| > It's absurd to pretend you don't understand this. If you want to phrase what that person wrote in this way, then you're going to have to provide deeper analysis than a Dragon Ball Z style power comparison. > What evidence is there that Iran would have shut down the strait at all? The only time they've done so in the last 40+ years is in response to a direct, unnecessary attack. While neither of us have intelligence on Iran, you can reason about their activities and speculate on future actions. In the case of the Strait, Iran was stockpiling missiles and drone capabilities and if they continued to do so at the rate they were there is a tipping point where even the mighty US military would struggle to deal with this. Someone else commented about the US Military not learning anything from the Ukraine war, but I'd submit it was the opposite. We saw how devastating cheap missiles and drones were, and realized if we didn't do something now then Iran could continue stockpiling, declare the Strait closed pending payment, and then work on a nuclear weapon as well leaving the United States (since we're the only one that can do anything) with very limited and unpalatable options. Now it's fair, certainly, to speculate that Iran had no intention of closing the Strait or whatever, but their actions seem to indicate the opposite. You can also ask why is it that Iran is the only country stockpiling these weapons systems, working on a nuclear weapon, chanting death to America, and whatnot? Maybe if they stopped doing those things we wouldn't be in this situation. But why would they stop when the IRGC and religious fanatical leadership want to actually do those things? I think it's unfair to characterize this as wild speculation when anyone can read for themselves from reliable sources about Iran's activities. There seems to be this impression that the Iranian government is like this peaceful government and oh if only the US would just stop bothering them, but that simply does not stand up to reality. |
"That person" was literally you. I replied to you and quoted you. Are you sure DBz is beneath you?
> Now it's fair, certainly, to speculate that Iran had no intention of closing the Strait or whatever, but their actions seem to indicate the opposite.
It indicates only that they wanted to have a stockpile of weapons... the most common reason for which is to defend the country from attacks. It seems perfectly reasonable that they would want a bunch of weapons in striking range of both attacks from the sea, and of hostile military installations (which were located specifically within range to strike Iran). In fact, given that the 2025 project explicitly targeted Iran it seems very likely that it was a bolstering of defenses (absent other evidence).
> You can also ask why is it that Iran is the only country stockpiling these weapons systems, working on a nuclear weapon, chanting death to America, and whatnot?
They aren't the only country doing any of these things. (semantics aside... maybe they are the only country stockpiling those brands of missles and drones.... but certainly not the only country stockpiling missles and drones, etc).
> I think it's unfair to characterize this as wild speculation when anyone can read for themselves from reliable sources about Iran's activities.
The wild speculation is intent. Each of the actions that you bring up have many possible motives. The idea of Iran attacking directly and initially is a change in M.O. for Iran, and such a claim requires evidence that points directly to it beyond "this one of many possible motives".
> There seems to be this impression that the Iranian government is like this peaceful government and oh if only the US would just stop bothering them, but that simply does not stand up to reality
I don't think may people are saying that at all. They are saying this war was unnecessary for any of the reasons that have thus far been stated because there is no evidence pointing to those reasons being true. The consequential evidence does not add up to a single conclusion, and the direct evidence has not been presented.
You seem to have had an awful lot of the "Iran is irrationally evil and stupid" kool-aid. I don't beleive Iran is a "good guy", but I don't believe in war justifications without good evidence either, particularly not ones that rely on cartoon-level villainy.