American Politics Discussion Thread

[MJW (ya that one)]

NE SoS has kicked off the DEM who would drop out for Osborn as she has no intention to serve. NE goes to Solid R for now.

[darrelljs]

this is a new dawn for the world. A dawn free from America, a dawn where the West no longer exists and Europe is just a bunch of countries again. A dawn of a more free, fairer, better world. A world without Israel and the United States.

So what do you expect to have happen over the next 12 months?

Darrell

[BING_XI_LAO]

this is a new dawn for the world. A dawn free from America, a dawn where the West no longer exists and Europe is just a bunch of countries again. A dawn of a more free, fairer, better world. A world without Israel and the United States.

So what do you expect to have happen over the next 12 months?

Darrell

Iran's veto over Persian Gulf oil continues, causing a global economic crash. With oil scarce and expensive, states will need to be fuel exporters (Russia, US) or to have lots of alternative energy (coal/renewables, aka China, which has either 1 TW or 2 TW of wind-solar capacity, I don't remember which, and 1.2 TW of coal power plants which are 90% domestically supplied when running at 40% utilisation rate as at present).

So the US itself will be okay relatively speaking, the true economic collapse will occur among the regions it conquered in WW2, namely the East Asian periphery and NATO-integrated Europe. Indeed the US will continue to parasitically leech investment and industry out of its vassals, as with the combo of the Inflation Reduction Act + Nordstream pipeline nuking under Biden.

Then what? The three points of potential and actual confrontation are Malorussia, Taiwan Province and Iran-Israel. The weakened West will have to pick and choose which to defend. 
Taiwan Province will be negotiated because China is enjoying peacetime and surely doesn't envy the predicaments of Iran and Russia.
Iran-Israel will be fought, and nuclear weapons will be used openly, instead of just small Minimum Residual Radiation weapons currently in use under the guise of "MOABs" and "ammo depot explosions".
Malorussia will be negotiated, its funding has already been transferred to NATO-integrated Europe, so what happens when they have an economic collapse and can't afford it any more?

Maybe the above prediction will be considered so unacceptable that the American regime will allow Trump to use nuclear weapons to defeat Iran, then make him the scapegoat for it and pretend they were against it. Or perhaps the Zionist infiltrators will be outweighed by a domestic faction which advocates limited retreat over redoubled aggression; considering that the US as a lone sovereign state would be excellently situated in material terms, it merely wouldn't be able to force its petro-dollar printing financial parasitism, nor its ideology and zionist doomsday cult, on the rest of the world any more. The problem then is that negotiations with Iran will be hard to open because of the Zionist penchant for mass terrorist bombings to go along with assassinations.

[BING_XI_LAO]

Oh lol I didn't see this headline when writing that post:

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chin...026-03-18/

Chen Binhua, a spokesperson for China's Taiwan Affairs ​Office, told reporters in Beijing that "peaceful reunification" would bring better protection of Taiwan's energy and ​resource security with a "strong motherland" as its backing.
"We are willing to provide Taiwan compatriots with stable and reliable energy and resource security, so that they may live better lives," he said, responding to a question about ​Taiwan's energy supplies during the war in the Middle East.

[greenline]

Nuclear weapons aren't required for the US to conquer Iran. Existing conventional assets are enough. However, the cost would be enormous (doubly so if Iran sends a bunch of Persian Gulf infrastructure ablaze on their way out), and would kill any hope of Trump or his successors ever had of winning another election.

If oil stabilizes at the current price near $100 a barrel, the world economy can keep chugging along, though with inflation and inefficiencies. The prices from the conflict are still bad for Trump politically, but not yet catastrophic. Iran hasn't yet escalated to attacks on the Saudi pipeline or sinking all ships. Everyone waits with baited breath to see what happens next.

[BING_XI_LAO]

Nuclear weapons aren't required for the US to conquer Iran.

Compared to 2003 Iraq.... (over in 2 weeks)

Iran hasn't been starved like Iraq was
Iran is several times larger in every way
Iran is mountainous not flat 
Iran is backed by Russia and China, at the very least with trade and satellite ISR

Iran does have a severe problem of infiltration, but I don't think whole army sections will be bribed into inaction as in Iraq 2003 or Syria 2024; the state is able to pay salaries. 

Meanwhile Iraq in 2003, no attacks prior to the invasion and then:

Starting March 20–21, Iraq launched several short-range ballistic missiles (including some identified as Scuds or variants like al-Hussein) and cruise missiles toward Kuwait, targeting areas with U.S./coalition troops and logistics (e.g., Camp Doha, other northern Kuwait sites).
Reports indicate about a dozen missiles fired in the early days, causing air raid alerts, Patriot intercepts (some successful), but no major casualties or damage from these.

not even comparable. Iran is more like a The ukraine than an Iraq.

Where will the US stage its forces? Is flying in on bombing runs all the way from Europe really good enough?

[greenline]

Afghanistan is mountainous, landlocked, and was overran in weeks. Iran has significantly more short range missiles available for defense - there would be significant casualties, and there would be resistance elements escaping to the mountains, potentially even causing trouble for the Strait longer after Tehran falls. This is part of the calculus that makes it possible, but very much not worth it.

[BING_XI_LAO]

The pre-invasion Taliban government hadn't even established full control over Afghanistan's territory, it's in an entire lower category compared to the Iranian government.

[greenline]

As historical comparisons go they're more well armed and consolidated than the Taliban, but less so than North Vietnam was at the start of the Vietnam War. It would have been possible in the Vietnam War for the USA to win (with significant casualties) by simply massing forces and driving north to Hanoi - absent Chinese intervention. But if China had intervened as it did in Korea, the result would have been another bloody stalemate. Iran doesn't have an equivalent backer close by.

[BING_XI_LAO]

Iran has 20x as much artillery as North Vietnam, 3x the size if we ignore large swathes of desert, 3-4x the population.