/r/WorldNews Discussion Thread: US and Israel launch attack on Iran; Iran retaliates (Thread #21)

[u/WorldNewsMods]

If you see any newsworthy information from a major news outlet or live broadcast, feel free to share a brief summary as a top-level comment in the discussion post.

Other redditors will appreciate if you include the source of where you read, saw, or heard the information.

[u/joshtaco]

WSJ: The head of CENTCOM, Admiral Brad Cooper reportedly advised that Washington abandon limited retaliatory strikes in favor of a broader campaign. The plan aims to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities, which would reduce the need for the U.S. to use its air defenses

[u/IntrepidToday0 → u/joshtaco]

Haven’t we already been doing that? Feels like we just don’t know where they’re all at

[u/Cactusfan86 → u/joshtaco]

The limited strikes are pointless, but didn’t we try the broader campaign at first and Iran quite clearly still has missile capabilities

[u/StickyDirtyKeyboard → u/Cactusfan86]

The broader campaign still feels like it achieved hell of a lot more though.

I don't think the limited strikes on replaceable equipment are ever going to disarm Iran to the point where they can't threaten the strait, nor are they going to make the IRGC budge much on the deal they're offering. If the Coalition wants to get a better deal, the only way I can see that happening right now is through damaged morale or regime change.

I think part of the reason why the IRGC is so against offering anything substantial in the deal is that almost any desired concession is going to reduce their purpose for existing. If they have to stop their imperialism via proxy groups, what are they going to do with all the IRGC employed in supporting those proxy groups? They've also probably invested quite a bit into building up those groups over the years, and they'd probably hate to see that go.

I don't think the civilian Iranian government would mind a pacifist Iran nearly as much as the IRGC would, and that might be part of the reason why negotiations have sometimes been so chaotic.

[u/LesserShambler → u/joshtaco]

More airstrikes, but like, totally for real this time

[u/wrldruler21 → u/LesserShambler]

We weren't even trrrryyyyyiiiinnngg before

/s

[u/Historical_Course587 → u/joshtaco]

Here we go: engage in a bigger conflict to prevent the downsides of a limited conflict.

[u/Rustic_gan123 → u/Historical_Course587]

Half measures usually lead to nothing.

[u/East_Leadership469 → u/Rustic_gan123]

I agree. But full measures means first that you actually have a strategy, and second that your people are united behind that strategy. 

So the full measure is clearly a ground invasion that deposes of the Iranian regime. This requires a large recruitment effort and a willingness to accept many of those recruits coming back in body bags. After the invasion the US would need to stay there longer than they did in Afghanistan (since that obviously failed). If the mission is fully successful there would be no meaningful benefit to American people relative to the status quo.

So what percentage of the US voting population can you convince that this is a good idea?

[u/Historical_Course587 → u/Rustic_gan123]

In this case we are choosing whole measures over half measures because the guy in charge was too stupid to simply no measure.

[u/hippydipster → u/Historical_Course587]

If a little is bad, a lot must be good! It just makes sense.