Public sentiment is marked by significant concern and disapproval of U.S. military involvement and support for Israel amid the escalating conflict with Iran. Many advocate for Iran's right to defend itself while criticizing the perceived media bias and one-sided U.S. foreign policy. There is a widespread desire for peace and diplomacy, reflecting fears of wider conflict and the humanitarian cost of ongoing military actions. Overall, the public is alarmed and skeptical about potential military escalation, emphasizing the need for non-involvement and diplomatic solutions.

United States

Iran

Israel

War is generally bad, and not something to be entered lightly. 

It’s easy to cheer for a war that you don’t have to fight and won’t affect you.

ShittyLanding

Haven't paid much attention to the last 20 years and how modern conflicts tend to go have you?

omnipresent_sailfish

This post encapsulates the vibe of this subreddit really, really well.

french-fry-fingers

IDownVoteCanaduh

While I wouldn’t class Iran as a near-peer adversary, they would most definitely prove to be a complicated and difficult fight - especially with support from certain near-peers.

A fight with Iran wouldn’t be quick, wouldn’t be easy, and would cause significant loss of life to both sides.

desperado24

This might be the most aggressive post I’ve seen in a while.

Firstly, the cost analysis isn’t worth it. Iran maybe a nuisance but, the cost of removing them isn’t worth the result. Especially since the reason they came to power was because of the US to begin with. 

Secondly, the world isn’t going to agree with the US on many matters. Using war as a tool should be a matter of last resort. They haven’t done anything worthy of a full scale strike, especially since the U.S. does retaliate, look at the past strikes against the leadership by Israel and U.S.

Thirdly, the death toll would be ridiculous. It would create more chaos and instability in the region. Right now, Iran is an extremely stable state, that in it upon itself is better that what I can say for most middle eastern states. 

There are benefits to peace and stability thru diplomacy. War isn’t always the best result. Also setting the precedence that war is the tool for disagreements is absolutely awful and will make the world more unstable.

Danimalsyogurt88

Casval214

Take a look at history on how well it works out when the US removes a dictator and introduce “freedom” without an after plan….

TXWayne

RaptorO-1

Chillicothe1

Because war in reality isn't like video games. It's extraordinarily expensive, in lives and treasure. It takes hard turns to strange and dark places. It makes and breaks politicians, political parties, and destroys nations. It's chaotic in ways that films and video games and documentaries can rarely portray. The U.S. is a truly impressive military power, but if we entered into a war with Iran and performed poorly or experienced higher casualties than expected it would tarnish a respected and feared international reputation consecutive generations have known. There isn't a sufficient casus belli to warrant embarking on a massive campaign that would end hundreds of thousands of lives while risking creating a power vacuum in Persia that may very well end up filled by somebody worse than the current regime. The American public is also tired of conflicts in the Middle East, a region we have come to associate with military quagmire, religious fanaticism, an inhospitable host for Western cultural and political ideologies. We're still fresh out of Afghanistan, a chapter many Americans feel ruined countless lives, cost trillions of dollars, and had no lasting effect. Why should we just Leroy Jenkins ourselves into another war?

KittenM1ttens

No one should be eager to go to war.  

I’d love to see the Persian People free of the theocratic Iranian government.  If the US banded together with the Arab States to overthrow the Iranian government, it‘s the Persian people who’d bear the suffering.  Wars almost always generate unintended consequences which are often as bad as the reason a nation went to war in the first place.

Persian will overcome, but rather not kill a million people rushing the process.

Pompous_One

I think it’s pretty obvious that the costs and potential negative consequences for America outweigh the potential benefits.

BigfootForPresident

op I think you may have misjudged your audience.  A lot of the people in this subreddit are intimately familiar with the last 20 years of war(and equally if not more familiar with middle east geography).  You may wish to save this war talk for either 20 years in the future when the next batch of political leaders never learned of the horror of 9/11 and the subsequent 20 year shit show... or just take this crap somewhere else.

kleekai_gsd

You gonna fight in it? I love you keyboard generals who love imagining sending other people to die.

Daedra_Worshiper

Go study the past 20+ years of US conflict in the Middle East and what we got out of it.

Ok-Library247

War with Iran will cost America a lot of money and lives. It will also cause the death of countless innocents so war should always be the last option. I’m tired of war hawks who don’t serve screeching about sending the US straight into war. 

Lots of better ways to settle our disputes and defeat our enemies than going straight into a cost guzzling war where thousands of people will die.

PumpnDump0924

Logistically, Iran is a nightmare. The Iranians can deny access to the Persian Gulf fairly easily.  They can just sink a couple of tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. Not to mention the entire Gulf is in range of Iranian anti-ship missiles and suicide boats. So you're limited to Bandar-e-Jask as a point of entry. Then a fight up to Bandar Abbas, and along the Zagros mountains. Tehran is in the far north.

It's not like Iraq, where you could stage out of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.  Jask isn't a large port.

During the Cold War, the Soviets would not take kindly to the US in Iran. It puts US forces far too close to the oil fields in Azerbaijan.  They'd likely seize Tehran before we could get there.

RonPossible

Only way I see a war to really start is if they actually attack CONUS directly, either with ballistic missiles or sleeper cells.

Parabellum_3

Active duty Air Force here.  The problem with Iran is any fight won't happen there, it will happen there, and everywhere else.  Iran's main army+ Houthis+Hezbollah+whoever else will jump in where ever they happen to be.  War with Iran would be seen as a true Jihad with EVERY extremist in EVERY terror group getting involved.  Think 4D wack-a-mole with triple overtime bonus round with the world as the playing board.

Also, America's social tolerance for war is pretty much zilch right now.  I just finished my 4th deployment, and we got held over an extra 2 months because of the Israel/Gaza conflict happened a week before we were set to leave the region.  Navy is STILL in the area, no telling how long their deployments will get extended.  Army/Navy/Air Force recruiting doesn't look good.

Finally, Iran is back burner kind of being handled though Red Sea and Israel/Gaza conflict.  We also have Russia/Ukraine going on.  We're eyeing China, trying to build up for that, but the previous 2 mentions are messing with our bandwidth.  Right now we are like the little dutch boy with his fingers in the dam holes.

If you wanna go to war, join up, and convince your friends to join to.  More people means more stuff we can go do.  For myself, 3 1/2 more years and I retire, I'm pulling my fingers out of the dam because it's the next guys turn.

[deleted]

“…young and pro-west”. That’s where you’re wrong son

morallyirresponsible

A full scale war against a near pear in mountainous terrain is not currently warranted

It would have massive global implications and cost an obscene amount in every way imaginable. 

Plus the people generally hate war against an unclear aggressor (remember we wanted to remain neutral in WW2 until we were forced to enter).

NoSpoilerAlertPlease

Um… land wars in Asia generally don’t go well.  

Also, wanna make an evil and unpopular dictatorship more popular and more resistant to regime change?  Invade their sovereign country without provocation.  

Wanna start a new round of worldwide terrorism against the US and US allies?  Invade a sovereign country.

Wanna cede more diplomatic clout to China and lose allies, invade a sovereign country.  

Or….China sees the US Navy has its hands full in the Persian Gulf and while the world focuses its anger at the US, China invades Taiwan. 

Really not seeing any upside to this US invasion of Iran.

Brian_Corey__

Kaye-77

Apparently I Ben told bc America lost in Vietnam and Afghanistan, Iran will win against the Americans in a war, I tried to point out operation preying mantis, and that the US military is just basically waiting for their government to fall, and it’s all about containment, and when I ask what actual advantages does Iran have specifically? It’s just crickets

I don’t think it would be just Iran we would be fighting I’m sure China and maybe Russia would send money and possibly troops to help Iran. Other middle eastern countries would probably get involved aswell. China could also take this opportunity to seize Taiwan while our attention is on Iran.

EliMacca

do you realize how many Iranian spies are around the world waiting to be activated and/or have already made assassination and terror attempts? This isn’t an idle one sided fight.

Because the US has a pro Iranian lobby to some extent influencing current policy. There's also a pro Russian lobby that has the maga republicans under their influence and has been slowing aid to Ukraine.

Its because of these foreign lobbies the US doesnt really fight new wars anymore because congress feels the need to use their money to win elections.

Well nobody wants what comes when you go to war.

Could someone help me understand how this conflict could effect the rest of the world? I understand that american soldiers might have to go there and that Iran has control over a good amount of oil.

But could this war actually extend to other countries outside of the area, like the US or Europe? Or is this a big but local issue?

whatIfindinterestng

Israel complaining about targeting civilians, now I’ve seen it all.

chazzapompey

All the fake tough guy virgin country boy trumpers sign up!

tmtd85

 It's a proxy war. China isn't going to let Iran go down they need that oil. Now we have 2 proxy wars.

Low-Ad-1448

Whatever happens, I hope it pushes Netanyahu out of power.

Edit: spelling

Winter-Collection-48

Get your passports and get your kids' passports.

Drafts are real.

TheBirdBytheWindow

This never happened when Joe Biden was president needs to be a new rally cry. Whether true or not, trump lies every time he speaks so can everybody.

Mildly_Twisted_

Israel starts it, kills civilians, says they are too close to military targets, says they plan to continue attacking, threaten more violence if one of theirs gets hurt. Remember when a bully held you down and made you stop defending yourself so they could hit you but your only real defense was to fight back but they said if you fought back it would be worse? Yeah

himheritaintme

Whatever happens I hope and pray it ends soon as well the rest of these wars.

Opposite_Ad_1707

GN0K

We (USA) could not possibly have a worse, less qualified government to handle this. F.

parakeetpoop

They're just getting a taste of their own medicine and then crying about it, whats new

Away_Extension_9077

Guys nothing will happen. Things will just die down.

lockerno177

"But you can't do that same thing to us it's not fair!"  
"Because we are God's chosen because we invented circumcision."  
"I know, I know, we were "created in God's image and "all that" (dismissive laugh) but this is to honor him."  
"OH and ww2 that was a bad thing that happened to us. Memeber?"

KptKreampie

Israel appears to have an ultimate goal of decapitation on the Iranian regime. The Iranian regime is on friendly terms with both China and Russia as the three are interlocked in trade for oil, military equipment ETC. 

Russia and China will not like and possibly not take kindly to a major ally of theirs being taken out of power and therefore likely largely out of equation. It could make shit pop off with those countries personally I think not so much.

This is just one example of how things could escalate beyond a regional conflict.

yurnxt1

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-06-10/washington-dc-military-parade-tests-local-infrastructure?utm_source=website&amp;utm_medium=share&amp;utm_campaign=copy



https://youtu.be/1bN4Wk08sQM?si=kt-a9OXHlwpD11ob

Current-Seaweed-3836

Their gunna close the strait and the US will have light duty or they shoot dirty bomb and we make a parking lot ..But the US will be involved one way or another

helmetdeep805

Khuff91

If Iran didn’t like the F-16s just wait for the B-52s.

crypticaldevelopment

God I hate these Middle Eastern countries. I hope they destroy themselves.

RoyalSpectrum91

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iran/2019-06-04/what-war-iran-would-look a good source to answer your question

Here are 2 lessons from Vietname.

”You know, you never beat us on the battlefield,’ I told my North Vietnamese counterpart during negotiations in Hanoi a week before the fall of Saigon. He pondered that remark a moment and then replied, ‘That may be so, but it is also irrelevant."

Historian James Paterson concluded that “The Unyielding determination of the enemy wore down the American commitment, which proved to be far less resolute.”

And here is a lesson from WW2

Yamamoto, when once asked his opinion on the war, pessimistically said that "the only way for Japan to win the war was to dictate terms in the White House."

There are a few things we can say for sure about any possible war between the USA and Iran.

1 - it will be long 2 - it will be bloody for both sides 3 - it will see fighting across the region if not the world 4 - both sides will claim victory at the end

A war is not only a test of your weapons. It is mainly a test of your will.

Wars are won only when your enemy stops fighting. So either you destroy their will to fight or you destroy their ability to fight.

At the moment Iran lacks the means to destroy the US's ability to fight and the US lacks the will to make the huge sacrifices in both blood and treasure required to destroy Iran's ability to fight.

Both nation's are also protected by geography. The US is half the world away and protected by oceans. Iran's terrain renders large mechanized forces useless and their access to the Russian controlled Caspian sea and Asian steps gives them a means to secure a never ending stream of weapons and materials.

Iran's human resources is also significant with a large population and equally important a very skilled and educated population. Look at this graph.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/06/09/the-countries-with-the-most-engineering-graduates-infographic/

If this comes to war it will have a long push a pull period of ups and downs for both sides and after a very long time it will end with the US saying "that's it, I'm out" and Iraq and Saudi Arabia will be changed forever.

cravic

It would be a clusterfuck. Iran's neighbors would take advantage of the chaos to annex and steal as much of Iran as they could. Sunni terrorists from all over the world would flood in for the chance to slaughter Shiites.

911roofer

I think were getting a bit ahead  of ourselves. The USA and Iran butt heads and sabre rattle at least once every 5 years. I don't think anything big will come of this but I'm wrong all the time. 

In the event of a war it would probably be fast and one sided. Iran isn't a very popular country. Their main allies Russia, Syria, and China are unlikely to come to their aid. Russia's economy is the size of Spain and they've  already spent a good amount of money supporting Syria, even a short war or proxy conflict could rapidly become a money pit. Syria has been a bit of a gongshow for nearly a decade  and as a result they're probably pretty depleted manpower, money, and morale wise. As for china, things have been going pretty well for them and their long term prospects  look good. The Chinese government is known look to the long term so its unlikely they would risk their upward trajectory  for a minor and often belligerent ally.

And don't get me started on Irans enemies  that would get involved either directly or indirectly. USA, Israel,  and Saudi Arabia, and nearly all the Sunni Arab nations.

SparkyMcStevenson

the reason a full scale war is incredibly unlikely is this: the US won't randomly invade iran. they've just strongly provoked iran. a war would only start by Iran attacking the US.... only the war would be fought in iran. and would be a war that the regime in iran would be INCREDIBLY unlikely to win (their strategic goal- remaining in control of iran, it's economy and military. the US's goal- a regime change).

Irans objectives are incompatible with a war. they win by surviving, they survive by not having a direct war. war from them will only be if they believe they will not survive either way, or their only chance for survival is via war.

If a war were to happen it would play out like this IMO:

US destroys the iranian airforce as a first act, and begins a dramatic bombing campaign. Starting with the known (and unknown) nuclear sites.

Iran responds with a naval attack on any ships in the straights, and closing the straights. They will also trigger wars in Ira, and Syria. As well as order their sleepers around the west to attack american targets.

US paratroopers will attack Tehran to try and take out the leadership of the regime, however they will have already retreated to bunkers. The iranian people will join with the iranian army in a vicious defense of iran. 

The americans will have enough troops to hold Tehran, bringing most of the city to destruction in the process. This will be true in a few key cities. The countryside will remain Iranian largely, especially in the hills/mountains. 

The US will then be in a far worse version of the post saddam Iraq quagmire where they are trying to instal a new government against the will of the people, while only actually holding a small percentage of the country.

The US will keep hunting for the leaders of the regime and the large chunks of the military that have retreated to tthe mountains and bunkers. 


That state of play will remain for x number of years. Iran will keep using guerillas to attack in the straights and keep the straights closed for as long as possible and as often as possible

That's my thought anyway

Also that outcome is why neither side is interested in a full scale war. Neither can really win. Assuming the objectives are to win anyway, rather than a fight for the hell of it/for domestic political reasons

binzoma

Iran is mostly rugged and mountainous. I wonder how effective US military doctrine is for such warfare. Rugged terrain is good for defense but hell for offense. Iran cannot defeat US in a conventional war it will try to inflict maximum casualties on US and make US pay dearly for every inch of ground.

As such the best Iran can try for is some kind of guerrilla campaign. Where they harass oncoming American forces causing them massive casualties and making the war unpopular on the home front which forces the United States to make a tactical retreat.

Now the war might create another refugee crisis in Iran region and many will flee. Most likely some will move west towards a stabilising Iraq, some South towards Arabia, some others north towards central Asia, and others east towards South Asia. This might put mighty strain on the South Asian region since it is already rather fragile. 

I would expect India and Pakistan to have major stakes in this conflict. But will not look to getting involved directly. The war will no doubt pressure them terribly though. All in all Iran might win a strategic victory, if it plays it's card right and US is bound to win atleast a tactical victory.

Smooth_Detective

Ok, I'll take a stab:

Iran's initial targets would be US military assets in the Gulf, Syria, and Iraq, possibly Afghanistan. Airfields, bases, ships, ect. They would be targeted with missiles and drones similar to what was used against the Saudi oil facilities. Some would get shot down, many would not.

Simultaneously, Iranian proxies/allies launch missile/mortar/small arms attacks on US positions in Iraq and Syria. I think a major goal of Iran in the first few days of fighting would be to try to capture US military personnel/civilians/politicians as a bargaining tool in peace talks. For those who say "US doesn't need boots on the ground in a war against Iran" this is generally true, but also meaningless, because the US boots are already on the ground in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, all places with significant Iranian proxies, and likely regular Iranian forces if a full-scale conflict occurs.

US response would largely depend on air power. Nuclear sites, Iranian missile facilities, political targets ect. One issue here would be the overabundance of potential targets, not only in Iran itself, but also Iraq and Syria. Airstrikes work much better in Iraq and Syria than they do against the mountains of Iran.

PMUs in Iraq and associated forces in Syria would back Iran and attack US positions. Syrian government involvement, for what its worth, is possible. Potential Israel-Hezbollah war, though I envision that as largely a separate front, unless Iran/Iranian allies attack Israel at the Golan.

One big problem facing the US would be a relative lack of allies. It's hard to imagine any NATO countries going along with this. Israel, Saudi, and other Gulf States will only directly attack Iran and its allies if they themselves are attacked, which I don't see as inevitable. 

Turkey will not support the US, for fear of a balkanized Iran increasing Ankara's Kurdish issues. Same with Pakistan and the Balochis.

Iran would likely try to quickly negotiate a ceasefire. If such efforts fail, it would mine the Strait of Hormuz. US would try to clear it, setting up a war between US naval/air forces against missiles and air defenses in Iran's southern mountains. 

Energy prices spike worldwide, causing a global economic crisis. This would be especially intense in Japan, China, and Western Europe. Troubles for ruling governments.

Russia's economy gets a tremendous windfall. In order to keep the Hormuz closed and fossil fuels astronomically expensive, Moscow supplies Iran with anti-ship tech and SAM from the Caspian Sea. 

If no negotiated political settlement is reached, the war continues indefinitely. Trump loses if this war lasts more than a week. Possible end to conflict in early 2021 as new US president takes power.

takatu_topi

The times is the times, but this might answer your question [article!](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/world/middleeast/us-iran-war.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share)

firstlawoftherm

It won't, never. 

Want to know why? Here's a clear motive: https://www.instagram.com/therichkidsoftehran/

Ebadd

The final outcome will be determined by who can sustain the following longer:

1) Closing of the strait of Hormuz and shut down of Saudi oil production with massive spike in Oil prices to several hundred dollars accompanied by a global economic crisis. 
2) Iranian military and infrastructure bombed to shreds.

I'm not sure who would win this. Iran has shown a large capacity for suffering during the Iran Iraq war, but after decades of dissatisfaction with Theocracy is the population still as loyal to rally behind the flag or may it end in another revolution? This would be the best possible outcome for the US.

The US can sustain any military losses indefinitely and would be able to navigate through the oil shock, but on the political side, domestic and international pressure for an end to the conflict would be immense. Europe would stay out of the conflict except for constant diplomatic initiatives. Iraq could be an asymmetric battle ground, but I would expect the US to withdraw from Shia Iraq prior to a full war as bases there will be too vulnerable and hard to supply and bases in the Gulf monarchies would be the much safer option for conducting an air war. A land invasion is out of question anyway. Iran would likely receive covert aid from Russia who would be one of the big profiteers from the oil shock. Expect the Iranians to have a never ending supply of anti ship missiles. If the Iranians manage to last for a year without internal strife,  Trump is going to lose in a landslide and a new US president will end the conflict.

kenseyx

It will be ill advised for the Americans to pursue a land war invasion as Iraq only worked with modern mechanised military due to its flat terrain, but Iran's mountainous terrain will make a mechanised invasion to be extremely difficult and even if victory is achieved mechanised military are usually ineffective in terms of Counter Insurgency warfare as we have seen in Afghanistan after 20 years.  

America's best option would be a series of air strikes on Iranian assests in order to secure victory, for Iran's SAM assets are often outside the range of US air assets and Iran's limited air force will be neutralised very quickly. However any attempt at regime change or nation building as we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan will result in a total land occupation which will be a nightmare to pull off and will be an Afghanistan on steroids. 

The US main interest is in upholding Freedom of Navigation within the Persian Gulf to ensure the free flow of oil. It demonstrated its commitment to ensuring FoN under the Reagan administration with Operation Praying Mantis where it destroyed half of Iran's navy trying to harass merchant ships in the area. Unless Iran tries something similar it will be too costly and too illegitimate for the US to invade. 

Iran's best course will be to stick with its strength of asymmetrical power which helped it to drive out Western influence in Syria and successful attacks on many US bases and interests across the middle East. A restart on its nuclear program will be suggested, for the Nuclear Deal is in essence dead with a Trump America and the procurement of Nuclear Weapons with the effective means of delivering such assets will be best deterrence against unchecked American aggression

Fredstar64

[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/subredditrules) / [Submission Statement Guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/submissionstatement) / [Wiki Resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/index)

geopolitics_banbot

StickToStones

But why would that require a full scale invasion either? , You really just need to destroy the Iranian ability to project force into the strait of hornuz , everything else can be done by proxy. So a massive air campaign and a followup naval blockade , reduce Iranian infastructure but only land enough men and take enough territory to clear things for oil tankers.


Thats still 6 months of planning and a call up of the reserves and an occupation of sorts (indefinitely) but you can leave the remnants of the regime alone and not have to patrol major populated areas. So you can avoid a draft.


Obviously the international community would frown upon a warplan that basically requires the US to completely destroy infastructure (powerlines and roads etc) for the non combatant civilian population of a country with 80 million people but the alternatives worse and it seems the trump administration doesnt care at all about what the rest of planet earth thinks anyway.

My guess, Iran escalates with more hostility to KSA and cause more disruption along the straight of Hormuz to secure oil and territory for powering any drawn out conflict with the US and straining the US supply chain for regional oil.

Iran would then perform strategic strikes at territories with US presence whilst funding destabilizing initiatives (backing terrorism, revolutionaries, etc). China and Russia may provide sub parts or entire arsenals of their military technology to Iran to test the efficacy against US military technology during this proxy war.

KSA and anti status quo forces would be in position to demand more resources from US to increase it's regional power, and US would oblige as their playbook heavily biases to recruit regional forces to fight and die for their war; using whatever freedom/anti opression narrative to gather support.

After a period of escalations diplomacy will be reached as the warhawks / military industrial complex of US has gotten to exercise their investments and reveal capabilities of foreign threats, KSA has become further embolden with US strength, and Iran stood it's ground against US hegemony and gains geopolitical advantage/better terms.

ekw88

If USA attacks, their economy goes down the toilet. China will take advantage will become the sole super power. A weaker economy and a country in war can cause russia or even china be involved in this war and they will attack the US.

Nebula_Famous

The United States Military was, until 2022, really the only military that did have any concept of what it really meant to fight a war. Nobody on the planet thinks the US is afraid of military intervention lol. The US doesn't want to escalate an already tense situation and become embroiled in a war over posturing when resources are already spread fairly thin.

If an ally suffered a credible attack with intent to do harm, you can almost guarantee they'd receive reprisals. The truth is, Iran really has no direct way to threaten Israel. They're relatively far apart, and direct conflict between them wouldn't amount to much difference. It's easier for Iran to continue funding and supplying anti-Israeli military groups, and for Israel to continue stomping out their leadership than it is for either side to engage in direct conflict.

AKidNamedGoobins

If those hypothetical conflicts did occur, the U.S. would most certainly respond. Especially in South Korea and Taiwan.

PrometheanSwing

I'm starting to think that US intel's main focus has become China. As I see it, the Americans are trying hard to subdue any flashpoints to not get directly involved and spread thin avoiding an opening for the China/Taiwan, NK/SK flashpoints.

As a thought experiment, let's imagine that the Americans didn't hold back and started sending forces to any of the major flashpoints that recently flared up. In my mind, if they sent forces to Ukraine, then to Israel/Iran, in that scenario, China would really feel the risk ratio turn in their favour a lot and go for Taiwan as they would be sure they would need to deal with a reduced American response, since it's dealing with 2 other fronts already. What we have now is a tense waiting game between US and China, as well as the Chinese/Russian propaganda farms working a number on domestic American psyche and unpopularizing war to the maximum.

I might be wrong in some ways, but I'm sensing that US's main focus is China, since it is the main contender for the world leader title. Russia and Iran are supporting characters in China's game the way the Americans might see it, so they will only pull their best cards out if things go REALLY south on those fronts.

So to answer your question, in my opinion, I think that it doesn't embolden the bad guys that the Americans are not throwing their weight around everywhere, but instead are thinking twice, since the strategic ambiguity doesn't let them know which one of them will have to deal with the full American package.

Ledinukai4free

Re the Estonia vs Ukraine point, isn’t it more that it’s a performance : ‘we’re holding back but if you break the rules re NATO we won’t”. To put it more simply, deterrence (if it works) should apply more clearly in the Estonia situation, preventing it from happening in the first place. Unfortunately, this was not the case with Ukraine.

Bardonnay

Great points, I think you're right. Men see men back that from a fight and make emboldened decisions based off of that.

China will use cold calculus and not base their decision on precived US passivtivity. Russia is already at maximum effort in Ukraine and there isn't much to escalate. NK already do nukes and missiles they won't be emboldend to invade SK.

Iran is in the middle of the game and US actions is not just statement but actual facts on the ground. So they definitely will make their decisions based on what US does.

Suspicious_Loads

I would say the evidence points to no. 

As witnessed in the recent events between Israel &amp; Iran, Iran clearly telegraphed their retaliation action, declared beforehand that it was retaliatory action, and made it clear there would be *no further action* considering the matter closed. 

Likewise the faux tension created by the US between Taiwan &amp; China. The US attempted to escalate tension and China refused to even respond, aside from some military maneuvers. The US attempted again, pushing a red scare in Australia (a large trading partner with China), enlisting them to make military investments through AUKUS [including manufacturing plants]. 

These countries are very much aware of the the threat open war with the world's largest military power would pose, and seek to avoid it.

I would even go as far to say that viewing events rejects your premise entirely. The US does in fact routinely try to escalate, through propaganda &amp; staging, in a way that baits the other side to become the aggressor. As we saw with Russia. The NYT outlined how Ukraine had operating as a CIA beach head, gathering Intel and assassinating Russian targets, then Russia went all in on the role of aggressor, preforming an internationally condemned land invasion.

addicted_to_trash

petepro

Iran says attacks are a declaration of war.

---

Iran state media reports IRGC Commander in Chief Salami killed.

---

New update from Israeli PM.

[https://x.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1933326687300677981](https://x.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1933326687300677981)

&gt;Moments ago, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival.

&gt;"This operation will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat."

They targeted nuclear enrichment facilities, heavy water production facilities and top scientists. IRGC General Command HQ was also targeted.

---

https://preview.redd.it/wlp4kjr8bl6f1.png?width=1008&amp;format=png&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=e6d08cc2b80060a630125343f0f79b66f1a4f558

Targets

[https://x.com/AmichaiStein1/status/1933318948457513103](https://x.com/AmichaiStein1/status/1933318948457513103)

Salty_IP_LDO

https://preview.redd.it/132li9vr7l6f1.png?width=283&amp;format=png&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=0f8789389dc601e366606bacc42422f5b08328a6

This meme will continue to earn its pay. Stay safe out there boys and girls.

angrysc0tsman12

If I learn about this through Reddit that will truly be something lol

Edit: This appears to be the real deal. Just saw the NYT post this on their live updates page. I imagine it will start spreading very quickly soon. 

———-

Explosions rocked Tehran early Friday morning, and Israel’s defense minister said his country’s warplanes had carried out an attack on Iran, raising fears of an all-out war between two of the most powerful militaries in the Middle East.

Neither the scale of the attack nor the damage it caused was immediately clear. The strike was expected to prompt swift retaliation from Iran, likely involving a large barrage of ballistic missiles comparable to that Iran fired during similar escalations last year.

The defense minister, Israel Katz, described the attack as a “pre-emptive strike” and declared a special emergency across Israel, saying a counterattack “is expected in the immediate time frame.” Sirens rang out in Jerusalem and other cities.

Residents of Tehran, the Iranian capital, reported hearing huge explosions, and an Iranian senior official said fighter jets had taken off to intercept the Israeli warplanes.

Mohammad Jamali was standing on a roof in Tehran near Chitgar lake when he saw what appeared to be two jets moving fast and attacking nearby military bases. “What I can see is two massive flames and smoke coming from two military bases in eastern Tehran,” he said.

The attack came as the United States was leading efforts to negotiate an agreement with Tehran that would limit Iran’s ability to produce nuclear weapons and a day after the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, censured Iran for not complying with its nuclear nonproliferation obligations.

The Israeli strike followed months of disagreement between President Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel over how to handle Iran. Mr. Netanyahu has long proposed using military force to derail Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

On Thursday, Mr. Trump said again that he did not want Israel to launch an attack, predicting that doing so would scuttle the chance of a diplomatic solution. “I think it would blow it,” he said. Then he added a nod to the other side of the equation, saying that an attack “might help it, actually, but it could also blow it.”

Several months ago, Mr. Trump waved off an Israeli plan to strike at Iran, insisting that he wanted a chance to negotiate a deal with Tehran. Two weeks ago, Mr. Trump said that he had warned Mr. Netanyahu against launching a strike while the United States was negotiating with Iran.

Those talks faltered in recent weeks, however, and it was unclear how much effort Mr. Trump had made to prevent this latest attack.

The strike did not come as a surprise.

The Israeli government damaged the Iranian air defense system during its attacks on Iran last year and had planned for months to take advantage of Tehran’s weakness to mount further attacks. Anticipating a regional escalation, the United States withdrew diplomats from Iraq on Wednesday and authorized the voluntary departure of families of U.S. soldiers posted elsewhere in the Middle East. A British government agency also warned on Wednesday of an escalation that could pose greater risks to ships in the Persian Gulf.

The attack was among the most brazen moves in a decades-long struggle between Israel and Iran that, until last year, was usually conducted through covert and undeclared operations. For years, Iran has funded regional militias that oppose Israel’s existence and has carried out clandestine attacks on Israeli infrastructure and interests. Israel, which is believed to be the Middle East’s only nuclear-armed nation, sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and has long carried out its own covert attacks on Iran’s nuclear program, scientists and other infrastructure.

The shadow war spilled out into the open after the Iran-backed armed group that has long ruled Gaza, Hamas, attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, leading to both the war in Gaza and a broader regional confrontation pitting Israel against Iran and its proxies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, armed groups in Iraq and the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Israel’s strike on an Iranian-controlled compound in Syria in April 2024 prompted Tehran to fire a huge barrage of missiles at Israel. Iran launched a similar assault last fall after Israel assassinated Ismail Haniyeh, a Hamas leader, as he visited Iran last summer, and then killed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah.

Steamsagoodham

I am leaving for deployment in less than 2 weeks….

*sigh*

lavender__clover

Great, I arrived in CENTCOM just in time 🫠

mick-rad17

Gonna be an interesting next 24 hours to say the least

Be safe everyone stationed in the centcom aor

newnoadeptness

DJErikD

Fun day to be flying back from a TAD to the Middle East

Salty_Goat5

Onboard VIN. It has been an interesting 24hrs.

220solitusma

Very surprising that they chose to do this now, especially with negotiations planned for this Sunday. 

Given SecState Rubios statement it’s clear that the US did not want this. 

To what extent do we protect Israel now when the inevitable Iranian response occurs?

This is going to get much worse before it gets better.

SWO6

If you’re not signed up for First Alert/Dataminr, you should be. The DoD paid for a multi-year contract to give members access. 

It’s exactly what it sounds like - an alert app that you can customize for your preferences/AOR. It’ll push notifications to your phone often well before it breaks on any news source. The alerts can range from traffic issues to kinetic action based on your preferences. 

You can get an account here: https://www.dataminr.com/request-a-first-alert-account

random_generation

https://preview.redd.it/izswpsh7nl6f1.jpeg?width=1080&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=3bf91e7f1765ff53766f0497f5349af1cd338f43

HereWeGoAgain.gif

Practical-Layer9402

 Standby for heavy rolls. Be safe out there, everyone.

GBralta

ohhhh, so thats why American workers in the embassy were evacuated.

LivingstonPerry

Out here in Bahrain...... I'll be sure to post shaky, off center, low quality cell phone videos if I survive the first round of retaliations. Almost made it to retirement, just couldn't quite get there in time.😭

carritrj

Damn, im glad Im out. Don't want to get involved in WW3

RustyNK

BRONZE STAR ON MY NDSM IS NOT ON MY BINGO CARD. 

Well neither is Civil War II, but anything goes in 2025 I guess 😢

RoyalCrownLee

Fuck it, man. At this point, we’re going to need a megathread megathread. 

There is no world where this doesn’t end poorly.

Trick-Set-1165

Zookaamook

This is now the United States of israhell

irlbratz-doll99

Amid rising hostilities between Israel and Iran, President Trump issued a strong warning to Iran every time the situation escalated, coinciding with significant military operations leading to high civilian casualties on both sides.

US-Iran Tensions and Military Escalation

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want