple of decades after World War II, U.S. diplomacy was backed by the belief that words would be backed by force. After a while, our foreign policy elite began to see diplomacy as a substitute for force, not an adjunct to it. As soon as that happened, diplomacy lost most of its power. "Jaw jaw" as Churchill said, may be better than "war war," but the jawing mostly works because war is the alternative. If the alternative is just more jawing, not so much.

Unsurprisingly the author of "The Art of the Deal" knew this.

[gcode]

Some other Quotes from the article above

Our Political Class is Full of Traitors, Liars, and Fools. Okay, this isn't really news. I've been pointing out for over two decades that the "anti-war" movement isn't so much antiwar as just on the other side. But the speed with which mobs waving Hamas flags turned into mobs waving Mexican flags and then into mobs waving Iranian flags — al with support from pretty much the same gang of pundits and politicians — has been truly striking.

New Diplomacy: In dealing with the Iranians in the 1980s, Donald Regan told President Reagan that America had been repeatedly "snookered" by a bunch of "rug merchants." The Iranians were in fact very good at leading Americans down the garden path, invoking (often imaginary) splits between "hard-line" and "moderate" Islamists in their government as excuses for delay and backtracking.

In truth, as Henry Kissinger once said, "An Iranian moderate is one who has run out of ammunition." After these raids, and the many Israeli attacks that led up to them, all of Iran is out of ammunition.

We'll see if moderation follows. (I doubt it, as I think the "irrational regime hypothesis" applies heavily to Iran. See below.) But one thing that follows is that threats and deadlines from the Trump administration, unlike those from the Obama and Biden administrations, will be taken seriously in the future. Obama's "red line" was bluster; Trump's was not. He gave the Iranians a deadline and when they failed to comply, he destroyed their nuclear capability.

The Humiliation of the Foreign Policy Establishment

We've had "Middle East experts" for years. Their track record, as the above suggests, has been poor. Our universities have departments of "Middle East Studies," who have mostly pumped out poorly informed activists, and horrible takes by risible faculty members. Their existence has revolved around the Arab-Israeli conflict, which is in the process of disappearing as the Arab nations have all reached accommodations with Israel, and as the Palestinians suffer humiliating defeat, and the loss of their last major patron, Iran, which will be in no position to help them financially or militarily any time soon, if ever.

Well, an establishment that is organized around a problem is unlikely to go about actually solving that problem: What will its high-paid people, in prestigious jobs, do if that happens?

[Incogneeto]

Funny How some say we are clinging to Trumps Balls.

Well , I would Rather have a Commander who has no fear than an Idiot that has no sense.

90% of the problem is Children never heard the promise from their Daddy.... FAFO!!

Simple words. "I will Light your Ass Up"

Then Follow Through.

Works Miracles.

A Few on this Forum could Learn.

The 4 Musketqueers?? LOL!!!

[CNCAppsJames]

"A moderate Iranian is one who has run out of ammunition."

#Facts

Middle East "experts"... remember kids and ex is a has-been and a spurt is a drip under pressure.

Those "middle-east expert" shitbirds haven't been right about a fuckin' thing in my 46 years of paying attention to Iran.