Iran, the Red Sea, and the West (tm).

Well, they started it with the Greeks, but details details and imperial mindset. :lol:

Quite the pause after the Mongolians, tho. Took until 1950 or so to get back to population levels from before?

For reference, here's a graph (for anyone wondering, this is not remotely true):

Alexander the Great invades Iran in the late 4th century, then the Seleukid kingdom rules Iran with Macedonians essentially positioned as the "master race", ruling over the other ethnic groups present in Iran. Eventually the Seleukids fall apart (largely due to the Romans beating the tar out of them in Macedonia and Anatolia) and lose control of Iran to the Parthians, who then spend roughly the next 300 years fighting what many historians consider to be a very long war against the Romans. The Parthians are replaced by the Sassanid dynasty c. 220 AD, and the Sassanids keep fighting wars with the Romans for another 400 years until the final Roman-Persian war in the 7th century exhausts both states and leaves them easy pickings for the Muslim conquests, which destroy the Sassanids and reduce the Roman empire to a rump based in Anatolia.

That covers about 1,000 years of war between Iran and the west right there. It's a little while before Iran can be said to be fighting "the west" again; I'm not super familiar with the intervening history but basically I'd argue the Ottoman Empire was a "western" state for all intents and purposes and the Ottoman-Safavid wars begin around 1500 and continue for another 200 years. The Russo-Persian wars begin in the 17th century and continue until the 19th, and then of course you have the joint invasion of Iran by the British and Soviets, the installation of a British-friendly Shah and the subsequent history of Western meddling in Iran leading to the lslamic Revolution and the present situation.
 
Last edited:
mongolian depopulation of Russia was as severe and the Russians beat the US into space . Hispanics will still remain more loyal to the US than Kurds , too . Was not that exactly impressed by the US in 2004 , have no intention of becoming so in 2024 . And yeah , how the Iranians managed to "drive the US out of Iraq" with endless promises of future help ...
That's still a head start in your comparison!
 
Ok ok Lex, not 1950. But it's hundreds of years on your graph.
 
That is very hypothetical given we have no force to protect Damascus. Maybe the Russians could have done something to prevent the Israeli strike?
Anyway what I see is that the US government refused to support an Israeli counterattack over Iran and has done everything it could to dissuade the Israeli government from doing so. This shows there's absolutely no will among Western powers to see the situation escalating in the region. And I think that feeling is shared by most Arab countries around.

Netanyahu's personal incentives are all for escalation. I read a Haaretz article last week that said basically he's had no plan for Gaza, no real strategy except to try to avoid going to trial on corruption charges by fighting an open-ended, indefinite war. I don't like the situation at all; I don't think Biden has the guts to tell Netanyahu that Israel is on its own if Netanyahu starts a war with Iran.
 
Congress would override Biden if he did so. Israel is popular among a wide swath of the US. 9/11 made every Muslim suspect in the eyes of far too many people. Too many people in Congress depend on those voters for reelection.
 
Congress would override Biden if he did so. Israel is popular among a wide swath of the US. 9/11 made every Muslim suspect in the eyes of far too many people. Too many people in Congress depend on those voters for reelection.
Didn't expect "the US is institutionally racist" to be the take, here. But hey, I'll take it.
 
I think that Iran deliberately announced the strike before it took place in order to give the Israelis time to intercept them. This allows Iran to save face and not give Israel reason to further escalate, and also draws a line at the Iranians will tolerate.

To that end, I think the USA/UK is responding in kind by giving a few reprimands and trying to sweep it aside as quickly as possible.
 
Congress would override Biden if he did so. Israel is popular among a wide swath of the US. 9/11 made every Muslim suspect in the eyes of far too many people. Too many people in Congress depend on those voters for reelection.

How many Americans do you think want to go to war with Iran?
 
I think the US could do more, it'd just hurt Biden's re-election chances. That's for another thread though.

See that's precisely what I'd be doing if I was Iran. Attempt to cause division by acting in such a way to get Trump back in office and make the United States struggle with internal issues so as to become incapable of defending Israel.

Yet at the same time there would be equal gambling odds for Netanyahu to rely on a Trump reelection bid to get someone who will inevitably appoint more neocons who want to blow up Iran into the State Department.

It just comes down to personal opinion as to the strength of the US left and whether a second Trump presidency would see it hinder it's operations or not. Iran may gander yes, but Israel may gander no, thus causing in a most surreal way both to calculate that escalation further from here may be in their selfish interests.
 
yeah , stolen this for you ...
16-04-2024.jpg
because there will be those who are already claiming this Nevatim base hit by upto 15 things (which is easy to do if you claim 3 warheads for each of the 5 that hit) . It is a combined base of C-130s and the damaged one is one parked over there as a candidate for scrapping since 2018 . Combined ? It also holds F-35s . And the one crater in the picture is supposedly 3 hitting the northern segment of the base that services the F-35s . One for each runway there . Pretty sure the empty sheds are not dug deep , thickly walled pits and whatnot but still empty ...
 
If the Israeli government decides to go ahead with a military response to Iran's attack, then the most obvious targets will be airborne targets (airbases & facilities that produce Iran's drones and missiles) and obviously the heart of Iran's nuclear weapons program; their main uranium enrichment facility. Everybody knows where it is anyway.
 
and who's going to support that ? Bidon ? Aren't they supposed to fight China in 2030 ? The commander of the US transport airplanes thing required his troops to be ready to execute POWs like gloriously but not exactly in the free media ... Is it going to be claimed that was a joke or two ?
 
Iran didn't want to cause casualties to Israel, at least on any scale to speak of (did even 1 israeli die?). If they wanted to, they'd not have announced when the attack would take place, nor limited it to numbers of drones/missiles that can be downed realistically.
It's a precedent, obviously. But if Israel does attack Iran, it wouldn't be as theatrical, therefore people would die. If the leaders of Iran just made the bet Israel wouldn't attack since it wasn't hit by their theatrical attack, they may have made the wrong bet.
 
Israel are trying to go "we defeated this massive attack with next-to-no real damage, super easy, barely an inconvenience" and "this was a horrific attack that presented a real danger to us" at the same time. I'd laugh, but uh they've proven this line works before, so.
 
Top Bottom