I’m confused (sorry if this has been explained in another post). Iran surely doesn’t control the whole Strait of Hormuz. Oman’s exclave (and UAE, to a lesser extent) has a point of land sticking out on the other side. Is it a problem with a channel or water depth that prevents ships from passing through on the Oman side? (I assume the Iran-Oman border goes right up the middle of the strait).
Iran is a credible threat to shoot at ships and those other countries aren’t. If Oman successfully sank some ships or boarded them and turned them around or something, then declared that no ships could pass without their permission, got compliance from commercial ships, and either no one attacked them in retaliation for any of this or Oman decided they could live with the level of retaliation then we’d be talking about some diplomatic solution to their control of the strait.
If Iran and the US actually go through with this idea that they both get to toll the strait, at some point someone is going to try to just pay Iran and not pay the US, and then Iran and/or the US is going to have to decide if they want to enforce their toll idea and if so how.
Technically you are correct, but since Iran can launch missiles or drones anywhere in the Straight, they can close it at will.
It’s Strait. STRAIT!!
It is funny that I keep seeing this typo everywhere. Reminds me of some argument I remember seeing in the 1990s that homosexuality is evil because of Matthew 7:14, which of course in the KJV is translated as “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Yes, it was that stupid an argument.
I guess the real question for the next couple weeks, besides what the Israelis do, is whether or not Trump can convince himself that this actually isn’t a loss.
Or that after more than a few days of not bombing, Trump even remembers that he started a war.
“No, that’s over. We won. The likes of which no one likes the witch.”
Yes; the best tactic Iranians can really try I think is to keep Trump distracted from attacking long enough that he fixates on something else.
Far from me to defend DrDreth, but President Ineptstein himself wrote in his failing TruthSocial account the word Straight when he meant Strait (no cite, too hard to find), so many people, good people (me included) have come to use the wrong spelling to mock the temper tanTrump in the White House.
An exercise in futility, I admit. Even if he read what we write, which he won’t, of course, he wouldn’t understand.
It’s DETH. I didnt go thru imaginary Pathology and necromancy college to get the name wrong.
Yeah, it is sorta like me using “trump”.
Oops! Sorry.
That first option is indeed the end goal. The problem is that for many decades, the Lebanese armed forces were only the second strongest military within Lebanon. They simply weren’t capable of disarming Hezbollah; if they tried, it would have started a civil war that (barring Israeli intervention) Hezbollah would handily win.
Blowing up Hezbollah cells (that, yes, are intermingled with civilian infrastructure; you can thank Hezbollah for that) and degrading their leadership and fighting capacity has slowly worn Hezbollah down, to the point where they are now at a small fraction of their prior strength and roughly a match for the Lebanese army. Which is why Lebanon has taken monumental and unprecedented steps since this conflict has started, like for the first time ever making it illegal for Hezbollah to shoot rockets into Israel. And then, even more mindblowingly, actually arresting many Hezbollah members (and more since that article was written).
Lebanon’s government obviously can’t say this openly, because there’s a lot of disdain for Israel in Lebanon, but they’ve been cooperating with Israel in these operations because not only do they also want Hezbollah gone (that’s been the case for years, I am sure) but they actually see a path to this goal and are openly working against Hezbollah to make it happen.
How many of those dead were Hezbollah? You don’t think that matters at all? I don’t see how you can possibly say whether or not an action is justified or not without considering whether it targeted militants or civilians.
(Moving to what I hope is the appropriate thread).
For all we know, none.
I don’t know, but you seem to have an idea. Why not give us an independent cite with factual information?
The ISW cites around 200 Hezbollah fighters, but I’m sure you’ll reject that as Israeli propaganda.
A right wing think tank? Not credible at all.
I’ve always been a strong supporter of Israel’s right to defend itself.
However, Israel’s recent politicians and actions have moved beyond defense, and have now moved into more of a strategy of Lebensraum.
And again, this is now moving into hijack territory.
And your evidence for this is that 250 people were killed in the recent strikes on Lebanon, but you’re not interested in examining whether or not it is true that 200 of those 250 were Hezbollah terrorists, because you’ve decided that Israel’s actions have moved beyond defense and into Lebnsraum, and your evidence for this is that 250 people were killed in the recent strikes on Lebanon, but you’re not interested in examining whether or not it is true that 200 of those 250 were Hezbollah terrorists, because…
I think you see where I’m going with this.
I’m going to chime in and state that summarily executing people is not a great path to lasting peace.
When Israel shows it is willing to protect innocent non-Israelis in the West Bank and make meaningful efforts to that end, as well as dealing with the illegal settlements, I’ll reconsider my agreement with @Euphonious_Polemic re: Lebensraum.
The West Bank is, IMO, the place Israel could show itself serious about finding a solution. I don’t see that there.
I have asked you for any proof of this beyond a claim by Israel.