The WaPo reported yesterday what we all already knew: the damage to US bases in the Gulf region is more extensive than the Trump admin admits to.
-
To hit them & walk away & think that was that?
Are you KIDDING me?
Sure, all they did in response was a few warning missiles to let everyone know "we are not defenseless, & we know where to hit you." I saw the news describe those missiles as "symbolic" because of course they were shot down by US & Israeli air defense, but then again...was that a test to see the air defense in action & look for weakness? Was that practice?
@artemis Practice, and mapping future targets.
And sure enough, they started by blowing up most of our radar network with cheap drones and then started sending out the big bombs.
-
Frankly, I don't think the IR was formerly capable of this. That may perhaps have been true even as recently as last year.
There is reason to believe that the attacks in June 2025, spurred on rapid development & preparation for a major conflict with the US. It is something they have always known was in the cards, but the events of last year a) told them that further attack was imminent and b) gave them insight into how the airstrikes would be conducted.
@artemis the Iranian government has been paying attention. they have seen what it takes to stall Russia, and they have seen how Palestinian and Lebanese resistance have used whatever limited weaponry they have to attack only military targets. they seem to know that they will be heavily criticised if they do what the USA military does.
-
Just because they didn't do any real damage then doesn't mean they gained nothing from the exercise. Trump played his hand waaaaaay too early & may have given the IRGC a lot of useful information & good practice in the process.
@artemis the mistake was in playing the game at all.
-
One of the reasons the IR may not consider inflicting mass casualties on US Forces a good idea is that Americans tend to start to see red when they feel like "the troops" have been harmed en masse.
I don't believe "maximum lethality" is an advantage for them when their diplomatic situation in most of the world is so shaky, & I just don't see evidence that they were trying to do that.
@artemis I've been thinking about this some this morning, and I think I'm landing on the theory that Iran sees it as much more in their interest to behave like the adult in this conflict.
Like, the US is a toddler throwing a tantrum and Iran is simply taking away its toys.
It very much looks like Iran saying "we didn't pick this fight so we're just trying to stop getting hit". That would be the reason to take out materiel not soldiers.
-
@artemis I've been thinking about this some this morning, and I think I'm landing on the theory that Iran sees it as much more in their interest to behave like the adult in this conflict.
Like, the US is a toddler throwing a tantrum and Iran is simply taking away its toys.
It very much looks like Iran saying "we didn't pick this fight so we're just trying to stop getting hit". That would be the reason to take out materiel not soldiers.
@artemis it's also possible that Iran knows full well it's actually fighting Israel, not the US, so it's not trying to kill Americans if it can help it.
-
@artemis I've been thinking about this some this morning, and I think I'm landing on the theory that Iran sees it as much more in their interest to behave like the adult in this conflict.
Like, the US is a toddler throwing a tantrum and Iran is simply taking away its toys.
It very much looks like Iran saying "we didn't pick this fight so we're just trying to stop getting hit". That would be the reason to take out materiel not soldiers.
@dave @artemis Notably, the reason the hostages in the 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm (from which we got the notion of "Stockholm Syndrome") began siding with the robber was because he was seen to be negotiating in good faith and taking steps to preserve the lives of the hostages, whereas the police seemed to be acting recklessly, without regard for the lives of the hostages. The behavior of Iran versus the US in this war has been bringing this to mind for me quite often as of late.
-
@dave @artemis Notably, the reason the hostages in the 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm (from which we got the notion of "Stockholm Syndrome") began siding with the robber was because he was seen to be negotiating in good faith and taking steps to preserve the lives of the hostages, whereas the police seemed to be acting recklessly, without regard for the lives of the hostages. The behavior of Iran versus the US in this war has been bringing this to mind for me quite often as of late.
@lykso yep. Also it's clear from their propaganda campaign, Iran *really* understands the American people. They clearly understand that they don't have to fight the US to get them out of the Strait of Hormuz. $5/gal gas will do that for them.
-
In many areas, we're already careening into $7 and $8 gallons. And it's truly just the beginning.
Just wait until the cost of food skyrockets in the fall...just before elections.
Dems are going to win so much they might have to actually impeach someone, which would *really* piss them off.
-
Everything on a US military base is infrastructure, even the McDonald's. This is where they house, feed, & placate their personnel.
Spouse says stopping at the 5th Fleet HQ in Bahrain was such a relief because it was like stepping into a mini-America. It felt like home, & that was part of its purpose.
This quote makes it sound like the only thing on a military base an enemy could actually want to destroy is the stuff with the most direct "military" function. That's just fucking silly.
@artemis I think there's value to thinking about how the US military is funded by talking about cool weapons and how you could kill people with your thing. There's a lot of money in tools to setup military equipment quickly on the field. There's no money on setting up a gym in a few hours. The US can easily replace weapons and defenses. It can't replace comforts and things that let people live. -
For Iran, destroying US military infrastructure has a lot more fucking value than taking lives, but they're still not talking about that, even when they are reporting on the damage done.
They aren't talking about what the damage means.
@artemis How do all those quotes go? Something something logistics win wars?
-
@artemis How do all those quotes go? Something something logistics win wars?
@eldersea amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
-
I mean... when USA got its ass handed back to it in Vietnam, Americans to this day frame the war not as a tragedy for you know... Vietnamese people, but as a nightmare for American troops.
Even less war-loving Americans seem to reflexively do that.
(and don't get me started on "thank you for your service" which is basically a prayer to the demigod that the US soldier is, LOL)
Like... literally nobody invited Americans there.
OK, I'm done.
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
