From the prediction thread:
Agreed, and this is reflected in the absence of high level discussion regarding the Straits of Hormuz as reflected in the Swan/Haberman piece above. Also note the small number of people in the relevant meetings. The head of the CIA was in the room (Ratcliffe), but there were no experts or specialists. In Trump I, the leader of the Joint Chief of Staff (Milely) would push back against Trump’s stupidity, but the Trump II replacement (Caine) would just list options and challenges (like the Strait). Well, what would be done about that? That’s a multi-step discussion that Trump would not follow, so it didn’t happen.
No contingency planning, no set goals: they would lean into Trump’s lies and conflicting remarks. It makes sense, as it permits his supporters to hear what they want to hear.