pull down to refresh
May we see them end at some point or are we required to take your word for it?
Decapitation and ~80% degradation in under a week is warp-speed progress relative to the last 50 years of pussy-footing
Petro self-sufficiency in the last 10 years has been a rapid change of incentives over the last 80 years
Every neighboring country has been aggressed, aligning incentives against regional tail risk
The treasury has cut the balls off the London Financial Center by using this as a trigger to re-shore maritime insurance
Cutting the balls off the London Financial Center helps makes Israel a US puppet, not the Chatham House puppet its been since the Europeans created it
There's basically no path to laundering trillions over a decade+ like was done in Iraq, which was largely only justified by keeping it out of Iran's hands
The only tail risk I see, which no dumb shit normies regurgitating NGO slop, libertarian cope, and TDS are talking about... is if this a setup for cassus belli with China... who has technical officers beta testing their hypersonics and satellite constellation based targeting from within Iran as a proxy
I'm of the belief we've had a backroom deal with China to avoid something major with Taiwan, but that doesn't mean the greater pacific containment issue won't go hot.
It's almost like the legion of .mil planners know shit that armchair virtue signalers don't
Well this is a different perspective. Sounds like something Tom Luongo would say
Tom Luongo
Only loosely familiar as I see his articles pop up under ZH from time to time, just did a search to see what he's saying and found this from today: https://metalsandminers.substack.com/p/tom-luongo-if-the-fed-has-to-expand
Notable lines from the description:
IRGC as Britain's Proxy in Iran
Trump's agenda targets globalist structures like the City of London, aiming to reshape commodity pricing and reduce illicit funding networks.
Maybe he's been reading my SN shitposts, or just pays even a little bit of attention and doesn't outsource his thinking to globoslop
Make a concrete falsifiable prediction, so we can gauge who the real dumbshit is.
Will we be out of Iran within the year? Spend less than $1T? Kill fewer than 10,000 people? Lose fewer than 1000 Americans? What observable benefit will we see and when?
Are your falsifiable predictions that DoW we will spend 1T on this or lose 1k Americans?
Not a chance of either, only way that happens if is this goes mask off with China directly
IRGC is allegedly 190k personnel, so any number under that is over performance.
Benefit is we spend less in Saudi and the region generally as overall risk pricing comes down with the tumor removed
Whatever private investment productivity can grow from that is gravy on top
I intended those only as examples of specific claims, not what I expect to happen.
Benefit is we spend less in Saudi and the region generally as overall risk pricing comes down with the tumor removed
If you give a timeframe, then this will do for a specific prediction, although I won't grant that it's sufficient on its own to justify the costs of a war.
Defense compacts and infrastructure alignment move incrementally over decades, so to put anything less than 10 years on it would be retarded... So let's use 1 decade as a unit of measure. However, there's already been work going into this for 10 years already, Iran's neighbors are in an increasingly better position to take the ball and run with it much sooner, or maybe the problem gets entirely dumped in Turks lap if Iran becomes a Kurdish state. Perhaps they got Syria in exchange for having to deal with Iran too.
Given that, any sane person that's not a globalist shill or virtue signaling beatnik can easily conclude that the spending on a sandlot half a world away will in 10 years be less expensive without Iran as a concern, such as its been for the last 50 years, than it would be with that festering.
What the globo-slop articles that virtue signalers outsource their thinking to ignore is the sunk costs.
Pretty much everything we've done in the middle east for half a century has come back to Iran in one form or another. These operations are like a lump sum payment to settle the debt we've already incurred for less than if we kept making interest-only payments.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. Virtue signaling doesn't consider this.
the spending on a sandlot half a world away will in 10 years be less expensive without Iran as a concern
This is a bad standard, though. It needs to be enough cheaper to make up for the trillions that have been spent on this project and the millions of lost lives. At any reasonable rate of discounting, that's unlikely, not to mention the assumption that America needed to be spending money on the Middle East in the first place.
I get it though. We're all idiots and there's no plausible way to assess your claims.
This is a bad standard
It's the only realistic standard, there's no time machine to reverse it, only options are to stop the bleeding or keep bleeding.
the assumption that America needed to be spending money on the Middle East in the first place
Hindsightism, that goes back even further than Iran itself, it was only technology that allowed the US to eventually become petro self-sufficient. Could tie that into the globalist post-WW2 financial system necessitating the petro-dollar.
The coup against Nixon assured this situation, done by the same globohomos that fund the marxist-lite blog you outsource your thinking to.
I get it though. We're all idiots
No argument there, bunch of wishy washy feelers and zero critical thinkers.
no plausible way to assess your claims
It's only not plausible if you can't extrapolate or process hypothetical
What if you ate a cactus for breakfast this morning?
The number of dumb shits that can't tell the difference between starting forever war and ending one is too damn high