US strikes Iran

[mjf981]

In conjunction with Israel.
Why? Starting wars has never ever ended well for the US, or for the country they are trying to 'help.'

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn5ge95q6y7t

I tend to believe that the American's did offer a ceasefire, Israeli newspapers are surprisingly a lot more honest than western newspapers. Remember in the 12 day war last year it took Iran 20 hours to respond, yesterday it was less than 90 minutes. The negotiations were never anything more than a ruse just like last year.

There was no plan, first it was the nukes that were "obliterated" then the ballistic missiles. they have limited assets in the region. Trump just listened to Bibi Netanyahu instead of the CIA and patriotic military folk who had assessed that bombing would not lead to regime change and would likely lead to a hardliner replacement.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/prior-iran-attacks-cia-assessed-khamenei-would-be-replaced-by-hardline-irgc-2026-02-28/

Also his call for Iranians to get out on the street to overthrow the regime spectacularly failed and instead today millions of people in Iran and across the World (not just Shia, Sunni or Muslim) are calling for revenge.

Remember the Iranian's had been signalling for weeks that any attack on Iran would lead to a massive attack on Israel. So a lot of American air defence and assets were moved to protect Israel, leaving the 10+ US bases in other areas quite exposed. You've most probably seen the videos of all these assets being lit up repeatedly over the last 24 hours, including targeting the hotels where intelligence and military were based. This would have been quite unexpected as American assets are rarely hit, the Iranians are bombing ports and resupply routes. Also Israel is getting pounded with deaths and casualties.

Trump's yes men most probably assessed that the Iranians would agree to a pre co-ordinated response as they have done many times in the last 6 years. Now there are dead American's who took part in this and MAGA knows and MAGA is mad, they're already not coming out to vote in the primaries, Trump betrayed them and you don't mess with MAGA. They once voted out or forced not to run most of the "never Trumpers" that voted to impeach Trump.

Good analysis in this video from Lieutenant Daniel Davis Larry Johnson say's in this video that 100 patriot missiles will be consumed in 8 days but will take a year to replenish.

"When the prices go up and the US feels the sting perhaps Trump will back down, especially if more countries jump to Russian oil alongside India. Trump is not in this war for the people of Iran. He is only interested in his own popularity and perhaps that peace prize 😆"

Watching the Finance Bros who were cheering this on yesterday, slowly realise that they actually might be fucked too has been a doozy. Filled up my tank yesterday morning. Futures open at 11 pm tonight.

The fundamental problem is that politics, especially in high-stakes times, is rarely what it appears. The public debates the visible stage play rhetoric, elections, summits while the decisive moves often happen backstage in a world of shadows, incomplete intelligence, and concealed motives. We assemble our understanding from scattered, often manipulated pieces, like trying to reconstruct a complex mosaic from a handful of tiles while most remain hidden or deliberately misplaced.

Sure, I haven’t said otherwise. I’m hypothesizing on publicly available information, considered within the context of how geopolitical wrangling has been evidenced to work. The body of it may change, but the bones are remarkably consistent. My interpretation may of course be wrong, but I do not believe that this wasn’t carefully planned. That the plan may fail does not negate its existence.

I also prefer not to let my like or dislike of someone color what I think they may or may not be capable of.

So true

You seem very hopeful that this will fail.

I’m sure a ceasefire was offered. It would have course be preferable to bring a swift end to conflict. Offering a ceasefire does not mean you expect or are banking on the other party to accept it however, or that you have no plans if they don’t.

There has been significant buildup in the region in recent weeks. It is also a region that can be resupplied quite quickly if need be.

Iran’s ability to respond militaristically is limited in comparison to the resources available to the U.S and Israel.

Regarding the ‘another hardliner’ article:

“The agency's assessments, which were produced over the past two weeks, looked broadly at what could occur in Iran following a U.S. intervention and the extent to which a military operation could trigger regime change in the Islamic Republic -- now a pronounced objective for Washington.

IRGC figures taking power was among the multiple different scenarios that emerged, a third source familiar with the matter said.”

…no shit? That’s what they’re supposed to do.

thats the pickle of it all, yes we may know how things should be but based on other factors that we dont know then that all makes the whole cake different than what we presume the result should be.

eg how many times has an event happened then offically it was down to the effots of x group of normal soliders,

then the true history we used a crack team of sas commanders, mi5 mi6 finest, and gchq all to pull this off and we learned gadaffi was actually making deals with other powers that normall would never make those deals etc

I know. Which is why it’s a hypothesis as to what I think has happened and is happening, not a prediction as to the outcome. Like I said, it’s very early days and there are too many moving pieces.

but to me with so many missing pieces of what the intelligence services would know but the public dont, how can any analysis be true its like putting together a an essay but when your getting half the information incomplete and even if offically we get more information via the media then that could still be just the offical versions so even then at best its all guessing and not a true analysis , ?

Absolutely, that's why any one of us can only guess.

The accuracy or quality of that guess can be improved with a knowledge of many subjects from Game Theory, Eschatology, History, Geopolitics, Culture, Media/Communication and having wide range of sources (especially those you disagree with).

What Trump sees as a "victory" by eliminating Khamenei. Knowing Shia history they will see an 86 year old man that refused to go to a bunker and was in his office on his compound with his daughter, granddaughter and other family members who was martyred by America and respond accordingly.

and that is partly what causes more wars, because the true history does not reflect what truly was happening etc

I’m not saying it’s true. I have said, repeatedly, that it’s what I think may be happening. I have not said that I know what is happening, or what the outcome will be. I don’t.

thats understandables

Absolutely, that's why knowledge has always been power. Observing and learning about people.

Good Analysis from Trita Parsi, Executive VP at the Quincy Institute in Washington (with all the requisite contacts with Politicians, Intelligence and experts) and being Iranian himself.

https://x.com/tparsi/status/2028191902080876849

"Some observations and comments on Trump and Israel's war on Iran:

1. Tehran is not looking for a ceasefire and has rejected outreach from Trump. The reason is that they believe they committed a mistake by agreeing to the ceasefire in June - it only enabled the US and Israel to restock and remobilize to launch war again. If they agree to a ceasefire now, they will only be attacked again in a few months.

2. For a ceasefire to be acceptable, it appears difficult for Tehran to agree to it until the cost to the US has become much higher than it currently is. Otherwise, the US will restart the war at a later point, the calculation reads.

3. Accordingly, Iran has shifted its strategy. It is striking Israel, but very differently from the June war. There is a constant level of attack throughout the day rather than a salvo of 50 missiles at once. Damage will be less, but that isn't a problem because Tehran has concluded that Israel's pain tolerance is very high - as long as the US stays in the war. So the focus shifts to the US.

4. From the outset, and perhaps surprisingly, Iran has been targeting US bases in the region, including against friendly states. Tehran calculates that the war can only end durably if the cost for the US rises dramatically, including American casualties. After the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran says it has no red lines left and will go all out in seeking the destruction of these bases and high American casualties.

5. Iran understands that many in the American security establishment had been convinced that Iran's past restraint reflected weakness and an inability or unwillingness to face the US in a direct war. Tehran is now doing everything it can to demonstrate the opposite - despite the massive cost it itself will pay. Ironically, the assassination of Khamenei facilitated this shift.

6. One aspect of this is that Iran has now also struck bases in Cyprus, which have been used for attacks against Iran. Iran is well aware that this is an attack on a EU state. But that seems to be the point. Tehran appears intent on not only expanding the war into Persian Gulf states but also into Europe. Note the attack on the French base in the UAE. For the war to be able to end, Europe too has to pay a cost, the reasoning appears to be.

7. There appears to be only limited concern about the internal situation. The announcement of Khamenei's death opened a window for people to pour onto the streets and seek to overthrow the regime. Though expressions of joy were widespread, no real mobilization was seen. That window is now closing, as the theocratic system closes ranks and establishes new formal leadership. Again: The question "How will this end?" should have been asked before this war was triggered. It wasn't.

Wow. That's a very depressing analysis of the situation but I follow his logic.

I hadn't realised that they had targeted Cyprus as well.

But Iran hasn't struck bases in Cyprus - it may have tried but we don't have details, so how accurate is the rest of the analysis?

Fair point. It seems that there were missiles fired in the direction of Cyprus but they were intercepted by the Israelis.

Trita Parsi is extremely well respected and connected, his bio from google:

Trita Parsi is an Iranian-Swedish-American author, foreign policy expert, and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, specializing in Middle East geopolitics, US-Iranian relations, and diplomacy. Born in Iran and raised in Sweden, he previously founded the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). Parsi is a renowned, award-winning author focused on promoting diplomacy over military conflict.
Wikipedia +6
Early Life and Education

• Background: Born in Ahvaz, Iran, on July 21, 1974, to a Zoroastrian family. His father was a university professor jailed by both the Shah and the Khomeini regime.
• Relocation: Moved to Sweden with his family at age four to escape political repression.
• Education: Earned a Master's degree in International Relations from Uppsala University and a Master's in Economics from the Stockholm School of Economics.
• PhD: Received his Ph.D. in International Relations from Johns Hopkins University’s Nitze School for Advanced International Studies, studying under Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski.
• Wikipedia +3

Career and Key Roles

• Quincy Institute: Currently serves as the Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a think tank advocating for diplomacy-driven U.S. foreign policy.
• NIAC: Founded the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) in 2002, serving as its president until 2017.
• Diplomacy: Worked for the Swedish Permanent Mission to the UN, focusing on the Security Council regarding Afghanistan, Iraq, and Tajikistan.
• Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft +4

Key Publications and Views

• Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States (2007) – Won the 2008 Arthur Ross Book Award.
• A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama's Diplomacy with Iran (2012).
• Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy (2017).
• Perspective: Advocates for diplomatic engagement with Iran, often criticizing sanctions and military action.
• Accolades: Recipient of the 2010 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order

I think the confusion over Cyprus being "struck" flows from the UK defence minister: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/iran-missiles-fired-towards-uk-bases-cyprus-defence-secretary-b1272938.html#comments-area

Though TBH the public won't really be told whether it was true or not.

even the well connected will still not be able to know or use various intelligence services information etc,

In all honesty you wouldn't need the intelligence services to know whether Cyprus or even one of the Sovereign Base Areas on the island had been hit, so TBH I'd expect a bit better from an analyst....maybe he rushed to comment.

i was thinking more whos pulling strings , which groups are tuly supporting who, whos been flipped and given plans intell, whos truly giving weapons to who, what groups and players and assets are in the field giving intell bascially the whole whos truly doing x and why etc

Ah got you now, tks.

Because they needed to prepare. That's why there's been so much movement of me aval vessels and military personnel over the past few weeks.

Firstly an act of war as this is, requires congress. This has not happened, therefore this is an illegal act.

Meetings between the trump administration and Iran happened just three times. The committee for non proliferation of nuclear weapons has stated this is simply not enough.

Secondly the idea of regime change would require forces on the ground. The ayotolla had already made plans for the transition of power and it's clerics that will choose the next ayotolla.

Assuming that IRG remains loyal to the cleric, which looking at the response, appears to be the case. This situation will almost certainly result in a continuation of the regime and will likely be more hard line and more determined to seek WMDs.

American assumption that the people will overthrow the regime......or they have some power play with a senior member of the IRG....again if a official is willing to be bribed to work with the yanks then honestly the next regime will be corrupt

I've worked in Iran, not everyone hates the regime and those that do many don't like American foreign policy either. It's a delicate situation that needs skilled diplomacy.

A war in the middle east will once again drag us into protecting our assets, our people. It will drive inflation and damage our economy. Tourists will have a target on their backs and places like Turkey will suffer greatly as tourists seek safer places.

Perhaps he did rush to comment, however it was being amplified by several pro American social media accounts and it has given Keir Starmer the casus belli to just announce that the UK will allow the United States to use British bases in a reversal of his decision. Quite convenient.

https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/2028213832380826047?s=20

at 2:14 Starmer refers to Iran striking British Interests and at 3:07 he refers to the US requesting permission to use British bases.