politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I'm not saying they won't use it as a distraction since it's the only beneficial action available to them, but I very much doubt that was the original plan, or that they correctly assessed how badly this would go for them.
I'm pretty sure there was reporting on intelligence from before they attacked saying that it was determined it would be a clusterfuck. I'll have to go check if I'm remembering correctly.
If that turns out accurate, then the question has to be asked how could they not know it would turn out badly? And since they had to have known, why did they do it anyway? I don't feel like Trump's insistence, or overconfidence, is enough to get the war machine going like it did. It very much looked, and still looks like they acted with an unspoken intention, and have just struggled with keeping their stories straight.
Top military brass are still vulnerable to making blunders. Take the Bay of Pigs as an example, which fumbled so hard it eventually led JFK to say "The first advice I'm going to give my successor is to watch the generals and to avoid feeling that because they were military men their opinions on military matters were worth a damn."
And that's with 'normal' generals. Now imagine replacing them with compliant generals that will take orders regardless of how bad the idea is tactically or politically.
The same thing happened with Hitler, who ordered his compliant generals into some insane military blunders. The duo of dictatorships and Yes Men massively increase the chances of incompetence compared to systems where those lower on the totem pole can safely push back against dumb ideas.
The regime could've manufactured some more controllable distractions to Epstein without the dramatic downsides the Iran war has brought, such as fake assassination attempts or false flag operations within the US (like a Reichstag fire situation).
The Iran situation would be like if Hitler tried to invade Poland, but instead of swiftly conquering it, continually started and stopped peace negotiations while Germany's cost of living skyrocketed.
It's a fair take. Giving me something to think about.
I hope you're right actually because incompetence suggests an end to this madness sooner than later. In my scenario we're right and truly fucked.
The interviews with retired/fired US generals that go over how and why Iran was a drastic miscalculation I think helps solidify that the current regime is incompetent.
Due to that incompetence, I have a somewhat hopeful view overall of how things may play out, but it could still be a while until things start getting better, including the possibility of an Irish Troubles-like civil war. Hopefully it doesn't come to that, but I could see it going in that direction if the republican party decide that they'd rather push this as far as they can instead of potentially going to prison if they give up.