The Iran War: a strategic blunder
In conversation with Glenn Diesen
Despite labouring under a bad flu/COVID type symptons following a hectic month of travel, I managed to splutter my way through a good conversation with my mate Glenn Diesen on the Iran war.
My view was, and continues to be, that the US strike and Iranian counter-strike contained a heavy dose of theatre from the careful choreography and pre-signaling of each move. That the CIA has now come out to claim new evidence suggesting major damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities feels as much about pressure from the White House to back up Trump’s claim that Fordo was obliterated, as it is about real damage assessment.
Either way, even that intelligence suggests any damage caused may now be reparable within two years rather than the decades that Israel crowed about shortly after the strike.
Unsurprisingly, western MSM is talking up the growing internal pressure for regime change in Tehran after this latest escalation, although that looks/feels like standard info ops coupled with a heaped tablespoon of wishful thinking. I should imagine, now, that Iran will be in an even greater hurry to race for the bomb.
Meanwhile, Trump appears locked in short-termism, distracted by several big foreign policy priorities at the same time, lacking the patience to follow through on any of them, yet susceptible to flattery and arse kissing at every turn.
I often say, these days, that he is starting to make Biden look good. In truth, I wouldn’t want geriatric Joe back either. The UK and Europe needs to wean itself off of its worrying ‘daddy’ complex and look increasingly east as it emerges, blinking and uncertain, into a new dawn of multipolarity.
Hope you enjoy the discussion.
A good titular question, not really backed up by Glenn's questions, which can be a bit unprepared and scattergun on occasion, not really opening up topics, just eliciting one answer before he skips to some unrelated question about another topic e.g. "Er, what about Russia?"
So perhaps "Was the Iran war a strategic blunder?" might be better explored by the Realists?
I'd say the people best placed to decide whether the Iran 'skirmish' (for want of a better description) was a strategic blunder are the people of Israel. I have no idea how it's gone down in Israel. I believe Haaretz is supposed to have a good journalistic reputation, and to allow the frank criticism and honest discussion that we in the West are no longer allowed to have in the 2020s, but I don't read Haaretz, as 'moderate' as it may be, and I'm certainly not going to read stuff from the other end of the political spectrum in Israel, the religious zealot psychopaths.
Everything the multiple war criminal and ICC fugitive Netanyahu does is to save his own bacon. He'd sell his own grandmother to Ayatollah Khamenei if he thought it would keep him in power.
I suppose the big question is, what effect has all this had on The Fugitive's popularity in Israel?
Strangely enough Iran has decided to join the compromised U.S intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard to inflated damage assessments of the bombardment demanded by the White House at the complete and total expense of thousands of intelligence operatives working around the world. Sadly, Tulsi has compromised her integrity to save her skin and Iran is calling off the dogs with these far fetched projections. In point of fact, very little of Iran’s program was destroyed according to professional preliminary reports now deemed specious. Iran could probably have a bomb in a year if they are correct and more reason than ever to do so. The “war” was a symptom a more serious problem that was entirely predictable. The West is in league with a genocidal maniac who has the full support of countrymen. Nothing of any good can come of it. Everybody lying about everything for fear of being outed in the undertaking is quite the chilling spectacle.