Originally Posted by
METO Guido
Sounds like you’re sold on worst case. Our objectives meritless. But are they really? Deny a preeminent state sponsor of Sharia code ICBM/MIRV leverage. Ensure safe passage of vessels on a critical free trade route. Create precedent that nuke ambitions short of existing superpowers capability will inevitably face deterrence at a cost too high to bear. Big picture wise, I’m more than less encouraged, so far, this move CAN payout.
I wish I shared your optimism. Our repeated attempts to social engineer foreign cultures in that part of the world have failed miserably.
Best case scenario is we find a way to declare some kind of empty “victory”, pull back to the previous status quo (IF the IRGC even plays ball with that) while leaving an enormous mess we might be forced to revisit down the line. Nuclear ambition can kicked down the road for a few years.
We have 2.5 years of the current foreign policy, likely 0.5 years before they’re stymied by a non-compliant congressional branch. How long do the IRGC have? ALL they need to do is survive until those two milestones…
As an aside, I’ve been enjoying this discussion and all the differing viewpoints, so mods thanks for keeping it open despite the inevitable political discussion that it’s creating.