War on Iran

Whodathunkit: you kill the leader of a country and expect an immediate ceasefire? You attack them during negotiations and then expect them to come back to the table, while Trump jokes about several of the negotiators having been killed?
Every so often we get a reminder that calling Turnip a sociopath is not hyperbole.

This is not about regime change. It is about weakening Iran so much that it has to stop supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, the last remaining armed resistance to the annexation of Gaza - and the building of Jared Kushner's casinos. Trump doesn't give a fuck about freedom for Iranians. He would be content for Iran to become a failed state with, ooh I dunno, maybe civil war, maybe secession of Baluchistan and Kurdistan, or whatever, so long as Gaza is annexed and his real estate play can go ahead.
All true, and I think Turnips handlers have another couple of goals - one, to justify to the base a continued expansion of "defense" spending and two, solidify support from the theocracy bloc.
 
5 charts show China’s oil dilemma after US strikes
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/02/iran-us-strikes-china-oil-supply-charts-00806415

EXCERPTS: Over the span of two months, the Trump administration has removed the leaders of two countries that both shared China as their most important crude oil customer. [...] Almost all of Iran’s exported oil, and more than half of Venezuela’s, went last year to China...

[...] The Chinese Foreign Ministry on Saturday said it was “highly concerned” by the attacks on Iran [...] The squeeze on China’s energy supply also comes just weeks before Trump is slated to hold a summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Any new challenges in obtaining oil from the Persian Gulf could drive China to expand its reliance on Russian energy supplies...

Fossil fuel crisis
https://apnews.com/live/iran-us-israel-hezbollah-strikes-03-02-2026

EXCERPTS: A bomb-carrying drone boat struck a Marshall Islands-flagged oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman on Monday, killing one mariner on board, Oman said. Iran has been threatening vessels approaching the Strait of Hormuz and is believed to have launched multiple attacks.

Earlier, Saudi Aramco temporarily shut down its Ras Tanura oil refinery near Dammam after it was targeted by Iranian drones. Iran’s decision to target the Saudi refinery further expands the war, directly targeting the lifeblood of the kingdom’s economy.

[...] European natural gas futures are spiking 42% in the wake of the shutdown of a major supplier of ship-born gas. The jump came after QatarEnergy said Monday it would stop its production of liquefied natural gas as the Mideast war rages. The state-owned firm blamed the war for the decision...
_
 
The World Outside Your Window

Dave Weigel↱ notes the "Quote of the day/year/century", coming via Financial Times: A hedge-fund executive laments the challenges of moving people back out of Dubai: "The trade was not that you were getting exposed to geopolitics when moving to Dubai. It was not a consideration. People have moved families. This element of concern is new."

 
If Carter had acted swiftly and decisively we wouldn't be having an Iran problem today.
Yep. And if General William Slim had acted more decisively and intelligently in 1941 we wouldn't have an Iran problem today. And if Harry Truman had not made such idiotic decisions in 1951, we wouldn't have an Iran problem today. And if Dwight D. Eisenhower had been smart enough to convince the Shah to abdicate in 1960, we wouldn't have an Iran problem today.

But all those things happened.
 
If funding irregular groups for asymmetrical warfare makes leadership by your definition every US president for the past 50 years was insane.

Want to try again?
I don't need to try again. We aren't talking about how it's organized. We are talking about the ideology and outcomes.
 
(wikipedia) is founded on the principles of republicanism and Islamism. It is described as an anti-imperialist system, opposed to democracy and secularism, and, in its own way, as a totalitarian and authoritarian system with an orientation toward the doctrine of the “Absolute Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist” I find it hard not to imagine any government/leadership as being "sane" when they have laws against educated woman, kill protestors, and stone to death, adulterers. Not to mention financing and promoting terrorism around the world, and in recent times, even Australia. religious fanaticism? tyranny and brutality?

During the current so called peace talks, it does appear that way, and yes, Trump and Israel certainly over-reacted for many reasons that have been given in this thread . But that doesn't detract from the tyranny, brutality, fanaticism, and the fact that they should not be allowed any weapon of mass destruction.

I'm not sure who or what country now trusts America, (well more correctly the USA, America is a big place of many nations) Or Russia for that matter! Both are run by dictators, liars, and monsters.
You are confusing being rational and sane with agreeing with your beliefs. The fact you dislike their beliefs doesn't change the fact they are acting in a rational manner given their goals and capabilities.
 
I don't need to try again. We aren't talking about how it's organized. We are talking about the ideology and outcomes.
I'm gonna read these as you just don't want to admit your full of shit. We weren't talking about ideology we are talking about rationality. Why don't you try defending your nonsense instead of running away when you got caught with you pants around your ankles intellectually.
 
Yep. And if General William Slim had acted more decisively and intelligently in 1941 we wouldn't have an Iran problem today. And if Harry Truman had not made such idiotic decisions in 1951, we wouldn't have an Iran problem today. And if Dwight D. Eisenhower had been smart enough to convince the Shah to abdicate in 1960, we wouldn't have an Iran problem today.

But all those things happened.
So, it doesn't change what I said. It is one of many decision points that has led to the world situation today.
 
Last edited:
I'm gonna read these as you just don't want to admit your full of shit. We weren't talking about ideology we are talking about rationality. Why don't you try defending your nonsense instead of running away when you got caught with you pants around your ankles intellectually.
"you're" not "your"
 
Everyone take a deep breath and remember that many people interact with the web by thumb typing on a tiny virtual keyboard, and sometimes punctuation fixes take more time than its worth. (See what I did there?)
 
"you're" not "your"
Still decidedly not a defense for you inane assertion that Iranian leadership is insane. I get it, if I said something so materially indefensible I'd avoid embarrassing my self trying to argue its defense too but maybe you should have thought of that before saying something so self indulgently divorced from reality.
 
Still decidedly not a defense for you inane assertion that Iranian leadership is insane. I get it, if I said something so materially indefensible I'd avoid embarrassing my self trying to argue its defense too but maybe you should have thought of that before saying something so self indulgently divorced from reality.
"your" not "you"

"Insane" "misguided" "not good"
 
I see the mask has slipped, confirming my suspicions that this is all about Israel's wish to degrade Iran from being a regional power: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/02/rubio-us-attack-israel-iran

So the logic is that because Israel had in mind to launch at attack on Iran, the US was thereby "forced" to "defend" itself from any resulting retaliation against it, by er, attacking Iran pre-emptively*! The option of dissuading Israel from such a course of action never occurred to anyone. Naturally.

This is all balls, obviously. The aim is no more than Netanyahu's burning ambition to smash Iran as a power in the region in the short term, leaving it and its neighbours to endure the consequences, irrespective of what they may eventually turn out to be.

* This calls to mind, not for the first time, the ancient Welsh martial art of Llap Goch : http://fatherdave.com.au/the-ancient-welsh-art-of-lap-goch-and-the-american-presidency/
 
Typical sour grapes from Trump...
With Iran having already told him over the weekend that they weren't going to negotiate with the USA, he has said "They want to talk. I said 'Too Late!'"
 
Iran wildly counter(?)-attacking other countries in the region besides Israel. Saudi Arabia aligns with US/Israel (just empty cheering on the sidelines, probably, no military investment). One report says SA urged Trump to attack Iran weeks before this. Supreme leader Ali Khamenei long since dead, of course. That loss along with others possibly contributing to the "chicken-with-its-head-cut-off" reflexive spray of missiles and drones around the ME.
_
It is not “wild”. Iran knows the key card it holds is the ability to disrupt fossil fuel supply and to some extent international trade through the Red Sea. Hence the attacks on oil states and shipping off the coast of Oman. Shipping insurers are already baling out, the prices of oil and gas are rising sharply, and Maersk is re-routing via the Cape of Good Hope.

Iran hasn’t the means to attack the USA directly, but it knows American voters are highly intolerant of presidential policies that disrupt supply chains, and increase inflation and the cost of motor fuel. So it looks to me as if their actions make perfect sense.
 
Typical sour grapes from Trump...
With Iran having already told him over the weekend that they weren't going to negotiate with the USA, he has said "They want to talk. I said 'Too Late!'"
I still occasionally have to pinch myself to remember that this is the real, actual, president of the United States talking in terms of these childish lies. How the country has fallen.
 
It's also illegal from a statutory perspective. It violates a couple provisions of the 1973 war powers act. Which further articulated and affirmed the Constitutional provision.
It is likely that the 1973 act and any additions are unconstitutional. In the absence of a declaration of war the president is CIC and makes decisions on initiating defense and offense. The congress, however, holds the purse strings and can pass laws preventing funds from being used for such purposes.
 
Back
Top