pull down to refresh
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?
I intended those only as examples of specific claims, not what I expect to happen.
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.