Iran War

[Syt]

The Top Men:

[Syt]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116391830634836370

Iran promised to open the Strait of Hormuz, and they knowingly failed to do so. This caused anxiety, dislocation, and pain to many people and Countries throughout the World. They say they put mines in the water, even though all of their Navy, and most of their "mine droppers," have been completely blown up. They may have done so, but what ship owner would want to take the chance? There is great dishonor and permanent harm to the reputation of Iran, and what's left of their "Leaders," but we are beyond all of that. As they promised, they better begin the process of getting this INTERNATIONAL WATERWAY OPEN AND FAST! Every Law in the book is being violated by them. I have been fully debriefed by Vice President JD Vance, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, on the meeting that took place in Islamabad through the kind and very competent leadership of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan. They are very extraordinary men, and continuously thank me for saving 30 to 50 million lives in what would have been a horrendous War with India. I always appreciate hearing that — The amount of Humanity spoken of is incomprehensible.
 
The meeting with Iran began early in the morning, and lasted throughout the night — Close to 20 hours. I could go into great detail, and talk about much that has been gotten but, there is only one thing that matters — IRAN IS UNWILLING TO GIVE UP ITS NUCLEAR AMBITIONS! In many ways, the points that were agreed to are better than us continuing our Military Operations to conclusion, but all of those points don't matter compared to allowing Nuclear Power to be in the hands of such volatile, difficult, unpredictable people. My three Representatives, as all of this time went by, became, not surprisingly, very friendly and respectful of Iran's Representatives, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, Abbas Araghchi, and Ali Bagheri, but that doesn't matter because they were very unyielding as to the single most important issue and, as I have always said, right from the beginning, and many years ago, IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!

So, there you have it, the meeting went well, most points were agreed to, but the only point that really mattered, NUCLEAR, was not. Effective immediately, the United States Navy, the Finest in the World, will begin the process of BLOCKADING any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz. At some point, we will reach an "ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO IN, ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO OUT" basis, but Iran has not allowed that to happen by merely saying, "There may be a mine out there somewhere," that nobody knows about but them. THIS IS WORLD EXTORTION, and Leaders of Countries, especially the United States of America, will never be extorted. I have also instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran. No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas. We will also begin destroying the mines the Iranians laid in the Straits. Any Iranian who fires at us, or at peaceful vessels, will be BLOWN TO HELL! Iran knows, better than anyone, how to END this situation which has already devastated their Country. Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their Anti Aircraft and Radar are useless, Khomeini, and most of their "Leaders," are dead, all because of their Nuclear ambition. The Blockade will begin shortly. Other Countries will be involved with this Blockade. Iran will not be allowed to profit off this Illegal Act of EXTORTION. They want money and, more importantly, they want Nuclear. Additionally and, at an appropriate moment, we are fully "LOCKED AND LOADED," and our Military will finish up the little that is left of Iran! President DONALD J. TRUMP

"They are very extraordinary men, and continuously thank me for saving 30 to 50 million lives in what would have been a horrendous War with India." Sure, buddy.

Also, which other nations will "will be involved" in this blockade?

[HisMajestyBOB]

The US president, Donald Trump, said the US Navy would immediately start blockading the strait of Hormuz and would also interdict every vessel in international waters that had paid a toll to Iran.

We'll see if it lasts past Tuesday.

[crazy canuck]

I wonder what the Americans would give now for the agreement Obama made that Trump ripped up

[Bauer]

Umm so Trump finally realized Iran can do real global economic damage by blockading the straight, and that there's not much the US can do about it...after being told all this to begin with.

Now he's deciding the blockade it too     

[Zanza]

My impression is that the Iranian regime can sustain a blocked Strait of Hormuz longer than the American regime. Let's see.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The argument that Montgomery and others who were advocates of blockading made is the damage to "Iran" and damage to the "IRGC Regime" are not synonymous. While there has been genuine physical damage to the IRGC, the IRGC is structured like a "state within a state", particularly as Khamenei significantly increased their internal powers over the course of his decades in power. (The prior Ayatollah had always kept the IRGC on a short leash, both recognizing their value but also likely fearing they could become a sort of Praetorian Guard and undermine his own authority--which was somewhat happening in the last few years, and certainly now the IRGC holds all political power with the new Ayatollah being a figurehead.)

Anyway, under the current Iranian oil export regime, the money basically goes directly to IRGC coffers, not to the Iranian government's general budget. This means that while much of Iran's economy is very bad, the ability to continue selling oil, even at a reduced amount, is more than enough to keep the IRGC going. Now, on a long enough timeline a country does need more than just a military junta funded to operate, but we've seen in other situations that "long enough timeline" can be many years before the problem comes home to roost.

Note too--Montgomery, despite being "Trump friendly", actually was careful to note he wasn't in favor of this war "in general", but was speaking in the context of "now that the war is a factual reality, here is what is likely the best way forward." His argument was you need to stop Iranian oil to cut off the IRGC's main funding, because they are significantly insulated from lots of negative consequences until that happens.

Like just about everyone who has any professional defense knowledge, Montgomery is also skeptical U.S. goals can be achieved solely through naval and air warfare, but he also is highly skeptical of invading Iran. I think this goes back to most guys, whether they are left or right, who have policy knowledge in this space just think this war is horribly ill thought out and almost set up to fail right from the get go.

[Valmy]

My impression is that the Iranian regime can sustain a blocked Strait of Hormuz longer than the American regime. Let's see.

Our regime will chicken out the second the markets react.

Of course the markets are insane and detached from reality so who knows what will happen.

[HVC]

My impression is that the Iranian regime can sustain a blocked Strait of Hormuz longer than the American regime. Let's see.

Our regime will chicken out the second the markets react.

Of course the markets are insane and detached from reality so who knows what will happen.

They tough it out just long enough for the inside traders to make a few quick bucks.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Here's a funny blurb from NBC News:

Details and takeaways on Vance-led negotiations in Islamabad
Henry J. Gomez and Garrett Haake

U.S. negotiators expected the talks with Iran yesterday to be a brief table-setting meeting to tee up future talks. Instead, it turned into continuous negotiations over 21 hours, according to a source familiar with the talks.

Vance went into these negotiations recognizing that the U.S. and Iran have interacted little over the last 50 years — a dynamic that could foster mistrust and misperceptions, a U.S. official familiar with the talks told NBC News. One of his primary goals was to reach mutual understanding of respective objectives and negotiating space.

This official characterized the talks as tough but said that by the end there was a friendly and productive exchange of proposals.

It was clear to Vance and the U.S. delegation, the official added, that Iranians did not understand the core U.S. objective: that any deal be anchored by an agreement that Iran never obtain a nuclear weapon.

Throughout the talks, Vance attempted to correct this misunderstanding and left Islamabad after delivering a best and final offer to Iran that he believed should be fair and acceptable to all parties.

Vance, the official added, also used the talks to probe the counterparties' own assessment of their position and came away with the conclusion that they had misperceived their negotiating strength — that the Iranians believe they have leverage that the U.S. believes they lack.

This is why, the official said, Vance left Islamabad after delivering the final offer. The Iranians need to recognize that the realities on the ground do not reflect the assumptions they held when they arrived at the negotiations before they will be ready to entertain a serious offer, this person added.

Vance has said that a deal remains on the table and that it's up to Iran to accept.

Meanwhile, the official said the national security team in consultation with Trump has devised a plan to break the Iranians' closure on the Straits of Hormuz. They also aim to counter the notion that the straits can deflect from the core U.S. issue, which is the Iranian nuclear program.

According to the official, Vance is pragmatic, but not naive. He was hopeful of making a deal, but over the 21 hours of negotiation, Vance also probed Iran's vulnerabilities, and now Trump will test them. It's on Iran, the official said, to recognize the reality of the U.S. position.

The U.S. and Iran did not reach agreement on the following points:

• For Iran to end all uranium enrichment
• To dismantle all major nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran
• To retrieve highly enriched uranium from Iran
• To accept a broader peace, security and de-escalation framework that includes regional allies
• For Iran to end funding for its proxies Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis
• For Iran to fully open the Strait of Hormuz, charging no tolls for passage

The President very much wants this conflict to be over and behind him, but he's demonstrated a willingness to restart it if necessary, according to a source close to the White House.

The source said their expectations on tomorrow's negotiations leading to a permanent deal are low.

"I think it's obvious that the President wants peace and wants out of this conflict, and so maybe he's given JD some latitude here," the source said.

Vance understands he is there as the President's deputy, and the idea that he will bring his own agenda is over-spun, according to the source, who added that Vance is a utility player.

"His inclusion shows our seriousness," the source said. "Its elevated, if our second most powerful official is there. Jared and Witkoff are powerful people, but they're not constitutional officers elected by the nation. I think it shows how importantly we're taking these talks."

When asked if there are any concerns about Vance's lack of experience in this kind of arena, the source said: "experience in foreign policy is certainly not indicative of either success or smart ideas."

"I don't know if a lifetime of attending Council on Foreign Relations luncheons suggests someone's ability to do a good job," the source said.

Bolding mine--that bolded segment really reveals the deep antipathy to expertise at the very core of Trump's inner circle. These guys truly believe a bunch of people who have never ran anything in the public sector, with minimal credentials in terms of defense, diplomacy, foreign policy etc, are just as knowledgeable as experts who have dedicated their whole lives to it. And in this second Trump administration they've worked hard to shut out any experts that may have been around in the first administration.

It's interesting they have so little introspection they don't perceive the very reason they are in this shit show is because they blindly trusted un-expert views on this topic.

[The Minsky Moment]

In 1980, while the revolution in Iran was still consolidating, Iraq launched a surprise attack on Iran, occupied a swath of border territory, captured Khorramshahr, and laid siege to Abadan.

At that point, Saddam proposed opening negotiations, making some fairly light territorial demands.  His plan had been to shock the new regime which was still facing civil unrest, to fight a quick war and settle for what he really wanted, which was sole Iraqi sovereignty over the Shatt al-Arab waterway on the pre-war border.

The Iranians replied by demanding that Iraq turn over Basra and much of southern Iraq, detach Iraqi Kurdistan etc. They basically flipped the bird.  They weren't shocked and awed.  And Saddam got stuck in a brutal eight-year quagmire.

It's safe to say no one making decisions in 2026 USA knows this history because it might have made them pause before pursuing their underpants gnome strategy of bombing their way to whatever constantly shifting objective is on the menu.

A full blockade will cause headaches for the IRGC and Iran generally, but it will also cause oil prices to rise and create friction between the US and other neutral nations.  The IRGC will likely calculate that they can bear the pain longer than Trump's will + attention span to last.  It is hard for me to imagine that calculation is wrong.

[Jacob]

Yeah I agree with your conclusion OvB.

I also find the whole "the Iranians believe they have leverage the US doesn't think they have" thing interesting. That probably needs to be resolved before things can settle.

Another interesting thing is that Vance's "fair offer" seems basically to be an Iranian  surrender, no?

It's basically "give us everything we want except regime change and we will stop bombing you," it seems. I wouldn't find that persuasive, were I in Iran's position.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I agree with your conclusion OvB.

I also find the whole "the Iranians believe they have leverage the US doesn't think they have" thing interesting. That probably needs to be resolved before things can settle.

Another interesting thing is that Vance's "fair offer" seems basically to be an Iranian  surrender, no?

It's basically "give us everything we want except regime change and we will stop bombing you," it seems. I wouldn't find that persuasive, were I in Iran's position.

Yes - and I think in part there is just a fundamental mismatch in perspectives here.

Iran's positioning has been that there is no return to the status quo on Hormuz. They've already rejected joint control and are framing it as an issue of sovereign power - it is (in their positioning) non-negotiable. The other major point for Iran is that any deal is regional - that means it needs to include Lebanon. I don't think from an Iranian perspective this is at all about nuclear - it might have been before the strikes but the war has changed that for them

Especially as I think that's tied to Iranian perceptions of Israel's role in this which includes continued strikes in Lebanon, repeated strikes that have killed people who (according to the media) were seeking negotiations on behalf of the regime and Netanyahu's statements that there may be future action against Iran's nuclear program. And I think that side of things makes it challenging to imagine any proposal by the US finding much credibility in Iran while Israel can (and under Netanyahu) will act as a spoiler.

It is right to focus on Trump and this is Trump's decision. But I think Netanyahu is a really important part of this and under-discussed. This is the culmination, or fulfilment of policies he has been pushing for 30 years including in the US. I don't know on the perception in Israel and whether what the government's goals are and if they think they're attainable - my only assumption is that they did think there'd be a far weaker and less resilient Iranian state.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Another interesting thing is that Vance's "fair offer" seems basically to be an Iranian  surrender, no?

sounds a bit like the fair offer the Russians gave Ukraine in 2022.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Yeah, I saw one claim that Netanyahu has finally "made his fatal mistake" by getting into a war he can't extricate himself from.

I think that fundamentally misunderstands both Netanyahu and the Israeli far right. In Netanyahu's world, Israel has always been at war. Lulls in the war aren't peace, simply the in between times for the next battle. Netanyahu's end state isn't a peaceful Middle East, I suspect he doesn't believe in such a thing, at least not one that is on terms friendly to the Jewish state.

Bibi is fine with endless conflict because again, his perception likely is that was already the status quo for Israel, the fact he has managed to embroil Israel's superpower ally, which had long as a matter of foreign policy received wisdom, avoided being drawn directly into a war fighting side by side with Israel. This may be in a factual sense bad for Israel, but it isn't bad for Israel as Netanyahu understands it, and that's who is making those decisions.

From Israel's perspective--they have had to deal with Iran's proxies for years, but now Iran itself is getting bombed. That isn't something Bibi likely sees as a loss, because he was already having to deal with those proxies, but now he basically has carte blanche to regularly bomb the source of those proxies. He didn't have that previously.

It also shows Trump fundamentally misunderstands the Israeli far right, has massively over prioritized his personal friendship with Bibi (who has gone as far as to interfere in American domestic politics on behalf of Republicans), Trump's desire for quick flashy wars he can claim victory in fly head first into the reality of the sort of conflicts Netanyahu envisions.