Political Posts

[changegonnacome]

22 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

There is no winning

Well it’s question of defining what are the strategic aims.

 

If the US set out in the hope of destroying the regime and the regime survives however bloodied and battered. Well they’ve won and we’ve lost. In the same way we lost in Vietnam, Afghanistan.

 

Couple of sayings I heard yesterday apparently from the region that kind of get at the heart of the matter they go like this -

 

“America comes and goes but Iran stays”

 

&

 

”They (the US) have the clock, we (Iran) have the time”

 

For Iran above you could easily sub Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam…..I really thought we’d learns this lesson.

[cubsfan]

4 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Yeah, unenforceable "deals" are not worth the paper they are written on.  And we paid them to accept this deal so they could arm their terrorist proxies and further supress the lives of their countrymen.  Some people never learn.  Same people who have to hide in a bomb shelter before they believe there is a threat.  As someone who has spent time in bomb shelters, it is never a good idea to wait for the inevitable and pretend everything is just rosy.

 

Obama cemented his legacy as a disaster with this deal. Yeah, let's give the terrorists billions so they can buy some more roadside bombs and fund the Houthis!

[dwy000]

20 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Yeah, unenforceable "deals" are not worth the paper they are written on.  And we paid them to accept this deal so they could arm their terrorist proxies and further supress the lives of their countrymen.  Some people never learn.  Same people who have to hide in a bomb shelter before they believe there is a threat.  As someone who has spent time in bomb shelters, it is never a good idea to wait for the inevitable and pretend everything is just rosy.

We didn't pay them. We released their own frozen funds. 

 

And if there's anyone who has proven they can't be trusted to keep their end of a deal it's the US.  How many of his own deals has Trump overturned because someone didn't praise him enough. 

[73 Reds]

17 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Obama cemented his legacy as a disaster with this deal. Yeah, let's give the terrorists billions so they can buy some more roadside bombs and fund the Houthis!

Obama had an opportunity to do some real good in the region.  Looking back, even Jimmy Carter helped negotiate and broker the first peace deals between Israel and some of its fiercest enemies - Egypt and the PLO led by Arafat.  Jordan came later.  These deals were a start but were kind of inevitable because in each war Israel had with its immediate neighbors, it could have destroyed them if not stopped prematurely by outside influences.  Arguably the Abraham accords are even more of an achievement because formerly hostile Arab countries are now convinced that doing business with Israel is mutually beneficial and this is the first time when Arab countries actually support Israel in its fight against terrorism and financiers.  As is always the case, Trump will receive no credit whatsoever.  As someone with a vested interest in Israel and its existence, I hold that Obama demonstrated remarkable naivite in what could be possible while Trump continues to push for better times for the entire region through a mix of strength, diplomacy and military force, as needed, completely defying politics in the name of what is right.  

Edited March 9 by 73 Reds
missed word

[backtothebeach]

While everybody is looking at Iran, Venezuela is not doing so bad apparently. This is from an article in the Swiss newspaper NZZ:

 

"On January 3, American soldiers in Caracas arrested Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife and took them to the USA. Hardly any traces of the massive military intervention remain.

At the La Carlota military airport, road workers are repairing the bomb craters in the runway. Nothing remains of the allegedly disabled anti-aircraft batteries in the center of Caracas. Only a seemingly damaged Russian Mi-17 helicopter is sitting there.

Daily life has also returned to the Fuerte Tiuna military base. The supermarkets for the soldiers are well visited. Laundry hangs from the windows of dozens of high-rise buildings on the premises. Former President Hugo Chávez had the military facility built like a small town. The buildings with soldiers and their families formed a human shield for the bunkers of the regime’s elite behind them.

 

Delcy Rodríguez wants to erase all traces of the regime

But it was of no use: on January 3, the presidential couple was arrested there. Eighty soldiers were killed, including 32 members of Maduro’s Cuban bodyguard.

Since then, nothing in Venezuela has been the same. It seems as if Maduro’s successor, Delcy Rodríguez, wants to erase all traces of the traumatic raid as quickly as possible. As if she wants people to forget that under Presidents Hugo Chávez (1999–2013) and Nicolás Maduro, a repressive regime was in power for 26 years, of which she was a significant representative.

 

References to Chávez have disappeared from the cityscape.

Hardly any school or public building still bears his portrait with the political slogan of “21st-century socialism.” In the ministries, the ubiquitous portraits of the presidents were reportedly taken down immediately after January 3. Only a few new billboards along the central city highway show Maduro and his wife Flores. They read: “We want them back.”

But no one talks anymore about the two central figures of the regime, who are now in a prison in New York awaiting trial. The longing for the unpopular despot and the first lady seems limited.

 

Queues in front of restaurants

Most people seem relieved. It is as if a nightmare is over. Normality reigns on the streets. On weekends, the city park Parque del Este is full of people jogging, picnicking, or following the lead dancers at the music pavilion during gymnastics exercises. People from all social classes, young and old, mingle there.

For a few weeks, the streets were empty at sunset. Now, queues form in front of restaurants in middle-class nightlife districts. Young couples arrive in tuned city SUVs and take selfies inside the restaurants. This is the new generation of enchufados (literally: “the connected ones”), the regime’s protégés. They are more worldly than their parents, have studied abroad, and now invest in franchise businesses like energy drinks. But traditional businessmen also gather again from early afternoon in restaurants around the obligatory bottle of whisky, as before.

 

At gas stations, the long queues that had been part of the street scene for years are gone.

There has been enough gasoline for several weeks. Even a new, high-quality type of fuel is now available for one dollar per liter. Allegedly, the U.S. is sending higher-quality chemical solvents to dilute Venezuela’s heavy oil in the refineries. The aid to Venezuela that Trump had stopped is also reportedly running again. There are medicines and food from the U.S.

Everyone the correspondent speaks to is convinced that Trump’s violent action was correct—without a qualifying “but.” Even between the lines, nothing of the widespread anti-Americanism in Latin America can be heard. “Trump’s action was bad for humanity, but good for Venezuela,” says a European diplomat. Support for the Americans in Venezuela spans all social classes: student leaders, deputies, trade unionists, and entrepreneurs.

 

Trump is a tough guy – they say admiringly

But residents of the barrios, the slums, are also glad that Maduro was arrested. “Trump has shown that he is a tougher dog than our tough guys,” says a hairdresser admiringly in the Barrio La Vega, a lively district stretching high into the hills. “Too bad he didn’t take more of them at once.”

The Afro-Venezuelan woman herself was Chavista until 2012 and supported the regime. After that, due to the economic crisis, she no longer voted for the regime but for the opposition and was viewed as suspicious by the neighborhood leaders. She only discussed politics with people she trusted. She was an election observer in her neighborhood. After the rigged elections in July 2024, she had to hide with relatives in another city because the regime’s henchmen were looking for her.

Today, the colectivos, the regime’s armed motorcycle militias, have disappeared. In the days following Maduro’s abduction, they still dominated the streets threateningly.

Otherwise, the capital is said to be as safe as it has not been for many years. Robberies, murders, and kidnappings are hardly a problem anymore. A few years ago, Caracas had the highest murder rate in South America. In surveys, insufficient security or drug trafficking no longer appear as important issues for the people.

...

Even in the barrios, once strongholds of Chavismo, there are hardly any supporters of Maduro.

The support for the government is minimal today, says the hairdresser. In her neighborhood San Miguel in the La Vega district, of 500 people, a maximum of 10 are still on the side of the government. Her district was once considered a Chavismo stronghold. Not much of that is left to see.

As in every community in Venezuela, there is the Plaza Simón Bolívar, named after the national independence hero. Four schools border the square. At midday, children in school uniforms stream across the square hand-in-hand with their parents, shaded by large tropical trees.

There is also the government assembly house. In this building, the feared Unidades de Batalla Bolívar-Chávez of the neighborhood had their headquarters. They were militarily organized block wardens who denounced opposition members, decided on food allocations, and organized protests in support of the regime. Today, retirees sit in the assembly house playing dominoes.

Nevertheless, the hairdresser does not want to be quoted by name. This is currently the case with many interlocutors in Venezuela. Although people openly criticize the regime, even when waiters, taxi drivers, passengers, or table neighbors can overhear, the fear of the repressive apparatus that persecuted people for many years still exists.

 

The regime is intact, but the Americans are in charge

The correspondent spoke with a dozen well-known opposition leaders, entrepreneurs, lawyers, social leaders, and municipal officeholders—but almost all hesitate to express their opinions publicly. Interviews with regime representatives are also not possible. The media are state-controlled. X and Chat-GPT do not work at all or are limited. Delcy Rodríguez communicates mainly via Instagram and TikTok. Like Maduro before her, she presents herself to her supporters as a leader working hard for the good of the people.

The regime seems intact. Delcy Rodríguez and her brother Jorge, the Congress president, as well as Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, who is responsible for the official and unofficial security apparatus of the regime, are still in power. Only Vladimir Padrino, the army chief, has largely withdrawn from public view. He is said to be ill.

After the attack, the U.S. left no doubt that they are in charge in Venezuela. Chris Wright, the U.S. Energy Secretary, spent two days in the country to assess the state of the oil industry. Interior Minister Doug Burgum was recently there to secure U.S. access to mining resources. General Francis Donovan, head of the U.S. Southern Command, met with the president to discuss security, drug control, and migration. He plans to return in the coming days. John Ratcliffe, CIA Director, was also on-site.

Alone the visit schedule shows that the Americans do not appear as visitors or state guests. They come to the country whenever it suits them. There is no official reception by Venezuelan authorities. “They act like governors visiting their province,” says a diplomatic observer.

 

Rubio talks about a three-stage process

The U.S. seems to be planning its engagement long-term. The run-down embassy is currently being renovated. It had been closed for seven years. American diplomats have temporarily moved into the Marriott Hotel in Caracas. Almost everyone in Venezuela says the country is under American tutelage—but this seems to bother no one. On the contrary. This is associated with the hope that the regime can no longer harass people as before—and that the U.S. will finally lead the country out of the economic and political isolation it has been in for more than a decade.

Delcy Rodríguez is compared to Scheherazade from One Thousand and One Nights, who tells the king a new story each night to postpone her execution. The comparison with the oriental tale fits well: Rodríguez is currently busy securing the goodwill of the U.S. One example is the oil law, which will for the first time give private companies control over the energy sector.

This fits the strategy the U.S. is pursuing in Venezuela. Foreign Minister Marco Rubio repeatedly refers to a three-stage process: first comes stabilization, then economic recovery, and finally political transition. Rubio does not ignore the topic of elections. He recently stated at a meeting with CARICOM heads of state that the next phase of the transition can only be legitimate if Venezuela holds “free, democratic, and fair elections.”

 

Elections later this year?

In the country itself, many hope for imminent elections. Optimists expect them to take place by the end of the year. At least a date must be set then.

For all interlocutors, it is a matter of course that María Corina Machado will run. There is consensus that the Nobel laureate holds the leadership role in the opposition. She is still outside Venezuela at present but is expected back any day. Even interlocutors who criticized her in the past now support her. A nationwide survey by the Meganálisis institute from early February shows a clear mood: 78 percent of respondents would vote for María Corina Machado, while more than 90 percent reject President Delcy Rodríguez as transitional president.

A diplomat says Rodríguez is currently trying to increase her popularity through economic recovery. “But what will she do when she realizes she has no chance in free elections?”

[cubsfan]

4 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Obama had an opportunity to do some real good in the region.  Looking back, even Jimmy Carter helped negotiate and broker the first peace deals between Israel and some of its fiercest enemies - Egypt and the PLO led by Arafat.  Jordan came later.  These deals were a start but were kind of inevitable because in each war Israel had with its immediate neighbors, it could have destroyed them if not stopped prematurely by outside influences.  Arguably the Abraham accords are even more of an achievement because formerly hostile Arab countries are now convinced that doing business with Israel is mutually beneficial and this is the first time when Arab countries actually support Israel in its fight against terrorism and financiers.  As is always the case, Trump will receive no credit whatsoever.  As someone with a vested interest in Israel and its existence, Obama demonstrated remarkable naivite in what could be possible while Trump continues to push for better times for the entire region through a mix of strength, diplomacy and military force, as needed, completely defying politics in the name of what is right.  

 

I can't wait until this war is over and the Abraham Accords restart. Watch the Saudi's get it going along with neighbors - and the TDS crowd loses it.

 

Guaranteed

[Xerxes]

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/iran/#article/part1

 

From 2013 and still relevant today 

The theft of century 

[cubsfan]

27 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/iran/#article/part1

 

From 2013 and still relevant today 

The theft of century 

Quite the Holy man!

 

[Gregmal]

4 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

So the underlying assumption here (which is false) is that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States and so something just had to be done now.

Wasnt it just last year where the refrain was "we didnt really set their nuke program back all that much?"....now it's 180'd again to "they dont have one"? or is it "we're waiting til its a red lights flashing threat" before doing anything?

[Dalal.Holdings]

4 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

So the underlying assumption here (which is false) is that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States and so something just had to be done now.

 

Nobody - not a single person from the admin has articulated the imminent threat thesis in a way that isn't nonsensical. So lets all agree that Trump (with Israel the forcing function) has decided that now would be an optimal time to move on Iran and IMO roll the dice on what emerges post-conflict is something superior to the previous status quo. This is a geoptilcial sitituation completley manufactorered by Trump. Which is just plain dumb.

 

 

So your entire argument boils down to: we should only stop a nuclear problem until it becomes imminent? Is that how you deal with tail risks? Do you only buy insurance when you are about to get into a car crash or your house is about to burn down?

[dwy000]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

Wasnt it just last year where the refrain was "we didnt really set their nuke program back all that much?"....now it's 180'd again to "they dont have one"? or is it "we're waiting til its a red lights flashing threat" before doing anything?

There's a VAST difference between a threat (which it has been for 47 years) and imminent threat.  Not the least of which is that one requires congressional approval to act.

 

Now Trump is saying the war is almost over (funny how that happens when oil goes to $120 and the market drops 2%).  So is the imminent threat now gone forever?  How exactly are we better off now than a week ago?  Other than we have stirred the hornets nest and ensured that Iran is motivated to continue to pursue nukes. 

[LC]

WH asks, is there a way we can use AI to DOGE responsibility?

 

https://thisweekinworcester.com/exclusive-ai-error-girls-school-bombing/

[SharperDingaan]

The 'war is over' euphoria comes down to this ....

• "I think the war is very complete, pretty much," the president said, speaking from his Doral, Florida, golf club. "[Iran has] no navy, no communications, they've got no air force. Their missiles are down to a scatter. Their drones are being blown up all over the place, including their manufacturing of drones."
• "If you look, they have nothing left. There's nothing left in a military sense," Mr. Trump said. "I have no message for him. None, whatsoever," the president said, adding that he has someone else in mind to lead the country. 
• "We're very far ahead of schedule," he told CBS News on Monday. The same afternoon the president said the war is "very complete, pretty much," the Department of Defence posted on X, "We have Only Just Begun to Fight" and "no mercy." 
• So far, seven Americans have died in combat. Later Monday, Vice President JD Vance will attend a dignified transfer of the remains of U.S. Army Sgt. Benjamin Pennington, who died of injuries he suffered in March 1 attack at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. Asked whether he thought the war could wrap up soon, the president said, "Wrapping up is all in my mind, nobody else's."

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/trump-says-the-war-is-very-complete/ar-AA1XQWQu?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=69af29f3cfaa4f1690f9a9534b1b5f55&ei=14

 

In other words; Orange Boy can't enforce regime change, can't keep the SOH open, can't get the SPR release he wanted, can't put a lid on rising gas prices, can't get cooperation without giving up tariffs, and can't get the replacement weaponry to extend the war . Orange Boy badly needs an 'off' ramp .... so  float the idea that in his mind he can't win from here, war's over ! ... everyone can now come home  

 

PR and press scrums ain't going to do it ...... this is the land of an 'eye for an eye'. Tar pits strangle their victims via exhaustion and suffocation - no exceptions.

 

SD  

Edited March 9 by SharperDingaan

[cubsfan]

You guys should hear yourselves!  You're so jealous. You sound like Carville. 9 days in, stunning results. Ya'll have careers at MSNBC.

 

I love your TDS!  Keep it up!

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, Dalal.Holdings said:

So your entire argument boils down to: we should only stop a nuclear problem until it becomes imminent? Is that how you deal with tail risks? Do you only buy insurance when you are about to get into a car crash or your house is about to burn down?

below is the central JCPOA argument as articulated at the time….short version it prevented a nuclear Iran at very low no cost while preserving all strategic optionality to step up the escalation ladder if required….your gut might not like it….everyone wants to ‘get’ the bad guys….but as I said some scenarios only present bad options and Iran is one of those for sure.

 

”Assessing the JCPOA vs. War: A Risk Management Perspective
When evaluating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) against an active kinetic conflict, advocates of the nuclear deal frame it fundamentally as a risk-mitigation vehicle. From this perspective, the JCPOA was not built on trust, but on verifiable metrics designed to cap downside exposure while preserving policy optionality.
Here are the primary arguments for how the JCPOA managed risks more effectively than an offensive war:
 * Mitigating Information Asymmetry (Visibility and Data)
   * The JCPOA: Acted as a continuous audit. It implemented the most intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection regime in history, providing real-time data on enrichment levels, centrifuge production, and uranium supply chains. This continuous monitoring heavily reduced the "unknown unknowns."
   * The War Scenario: Destroys visibility. In a conflict, inspectors are expelled, cameras are dismantled, and nuclear infrastructure is driven deep underground. The loss of on-the-ground intelligence creates a blind spot, making it nearly impossible to accurately price the risk of a sudden nuclear breakout.
 * Capping Tail Risk (The Nuclear Threshold)
   * The JCPOA: Physically constrained the path to a nuclear weapon by capping enrichment at 3.67%, eliminating 98% of the uranium stockpile, and altering the Arak reactor to block the plutonium route. It extended the "breakout time" (the time needed to produce enough fissile material for one weapon) from weeks to over a year, providing a long runway to react to any breach.
   * The War Scenario: Dramatically increases tail risk. Facing an existential threat to its regime, a state actor is incentivized to accelerate its nuclear program to secure the ultimate deterrent. A kinetic strike might delay the program, but it fundamentally motivates the adversary to acquire a weapon at all costs once they rebuild, often in harder-to-reach facilities.
 * Systemic Contagion vs. Compartmentalization
   * The JCPOA: Attempted to ring-fence the nuclear issue. By compartmentalizing the nuclear portfolio, it aimed to prevent the most catastrophic threat from bleeding into other regional frictions, allowing stakeholders to manage proxy conflicts without the overarching threat of a nuclear umbrella.
   * The War Scenario: Represents massive systemic risk. A war with Iran cannot be isolated; it inherently triggers contagion across multiple theaters. It activates proxy networks across the region, threatens critical maritime chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, and injects severe volatility into global energy markets and supply chains.
 * Cost of Capital and Resource Allocation
   * The JCPOA: Achieved its primary objective—halting the nuclear weapons program—with zero expenditure of military capital or loss of life. It allowed the U.S. and its allies to allocate strategic resources and focus toward other long-term geopolitical competitors.
   * The War Scenario: Requires immense upfront and ongoing capital. An offensive war involves staggering military costs, inevitable economic disruptions, and the heavy burden of post-conflict stabilization. The return on investment is highly uncertain, historically yielding protracted engagements rather than clean resolutions.
 * Reversibility and Preserving Optionality
   * The JCPOA: Maintained strategic flexibility. If the counterparty breached the agreement, the "snapback" mechanism allowed for the immediate reimposition of global sanctions, and the military option always remained fully on the table as a last resort. It was a reversible policy.
   * The War Scenario: Is an irreversible sunk cost. Once kinetic action is taken, the escalation ladder is highly unpredictable. It eliminates diplomatic off-ramps and locks all parties into a high-stakes conflict with no guaranteed exit strategy.
In essence, advocates argue that the JCPOA functioned as a strategic hedge. It traded temporary economic relief for hard data and physical limits, successfully managing the most severe threat while keeping options open. War, by contrast, is viewed as an unhedged position—incurring massive, immediate costs while exposing the region to entirely unpredictable downside variables.“

 

We are in some half hearted war scenario as laid out….its regime change but it isn’t…it’s a uranium collection exercise but it isn’t….its just a capability degradation exercise but it isn’t 

 

 

Edited March 9 by changegonnacome

[Dalal.Holdings]

35 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

below is the central JCPOA argument as articulated at the time….short version it prevented a nuclear Iran at very low no cost while preserving all strategic optionality to step up the escalation ladder if required….your gut might not like it….everyone wants to ‘get’ the bad guys….but as I said some scenarios only present bad options and Iran is one of those for sure.

 

”Assessing the JCPOA vs. War: A Risk Management Perspective
When evaluating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) against an active kinetic conflict, advocates of the nuclear deal frame it fundamentally as a risk-mitigation vehicle. From this perspective, the JCPOA was not built on trust, but on verifiable metrics designed to cap downside exposure while preserving policy optionality.
Here are the primary arguments for how the JCPOA managed risks more effectively than an offensive war:
 * Mitigating Information Asymmetry (Visibility and Data)
   * The JCPOA: Acted as a continuous audit. It implemented the most intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection regime in history, providing real-time data on enrichment levels, centrifuge production, and uranium supply chains. This continuous monitoring heavily reduced the "unknown unknowns."
   * The War Scenario: Destroys visibility. In a conflict, inspectors are expelled, cameras are dismantled, and nuclear infrastructure is driven deep underground. The loss of on-the-ground intelligence creates a blind spot, making it nearly impossible to accurately price the risk of a sudden nuclear breakout.
 * Capping Tail Risk (The Nuclear Threshold)
   * The JCPOA: Physically constrained the path to a nuclear weapon by capping enrichment at 3.67%, eliminating 98% of the uranium stockpile, and altering the Arak reactor to block the plutonium route. It extended the "breakout time" (the time needed to produce enough fissile material for one weapon) from weeks to over a year, providing a long runway to react to any breach.
   * The War Scenario: Dramatically increases tail risk. Facing an existential threat to its regime, a state actor is incentivized to accelerate its nuclear program to secure the ultimate deterrent. A kinetic strike might delay the program, but it fundamentally motivates the adversary to acquire a weapon at all costs once they rebuild, often in harder-to-reach facilities.
 * Systemic Contagion vs. Compartmentalization
   * The JCPOA: Attempted to ring-fence the nuclear issue. By compartmentalizing the nuclear portfolio, it aimed to prevent the most catastrophic threat from bleeding into other regional frictions, allowing stakeholders to manage proxy conflicts without the overarching threat of a nuclear umbrella.
   * The War Scenario: Represents massive systemic risk. A war with Iran cannot be isolated; it inherently triggers contagion across multiple theaters. It activates proxy networks across the region, threatens critical maritime chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, and injects severe volatility into global energy markets and supply chains.
 * Cost of Capital and Resource Allocation
   * The JCPOA: Achieved its primary objective—halting the nuclear weapons program—with zero expenditure of military capital or loss of life. It allowed the U.S. and its allies to allocate strategic resources and focus toward other long-term geopolitical competitors.
   * The War Scenario: Requires immense upfront and ongoing capital. An offensive war involves staggering military costs, inevitable economic disruptions, and the heavy burden of post-conflict stabilization. The return on investment is highly uncertain, historically yielding protracted engagements rather than clean resolutions.
 * Reversibility and Preserving Optionality
   * The JCPOA: Maintained strategic flexibility. If the counterparty breached the agreement, the "snapback" mechanism allowed for the immediate reimposition of global sanctions, and the military option always remained fully on the table as a last resort. It was a reversible policy.
   * The War Scenario: Is an irreversible sunk cost. Once kinetic action is taken, the escalation ladder is highly unpredictable. It eliminates diplomatic off-ramps and locks all parties into a high-stakes conflict with no guaranteed exit strategy.
In essence, advocates argue that the JCPOA functioned as a strategic hedge. It traded temporary economic relief for hard data and physical limits, successfully managing the most severe threat while keeping options open. War, by contrast, is viewed as an unhedged position—incurring massive, immediate costs while exposing the region to entirely unpredictable downside variables.“

 

We are in some half hearted war scenario as laid out….its regime change but it isn’t…it’s a uranium collection exercise but it isn’t….its just a capability degradation exercise but it isn’t 

 

 

Let’s keep it simple and use Occam’s Razor for why the regime was so intent on enriching Uranium: it wasn’t for power generation. They wanted a weapon. This is the kind of regime that would have abused the nuclear deal and snuck weapons development elsewhere. Look at the IRGC and how decentralized it is…

 

And at the same time they fomented terrorist groups around the world. Such people cannot be trusted even with power generation grade enriched uranium. Once Iran has nuclear weapons, then Saudi Arabia will insist then Egypt and it becomes a huge mess. Once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle, it becomes impossible to put it back in. Better to nip it in the bud early and completely.

[Dalal.Holdings]

A lot of fears here about confronting Iran. But just look at how weakened they have become the past 2 years: Hamas, Hezbollah basically wiped out. Their ally in Syria taken out. Their friend Russia mired in a quagmire. And the regime under pressure due to internal strife: water shortages (Tehran may have to be abandoned?), and mass protests. And the Gulf states aligned against it.

 

If there was ever a good time to strike, it was now.

[dwy000]

I guess the "imminent threat" must have been buried in that girls school they eliminated.

 

And good to see the unconditional surrender of Iran as required way back on...two days ago. 

[cubsfan]

3 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

I guess the "imminent threat" must have been buried in that girls school they eliminated.

 

And good to see the unconditional surrender of Iran as required way back on...two days ago. 

 

You'll be happy to know the Regime is loaded with great people and NONE of them had anything to do with Epstein.

[Spekulatius]

9 hours ago, Dalal.Holdings said:

I watched one of his videos where he claimed the Middle Eastern countries, owning a whopping ~$1 Trillion in U.S. stocks, would crash the stock market if they sold. I guess he doesn't realize how big the U.S. equity markets are. I turned it off at that point.

Yeah, these claims immediately discredit this fellow.

[Gregmal]

13 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

You'll be happy to know the Regime is loaded with great people and NONE of them had anything to do with Epstein.

It’s amazing and amusing. Defending Iran now they are. If Trump said “don’t kill your neighbor” these lunatics would go on murder sprees. 

[Parsad]

16 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

You'll be happy to know the Regime is loaded with great people and NONE of them had anything to do with Epstein.

 

It's funny how you guys equate one with the other.  So because someone is a pedo, but makes decisions you like, makes it ok because the other guy is not a pedo, but is doing other evil things.  That's not very sound logic...it's what keeps you in trouble!  Cheers!

[dwy000]

Just now, Gregmal said:

It’s amazing and amusing. Defending Iran now they are. If Trump said “don’t kill your neighbor” these lunatics would go on murder sprees. 

Misrepresenting. Literally nobody is defending Iran. I was calling out the utter uselessness of this war given it achieved nothing, cost a fortune (in money, people, relationships and reputation) and probably left things worse than before it started.  

[Spekulatius]

4 hours ago, backtothebeach said:

While everybody is looking at Iran, Venezuela is not doing so bad apparently. This is from an article in the Swiss newspaper NZZ:

 

"On January 3, American soldiers in Caracas arrested Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife and took them to the USA. Hardly any traces of the massive military intervention remain.

At the La Carlota military airport, road workers are repairing the bomb craters in the runway. Nothing remains of the allegedly disabled anti-aircraft batteries in the center of Caracas. Only a seemingly damaged Russian Mi-17 helicopter is sitting there.

Daily life has also returned to the Fuerte Tiuna military base. The supermarkets for the soldiers are well visited. Laundry hangs from the windows of dozens of high-rise buildings on the premises. Former President Hugo Chávez had the military facility built like a small town. The buildings with soldiers and their families formed a human shield for the bunkers of the regime’s elite behind them.

 

Delcy Rodríguez wants to erase all traces of the regime

But it was of no use: on January 3, the presidential couple was arrested there. Eighty soldiers were killed, including 32 members of Maduro’s Cuban bodyguard.

Since then, nothing in Venezuela has been the same. It seems as if Maduro’s successor, Delcy Rodríguez, wants to erase all traces of the traumatic raid as quickly as possible. As if she wants people to forget that under Presidents Hugo Chávez (1999–2013) and Nicolás Maduro, a repressive regime was in power for 26 years, of which she was a significant representative.

 

References to Chávez have disappeared from the cityscape.

Hardly any school or public building still bears his portrait with the political slogan of “21st-century socialism.” In the ministries, the ubiquitous portraits of the presidents were reportedly taken down immediately after January 3. Only a few new billboards along the central city highway show Maduro and his wife Flores. They read: “We want them back.”

But no one talks anymore about the two central figures of the regime, who are now in a prison in New York awaiting trial. The longing for the unpopular despot and the first lady seems limited.

 

Queues in front of restaurants

Most people seem relieved. It is as if a nightmare is over. Normality reigns on the streets. On weekends, the city park Parque del Este is full of people jogging, picnicking, or following the lead dancers at the music pavilion during gymnastics exercises. People from all social classes, young and old, mingle there.

For a few weeks, the streets were empty at sunset. Now, queues form in front of restaurants in middle-class nightlife districts. Young couples arrive in tuned city SUVs and take selfies inside the restaurants. This is the new generation of enchufados (literally: “the connected ones”), the regime’s protégés. They are more worldly than their parents, have studied abroad, and now invest in franchise businesses like energy drinks. But traditional businessmen also gather again from early afternoon in restaurants around the obligatory bottle of whisky, as before.

 

At gas stations, the long queues that had been part of the street scene for years are gone.

There has been enough gasoline for several weeks. Even a new, high-quality type of fuel is now available for one dollar per liter. Allegedly, the U.S. is sending higher-quality chemical solvents to dilute Venezuela’s heavy oil in the refineries. The aid to Venezuela that Trump had stopped is also reportedly running again. There are medicines and food from the U.S.

Everyone the correspondent speaks to is convinced that Trump’s violent action was correct—without a qualifying “but.” Even between the lines, nothing of the widespread anti-Americanism in Latin America can be heard. “Trump’s action was bad for humanity, but good for Venezuela,” says a European diplomat. Support for the Americans in Venezuela spans all social classes: student leaders, deputies, trade unionists, and entrepreneurs.

 

Trump is a tough guy – they say admiringly

But residents of the barrios, the slums, are also glad that Maduro was arrested. “Trump has shown that he is a tougher dog than our tough guys,” says a hairdresser admiringly in the Barrio La Vega, a lively district stretching high into the hills. “Too bad he didn’t take more of them at once.”

The Afro-Venezuelan woman herself was Chavista until 2012 and supported the regime. After that, due to the economic crisis, she no longer voted for the regime but for the opposition and was viewed as suspicious by the neighborhood leaders. She only discussed politics with people she trusted. She was an election observer in her neighborhood. After the rigged elections in July 2024, she had to hide with relatives in another city because the regime’s henchmen were looking for her.

Today, the colectivos, the regime’s armed motorcycle militias, have disappeared. In the days following Maduro’s abduction, they still dominated the streets threateningly.

Otherwise, the capital is said to be as safe as it has not been for many years. Robberies, murders, and kidnappings are hardly a problem anymore. A few years ago, Caracas had the highest murder rate in South America. In surveys, insufficient security or drug trafficking no longer appear as important issues for the people.

...

Even in the barrios, once strongholds of Chavismo, there are hardly any supporters of Maduro.

The support for the government is minimal today, says the hairdresser. In her neighborhood San Miguel in the La Vega district, of 500 people, a maximum of 10 are still on the side of the government. Her district was once considered a Chavismo stronghold. Not much of that is left to see.

As in every community in Venezuela, there is the Plaza Simón Bolívar, named after the national independence hero. Four schools border the square. At midday, children in school uniforms stream across the square hand-in-hand with their parents, shaded by large tropical trees.

There is also the government assembly house. In this building, the feared Unidades de Batalla Bolívar-Chávez of the neighborhood had their headquarters. They were militarily organized block wardens who denounced opposition members, decided on food allocations, and organized protests in support of the regime. Today, retirees sit in the assembly house playing dominoes.

Nevertheless, the hairdresser does not want to be quoted by name. This is currently the case with many interlocutors in Venezuela. Although people openly criticize the regime, even when waiters, taxi drivers, passengers, or table neighbors can overhear, the fear of the repressive apparatus that persecuted people for many years still exists.

 

The regime is intact, but the Americans are in charge

The correspondent spoke with a dozen well-known opposition leaders, entrepreneurs, lawyers, social leaders, and municipal officeholders—but almost all hesitate to express their opinions publicly. Interviews with regime representatives are also not possible. The media are state-controlled. X and Chat-GPT do not work at all or are limited. Delcy Rodríguez communicates mainly via Instagram and TikTok. Like Maduro before her, she presents herself to her supporters as a leader working hard for the good of the people.

The regime seems intact. Delcy Rodríguez and her brother Jorge, the Congress president, as well as Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, who is responsible for the official and unofficial security apparatus of the regime, are still in power. Only Vladimir Padrino, the army chief, has largely withdrawn from public view. He is said to be ill.

After the attack, the U.S. left no doubt that they are in charge in Venezuela. Chris Wright, the U.S. Energy Secretary, spent two days in the country to assess the state of the oil industry. Interior Minister Doug Burgum was recently there to secure U.S. access to mining resources. General Francis Donovan, head of the U.S. Southern Command, met with the president to discuss security, drug control, and migration. He plans to return in the coming days. John Ratcliffe, CIA Director, was also on-site.

Alone the visit schedule shows that the Americans do not appear as visitors or state guests. They come to the country whenever it suits them. There is no official reception by Venezuelan authorities. “They act like governors visiting their province,” says a diplomatic observer.

 

Rubio talks about a three-stage process

The U.S. seems to be planning its engagement long-term. The run-down embassy is currently being renovated. It had been closed for seven years. American diplomats have temporarily moved into the Marriott Hotel in Caracas. Almost everyone in Venezuela says the country is under American tutelage—but this seems to bother no one. On the contrary. This is associated with the hope that the regime can no longer harass people as before—and that the U.S. will finally lead the country out of the economic and political isolation it has been in for more than a decade.

Delcy Rodríguez is compared to Scheherazade from One Thousand and One Nights, who tells the king a new story each night to postpone her execution. The comparison with the oriental tale fits well: Rodríguez is currently busy securing the goodwill of the U.S. One example is the oil law, which will for the first time give private companies control over the energy sector.

This fits the strategy the U.S. is pursuing in Venezuela. Foreign Minister Marco Rubio repeatedly refers to a three-stage process: first comes stabilization, then economic recovery, and finally political transition. Rubio does not ignore the topic of elections. He recently stated at a meeting with CARICOM heads of state that the next phase of the transition can only be legitimate if Venezuela holds “free, democratic, and fair elections.”

 

Elections later this year?

In the country itself, many hope for imminent elections. Optimists expect them to take place by the end of the year. At least a date must be set then.

For all interlocutors, it is a matter of course that María Corina Machado will run. There is consensus that the Nobel laureate holds the leadership role in the opposition. She is still outside Venezuela at present but is expected back any day. Even interlocutors who criticized her in the past now support her. A nationwide survey by the Meganálisis institute from early February shows a clear mood: 78 percent of respondents would vote for María Corina Machado, while more than 90 percent reject President Delcy Rodríguez as transitional president.

A diplomat says Rodríguez is currently trying to increase her popularity through economic recovery. “But what will she do when she realizes she has no chance in free elections?”

Thanks for sharing. Sounds like good news for the people . Even if the regime is technically still in place, there can be noticeable change from within. THe fact that the heavily armed colectivos (basically government sanctioned and heavily marked street thugs ) are gone is huge for public safety.

Edited March 9 by Spekulatius

[Spekulatius]

15 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

Misrepresenting. Literally nobody is defending Iran. I was calling out the utter uselessness of this war given it achieved nothing, cost a fortune (in money, people, relationships and reputation) and probably left things worse than before it started.  

Wether this war is useless is highly debatable, at least Khamenei is dead and even if this is probably more a symbolic victory it stills sents a message. Also Iran’s military capability for sure is severely degraded.

 

Success in the near term of us depends on re- opening the straight or Hormuz. I think it’s possible, because Iran has only Shahed drones in large supply and they are only good for stationary targets (due to fixed GPS programming) and likely won’t work against ships at all.

 

I think what a Trump does is very risky but it’s not fair to say at this point that this war is a failure or useless. in my opinion, so far the operation has been successful and has achieved as much as one could hope for in barely more than a week.

Edited March 9 by Spekulatius