We were told last summer that we had effectively ended their nuclear program. You’ll have to excuse the more skeptical of us if we think the nuclear issue might just be used as an excuse for future US and Israeli military “excursions”.

The straight is open but commercial ships don’t want to cross due to risk? Do you hear yourself? If you can’t see what an oxymoronic statement that is, I don’t know if there’s any hope for you. It’s kinda like saying cigarettes are totally good for you, it’s just that pesky tar and nicotine that gets you addicted and gives you cancer.

Iran has lost a lot, that I’ll give you. We have trounced them by every military metric. But if you’ve been paying attention, we’ve learned (or should have learned) in every conflict since World War Two that you can win every battle and still wind up in a strategic loss or stalemate. That happens when your objectives aren’t clearly defined before commencing action and/or you allow mission creep to constantly move the goalposts as you go along.

The fact is the Iranian “regime” has not been changed. Hardliners remain in power and the IRGC remains loyal. Prior to the war, the idea that Iran could close the straight was only a theory. Now it’s been proven. Expect them to continue flex that capability in the future. Before the war, we thought we could shut down their nuclear ambitions with a few well placed massive ordinance penetrators. Apparently that wasn’t sufficient & we’re left with two options: a ground campaign that secures their nuclear materials, or a robust agreement that allows verification of them dismantling the program. Neither of those options seem likely or realistic.

So please do tell us, despite pummeling however many military targets, how exactly are we coming out ahead here? I see a great many downsides & little to no upside here.