The Israel-Iran War ?

[Legbiter]

Sounds like the US under the current administration does not, in fact, have an interest there.

What if this is all a misdirection for Operation Rake. 

[Legbiter]

You can look in vain for any strategic reason for the timing of Israel's attack.  The only relevant, recent regional event of interest happened a few days later when Netanyahu suffered a blow to his coalition's viability as two coalition deputies broke ranks to vote against him on a confidence vote. Bibi knows two things: once he falls he is facing jail time for corruption and that maintaining high intensity military conflict is his best play to stay on as PM.  The math is simple and crude, but it adds up.

The sausage is roughly made as you said but a light injury on a mortal enemy is worse than none. He has to bomb Iran to pieces now that he has started.

As for Trump, this crisis has badly exposed the abject weakness he attempts to disguise with juvenile bluster and boastfulness. Given advance notice of Israel's intentions, he made clear through public statements his desire to pursue diplomatic talks and his opposition to an Israeli strike.  Israel ignored him and struck anyways and has been fabulously rewarded for the insult with unconditional approval from Trump, some of it backdated.  After seeing Israel make things go boom, Trump quickly sacrificed his publicly announced "policy" and his credibility to jump on the bandwagon of the breathless 24 hour cycle of conflict news porn.  Of course, in part this reflects the emptiness of the policy.  At some level, Trump presumably knows he has no clue how to negotiate with Iran; his stated policy for talks flows from his reflexive preference to portray himself as DEAL-maker, not from any carefully thought out diplomatic initiative. But he is always ready to take on the Apprentice-like role of "tough guy," proven by avoiding any actual toughness in favor of recycling tough guy dialogue from B-movies.

I like the idea that he was just so impressed by how easy Israel rolled up almost 50 years of Iranian threats in 2 days he felt real fear of missing out on an easy win.

[Jacob]

For some reason I can't start a poll on the topic, but I'm curious how you all feel?

• How likely is it that Trump will TACO this - basically just bluster and do nothing?
• How likely is it that he'll support Israel with intelligence, maybe fly some sorties, and fire a bunch of missiles and rockets; but not commit beyond that.
• And how likely is it that he'll let the US get dragged into a full on war scenario, with boots on the ground and actual fighting?

My feeling is that we're likely looking at somewhere between 1. and 2. My read on Trump is that he does not want to give the order to deploy troops on the ground, for two reasons:

One - it's an unequivocal decision that rests with him, it does not generate any obvious grift opportunities, and it carries the risk for real blame and responsibility landing on him in a way that cannot easily be deflected.

Two - deploying troops is a long term commitments that cannot be easily reversed without looking feckless and cannot be covered up with bluster.

But I dunno... what do you think?

[Sophie Scholl]

Option 1. Trump is not a True Believer like Pence or Huckabee, so he's probably thinking about it much like you suggested. Now, if the Stephen Miller faction is overthrown and a religious right one takes over, then... who can say. Trump is a bully and therefore a coward at heart.

[Razgovory]

Trump declares the "Ultimate Ultimatum", and the next day he says doesn't know what he's going to do.  The man is simply stupid.  I'm going to go with "Bluster and do nothing".  I imagine we've already shared intelligence with the Israelis.

[Admiral Yi]

Damn, I was *just* going to post exactly what Joan wrote. 

[crazy canuck]

The US still imports a lot of oil.  That is the reason there is a trade imbalance between the US and Canada.  I am not sure how much the Americans source from the Middle East now though.

We do still import a lot of oil, but it is increasingly by choice.  The US almost produces enough oil to fill its own needs.  Though Legbiter said "energy", we have been a next exporter of oil specifically since 2020, and have been close to producing enough for ourselves since 2019, per the EIA.  That's not to say the US doesn't have significant interest in ensuring the continued flow of Gulf oil, but the concerts there are really about our allies and world economic stability, not our own direct needs.

As I understand it, while it is accurate to say the US is a net exporter on paper, it is really a question of refinery capacity and type of oil the refineries are set up to refine.  That is the reason why Trump had to abandon the notion of putting a tariff on Canadian energy (oil). The US would have had to reconfigure its refining infrastructure. And that sort of thing takes years and Billions of dollars to do.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

He'll probably bluster, but if he picks option 2 he'll be goaded into 3 since the orangina can't stand being insulted and the Iranians will do something that he'll see as an insult. escalation from there.

it's the dumbest timeline, and it's getting dumber by the week

[Jacob]

For argument's sake, let's say Trump does decide that he wants to use the military to force regime change in Iran...

What would that look like?

What sort of commitment of forces would that take?

How long would it take to position those forces to act?

What sort of troop movements and force concentrations should we be looking for to see that something is about to happen, as opposed to people like Graham and Cruz posturing in the media?

[Razgovory]

The invasion of Iraq took half a million US soldiers and Iran has about five times the population of Iraq... So this is something that simply isn't in the cards.

[PJL]

2 seems most probable at the moment. Can't see Trump going for 3, except by accident, which is admittedly quite likely.

[Sheilbh]

As for Trump, this crisis has badly exposed the abject weakness he attempts to disguise with juvenile bluster and boastfulness. Given advance notice of Israel's intentions, he made clear through public statements his desire to pursue diplomatic talks and his opposition to an Israeli strike.  Israel ignored him and struck anyways and has been fabulously rewarded for the insult with unconditional approval from Trump, some of it backdated.  After seeing Israel make things go boom, Trump quickly sacrificed his publicly announced "policy" and his credibility to jump on the bandwagon of the breathless 24 hour cycle of conflict news porn.  Of course, in part this reflects the emptiness of the policy.  At some level, Trump presumably knows he has no clue how to negotiate with Iran; his stated policy for talks flows from his reflexive preference to portray himself as DEAL-maker, not from any carefully thought out diplomatic initiative. But he is always ready to take on the Apprentice-like role of "tough guy," proven by avoiding any actual toughness in favor of recycling tough guy dialogue from B-movies.

I'd add to this his comments today that Iran's behaved very badly, but there could still be talks and he could order military action too. Or, as he put it: "I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do."

I agree with everything you've said but I'd that it is the producer instinct of a big reality TV show. Add twists and turns and unpredictability, keep people watching - as with his comment in the Zelensky meeting, "this is going to be great television".

As an aside I am struck at European passivity, no-one really staking a position and even with Merz even saying Israel is doing "dirty work for us all" - it's a world away from 2003.

[Zoupa]

Not sure what you want Europe to do exactly.

[Sheilbh]

Not sure what you want Europe to do exactly.

Maybe pick up the phone to de Villepin for some ideas.

Edit: But as I say it's the passivity or absence that is striking to me - on basically either side.

[crazy canuck]

As an aside I am struck at European passivity, no-one really staking a position and even with Merz even saying Israel is doing "dirty work for us all" - it's a world away from 2003.

So much a world away that I am not sure why you are making any comparison.