"Iran - What Worked, and What Didn't Work?" Topic

Thanks Tort! 🙂

Then how much more so?

Pete Hegseth has a military background as an infantry officer in the Army National Guard, completing active-duty deployments to Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and earning awards including two Bronze Star Medals and the Combat Infantryman Badge. [1, 2, 3]

Military Service and Deployments
* Commissioning: Commissioned as an infantry officer in 2003 after graduating from Princeton University.
*
* Guantanamo Bay: Served as an infantry platoon leader at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.
*
* Iraq: Deployed to Iraq serving as an infantry captain and counterinsurgency instructor.
*
* Afghanistan: Deployed to Afghanistan where he participated in high-value target raids and led a quick-reaction force.
*
* Rank: Rose to the rank of Major before transitioning out of active National Guard roles. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
*

Honors and Awards
* Two Bronze Star Medals
*
* Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB)
*
* Two Army Commendation Medals
*
* Joint Service Commendation Medal [1, 2]
*
*

Sounds like pretty good qualifications to me …

I know no one here right now on this thread has CV as good as those.

Is there ?

In a company you may have a production supervisor in charge of a small production team. He may be an excellent production supervisor. But would you want him to be immediately promoted to CEO – probably not. He wouldn't have the skills in many areas that are needed for the CEO job – even if it is a production company. Sales, Corporate Administration, Logistics, Legal, Business Development, Finance etc.

Would you want a business area manager put over IT?

Yet unfortunately it has happened all too often.

Yet they never make an IT manager the head of business sales. 🤔

What about making them a Supreme Court Justice, just because of their race and genitalia?

Or having them hold an executive office because they believed they were a woman and wore a dress?

Yet… it happens.

In case you care: 18 of 35 principal, Senate-confirmed Secretaries of War (from 1926 to 2026) and Secretaries of Defense (1947–present) had either NO military service at all or only junior-level service (enlisted / company-grade officer ranks such as private, technician, 2nd lieutenant–captain / lieutenant, or staff/administrative roles with no significant unit command). (The total counts dual-tenure Rumsfeld once.

The remainder held senior ranks—major and above, or flag/general officers—or clear higher-level command/staff experience.)

NO military service (9)

George Dern
Charles E. Wilson
Neil McElroy
James Schlesinger
Harold Brown
Dick Cheney
William Cohen
Ashton Carter

Only junior / limited service or no command experience (9)

James W. Good (enlisted private, National Guard)
Harry Hines Woodring (2nd Lieutenant, Tank Corps)
Robert McNamara (Army Air Forces statistical control officer)
Elliot Richardson (Army medic)
Les Aspin (Army economist/staff assignment to OSD)
William Perry (Army technician, occupation of Japan)
Robert Gates (Air Force 2nd Lieutenant)
Leon Panetta (Army intelligence officer)
Chuck Hagel (Army infantry sergeant)

(Others such as Forrestal, Johnson, Lovett, Gates Jr., Clifford, Laird, Rumsfeld, Weinberger, Carlucci, Esper, and Hegseth served as junior officers—typically lieutenant/captain or equivalent—and are borderline; the count above uses a stricter reading of "only junior command or no command experience."

Senior/career officers with general/flag rank or higher command experience
Davis, Hurley, Stimson, Royall, Marshall, Mattis, Austin, etc.—are excluded from the 18.)

U.S. Secretaries of War (1926–1947)

Dwight F. Davis (1925–1929): U.S. Army Colonel, WWI; Distinguished Service Cross.
James W. Good (1929): Enlisted private, Iowa National Guard (1899). (junior/limited)
Patrick J. Hurley (1929–1933): Rose to Major General, U.S. Army (WWI/WWII).
George Dern (1933–1936): No military service.
Harry Hines Woodring (1936–1940): U.S. Army 2nd Lieutenant, Tank Corps, WWI. (junior)
Henry L. Stimson (1940–1945): U.S. Army Artillery Colonel, WWI (also prior SecWar 1911–1913).
Robert P. Patterson (1945–1947): U.S. Army officer, WWI; Distinguished Service Cross.
Kenneth C. Royall (1947): Artillery lieutenant (WWI) and U.S. Army Colonel (WWII).

U.S. Secretaries of Defense (1947–present)

James Forrestal (1947–1949): Naval aviator, U.S. Navy, WWI.
Louis A. Johnson (1949–1950): Infantry captain, U.S. Army, WWI.
George C. Marshall (1950–1951): Career General of the Army (5-star); Army Chief of Staff, WWII.
Robert A. Lovett (1951–1953): U.S. Navy pilot, WWI.
Charles E. Wilson (1953–1957): No military service.
Neil McElroy (1957–1959): No military service.
Thomas S. Gates Jr. (1959–1961): U.S. Navy intelligence officer, WWII.
Robert McNamara (1961–1968): U.S. Army Air Forces statistical control officer, WWII. (staff/junior)
Clark Clifford (1968–1969): U.S. Navy lieutenant commander, WWII.
Melvin Laird (1969–1973): U.S. Navy lieutenant, WWII.
Elliot Richardson (1973): U.S. Army medic, WWII. (junior/limited)
James Schlesinger (1973–1975): No military service.
Donald Rumsfeld (1975–1977, 2001–2006): U.S. Navy aviator and flight instructor.
Harold Brown (1977–1981): No military service.
Caspar Weinberger (1981–1987): U.S. Army infantry captain, Pacific, WWII.
Frank Carlucci (1987–1989): U.S. Navy lieutenant.
Dick Cheney (1989–1993): No military service.
Les Aspin (1993–1994): Economist, U.S. Army (assigned to OSD). (staff/limited)
William Perry (1994–1997): U.S. Army technician, post-WWII occupation of Japan. (junior/enlisted)
William Cohen (1997–2001): No military service.
Robert Gates (2006–2011): U.S. Air Force 2nd Lieutenant. (junior)
Leon Panetta (2011–2013): U.S. Army intelligence officer. (junior)
Chuck Hagel (2013–2015): U.S. Army infantry sergeant, Vietnam. (enlisted/junior NCO)
Ashton Carter (2015–2017): No military service.
James Mattis (2017–2019): Career U.S. Marine Corps General (4-star).
Mark Esper (2019–2020): U.S. Army infantry officer, Gulf War.
Lloyd Austin (2021–2025): Career U.S. Army General (4-star).
Pete Hegseth (2025–present): Infantry captain, U.S. Army National Guard (Iraq/Afghanistan deployments). (Secondary title "Secretary of War" authorized by executive action in 2025.)

Good stuff, thanks SB and 35th. It's interesting to think about how vast the changes have been though the course of time these men represent.

I have always said Hesgeth would make a good under secretary today. He is good for morale, PR, connecting with troops. These are goods skills to have. Just not enough to manage the enormity of the position he has now. Plus his subsequent media career doesn't match up with the job, except in managing PR. Working with Congress is one skill I was concerned about but that is not relevant for now. Procurement corruption, logistics, weapons development, planning, policy, naval construction, global vision. Lots of high level managment across an endless array of responsibilities.

All my opinion… My career as a law enforcement professional approached mid-level, but I spent a lot of time on the street…and this is a forever war like no other. I would never presume to think I could run the NYPD as a result. Even if I had gone to Princeton and worked in the media. I may not know what I am talking about re DOD. I just see what I see, know who I would want to follow. Results are what matter in this war, I would be happy to change my mind based on some results.

I don't know what it's really like to run DOD. I think that this is a chaotic era in history, full of uncertainty, unprecedented changes in technology, a sudden leap forward into change. No matter how hard we try to preserve things about our country as we have known it, the clock cannot be turned back. I don't think there will be any battleships.

Pentagon removed four from official Iran War death toll

link

Our Generals Are Not Even Good at Tactics: A Hard-Hitting Reply to Gary Anderson

link

The Strait of Hormuz: Cost Imposition Is Not Strategic Deterrence

link

Armand

Good stuff, thanks SB and 35th. It's interesting to think about how vast the changes have been though the course of time these men represent.

I have always said Hesgeth would make a good under secretary today. He is good for morale, PR, connecting with troops. These are goods skills to have. Just not enough to manage the enormity of the position he has now. Plus his subsequent media career doesn't match up with the job, except in managing PR. Working with Congress is one skill I was concerned about but that is not relevant for now. Procurement corruption, logistics, weapons development, planning, policy, naval construction, global vision.

All my opinion… My career as a law enforcement professional approached mid-level, but I spent a lot of time on the street…and this is a forever war like no other. I would never presume to think I could run the NYPD as a result. Even if I had gone to Princeton and worked in the media. I may not know what I am talking about re DOD. I just see what I see, know who I would want to follow. Results are what matter in this war, I would be happy to change my mind based on some results.

I don't know what it's really like to run DOD. I think that this is a chaotic era in history, full of uncertainty, unprecedented changes in technology, a sudden leap forward into change. No matter how hard we try to preserve things about our country as we have known it, the clock cannot be turned back. I don't think there will be any battleships.

OVI +1

SB +1

Pentagon removed four from official Iran War death toll

Well the source is very biased, of course. But I don't know all the exact facts. However, one was killed when disarming a downed Iranian drone, IIRC? That may not be being considered KIA ? Weren't the others killed by incoming ?

A Hard-Hitting Reply to Gary Anderson

Vandergriff is exactly right. I see some of the points he talks about, I had experienced while with 4 line Infantry Bns. While on active duty …

The Strait of Hormuz: Cost Imposition Is Not Strategic Deterrence

As long as Iran can fire a few missiles or drones at a few ships trying to traves the Strait. And the ship owners, fearing losing a very expensive ship the insurance companies won't cover. This will make the movement of oil thru that region critical to many in the world.

Some nations are building pipelines to not have to go thru the Strait …

Iran has to no long be a threat to ships there. As well as the other threat they are guilty of. They have to be gone … I don't care how long it takes …

Unbelievable if this is the case…killed disarming an Iranian drone…what is that if not killed in action?

I read that they died during the so-called ceasefire. The administration doesn't want to count them because then an argument can be made that the war had been continual. Thus, the administration would have violated the 1973 law that says Congress had to vote approval for the conflict to continue.

That was no cease fire. And why should the WH worry…Congress is not a factor.

Vandergriff makes some interesting military points, I think I have heard others here, veterans, say similar things. Except citing the German Army's 1933 manual describing the definition of "character" seems a little too creepy for my taste. "Character outweighs intellect" I would try using a little intellect to see if we might look for some of both and avoid Wehrmacht publications as a general rule.

And he jumps way out of his lane in his new book as a far right radical advocating a fight to end to the "cancer" of the Democratic Party, the totally evil and devious force destroying America. So credibility is an issue. Still waiting for someone on either end of the spectrum to make sense. Still no sign of Communists in my area….the means of production looks safe.

Beyond Airstrikes: The Missing Phase of the Iran Campaign

"…First, temporarily disable Kharg's loading infrastructure. Kharg handles the large majority of Iranian crude exports. The objective should not be destruction of the island or its storage facilities but the temporary disabling of loading arms, pumping systems, and electrical distribution while avoiding storage tanks and facilities whose damage could cause a major spill. The April 13 blockade proved the financial mechanism. Oxford Economics estimated the blockade cut off approximately 70 percent of Iran's export income. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent estimated resulting losses at roughly $170 USD million per day. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies independently estimated broader combined daily losses at $435 USD million. Those loading terminals are still operating. Trump told reporters: "I said, hit everything but the oil. Leave that little area." The market's adaptation has weakened, though not eliminated, the oil-price case for leaving Kharg's loading infrastructure untouched.

Second, systematically interdict the dark fleet in open water. United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) documented 47 ghost armada tankers generating over $5 USD billion in IRGC revenue through dark fleet exports since the MOU was signed. CENTCOM's May 29 disabling of the M/V Lian Star demonstrates one limited enforcement model for vessels that enter a declared blockade area, refuse lawful instructions, and continue toward a prohibited destination.

Third, enforce secondary sanctions on petrochemical buyers and prevent rebuilding of export capacity. Israeli airstrikes on Mahshahr and Asaluyeh in April 2026 struck sites identified as responsible for approximately 85 percent of Iran's petrochemical exports. Iran halted all exports on April 16 to prioritize domestic supply after the damage. As Iran attempts to rebuild production during any ceasefire period, secondary sanctions on Chinese and Indian end buyers enforced through Treasury's Operation Economic Fury should substantially limit the reconstitution of Iranian petrochemical revenue. Simultaneously, Washington should facilitate alternative crude, condensate, and petrochemical supply from the United States, Gulf partners, Venezuela, and the Atlantic Basin, tailored to the products Chinese and Indian buyers currently obtain from Iran, providing commercial cover to avoid Iranian supply as production is rebuilt.

Fourth, close the air logistics channel. The IRGC uses Mahan Air, designated by Treasury since 2011, as its primary weapons logistics airline, supporting IRGC-Qods Force logistics across the region. But Mahan is not the only vector. Treasury has also designated Caspian Air, Meraj Air, and Pouya Air for providing support to IRGC operations. Washington should press governments and aviation service providers to deny landing rights, refueling, maintenance, ground handling, and other support to Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)-designated carriers wherever current flight operations can be documented, closing the air logistics channel without kinetic action.

Fifth, disrupt the financial network. Iran accesses dollar-denominated transactions through front companies in the UAE, Turkey, and China. A coordinated Treasury action targeting these correspondent banking relationships would materially constrict the remaining formal financial channels…"

link

Armand

IMO humble civilian opinion, this sounds like a complex coordinated plan that the current WH staff might have difficulty executing in its current configuration. You would need to use the State Dept for real, find someone experienced to replace the political and unqualified Pulte, and stop the layoffs. Appoint a team leader everyone can at least live with, probably Rubio, so that the threads are held together…its too much for POTUS on his own. Bessent has not been able to predict the monthly US economy for most of the last year, I would not be certain about his estimates.

And we could end up back where we started, Iran violating the agreement while rebuilding with US tax dollars. These people do not give up. There is only one sure way to win, the Iranian leadership and the Guard must go. Strictly opinion.

Tort.
And…POTUS is never going to do that. He calls the shots.

Unbelievable if this is the case…killed disarming an Iranian drone…what is that if not killed in action?

If true … this is Bull …

That was no cease fire. And why should the WH worry…Congress is not a factor.

It seems in the Mid East a Cease Fire only means the shoot less …

Vandergriff makes some interesting military points, I think I have heard others here, veterans, say similar things.

Yes I believe that is correct …

Except citing the German Army's 1933 manual describing the definition of "character" seems a little too creepy for my taste. "Character outweighs intellect"

Yes, but as we have said, you must know your enemy … After WWII surviving German GENs would brief NATO on their actions and experience fighting the Russians. I even have a small FM(?) I got in ROTC. Written by German officers about their war with the Russians.

I will also make the point, that the US Air-Land Battle Doctrine has been said to be based on the Blitzkrieg. If you study and understand both … one can see some clear similarities, etc.

I would try using a little intellect to see if we might look for some of both and avoid Wehrmacht publications as a general rule.

Yes we know of the Wehrmacht's "sordid" history. But again we are looking at how successful they were with the Blitzkrieg, etc. Does not mean we have the same ideologies they did on other topics.

The Nazis were as bad as the Russians and even the IJFs of WWII in many situations. We don't copy those unfortunate inhuman actions of those former enemies. Well one is still an enemy …

And he jumps way out of his lane in his new book as a far right radical advocating a fight to end to the "cancer" of the Democratic Party, the totally evil and devious force destroying America. So credibility is an issue. Still waiting for someone on either end of the spectrum to make sense. Still no sign of Communists in my area….the means of production looks safe.

I can see that point of view … and to a point I agree. However, we should stay away from politics …

Oh and I am no apologists for the Nazis, etc. My Father a WWII Infantry SGT was WIA while fighting the Germans/Nazis. And I can't say too many bad things about Neo-Nazis, etc. So put the pitchforks & torches away. If anyone thought otherwise …

Beyond Airstrikes: The Missing Phase of the Iran Campaign

But the campaign is not over …

The US knows most likely everything the US destroys eventually we may be involved with rebuilding. Once the islamists are gone.

I think we also know, as we did in the later battles in the WWII PTO. Th IJFs were not going to surrender easily or at all. We have to look at that a similar concept with Iran's islamists. And no … we don't have or will use nukes. But we do have very strong air and naval assets. As well as US Army long range missile systems plus Apache AH-64 Gunships.

Plus if need be approx. 5000 USMC and 2000 Paratroops in the area. And I'm sure there is other assets in the AO. But those would classified I'd think.

However, we also know we can't fight the ground battles as we did in Iraq and A'stan. Iran is not either of those. To try to defeat Iran's islamists that way would be like walking into an ambush. But as has been side, those elite units[and probably others] could be used for raids, etc. And the threat of them in the AO is still seen as more problems for the islamists …

the administration would have violated the 1973 law that says Congress had to vote approval for the conflict to continue.

Yes and that 1973 Law has been discussed as actually being unconstitutional as Roe vs. Wade was. Also that is a law that came about in '73 IIRC. Which was also recently deemed as unconstitutional. It may be with the stress, etc. of the Vietnam War, etc. at that time. Maybe the SCOTUS saw things a little differently. But I'll freely admit I am no Constitutional expert. However, it appears a many in the Congress, news media, etc. are not either …

And why should the WH worry…Congress is not a factor.

The POTUS knows he can't get reelected. So that does free him up a bit in some ways. As well as we have seen time and time again … No matter what the POTUS or even his Admin does. There will at least pushback and much, much by some in Congress and as always the media …

Legion +1

All those who feel safe, should check out Berlin and NYC the last few days.

"Ain't no one safe"

I never thought otherwise Legion, knowing your story as I do.

Safe depends on where you live, 35th – as it always has. It has zero to do with this or any other POTUS. Crimes rises and falls due to socio economic fluctuations. Local enforcement surges may shift this once in a while for a time….

Look at per capita crime rates in the red states. Only one blue state, CA, is in the top ten, the rest are red. Crime is not very political, it's part of the human equation. Ohio has a higher violent crime rate than Illinois – where Chicago is. MA is two places above Ohio in violent crime. All three fall in the middle of the states list, although MA has a lower homicide rate than the other two. As usual DC leads everybody.

All very interesting, given the claims and perceptions about our political parties. In recent times 2023 was our lowest crime rate year, 2020 the highest- during the pandemic. 2025 may been lower than 2023 by a bit. The 1980s were the worst recent decade, the 2010s the best. Socio-economic factors were key. Nobody would blame Reagan for the crime rates back then. Sources are the FBI.

Tort you misunderstood.

Not a crime comment. (Even though those numbers are significantly down 😉)

No

Berlin:

Subject: Manhunt underway for suspect with ‘Islamist' ties after deadly Berlin Pride attack


link

The phrase "Islamist circles" (or "Islamic circles") refers to networks, groups, or communities of individuals who adhere to Islamism—a political ideology that seeks to guide social, political, and legal life by Islamic law (Sharia). [1, 2, 3, 4]
While the term can broadly describe non-violent political movements, it is most prominently used by European intelligence, law enforcement, and global media to describe monitored networks of religious extremists, fundamentalists, or suspected terrorists. [1, 2, 3]
The term is currently at the center of international news due to a major developing security incident in Germany:

Context: The Berlin Pride Attack
Berlin police and federal prosecutors are using the term "Islamist circles" to describe the background of Abdul B., a 21-year-old suspect accused of carrying out a deadly vehicle-ramming attack at Berlin's Pride festival (Christopher Street Day). [1]
* The Incident: On the night of Saturday, July 25, 2026, a van plowed into a crowd of festival attendees near the Brandenburg Gate in Tiergarten park, killing one person and injuring at least 16 others. Some attendees were also reportedly stabbed. [1]
* The Suspect: Berlin police spokesperson Florian Nath stated that the identified suspect was already well known to authorities as an active member of "Islamic circles" within the German capital. [1, 2]
* The Background: Security reports indicate that Abdul B. is a known supporter of the Islamic State (IS) who had previously tried to join the terrorist group. He had traveled to Lebanon in 2025, spent time in pre-trial detention upon his return, and was released in May 2026 under court orders to complete a de-radicalization program. [1, 2]

How Authorities Classify These "Circles"
When European agencies like Germany's Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz) monitor these networks, they generally divide them into two categories: [1]
* Legalist Islamists: Groups that do not openly advocate for violence but work to gradually transform society, laws, and political institutions from within to align with Sharia. [1, 2]
* Jihadist/Militant Circles: Underground or online networks that actively promote, plan, or execute acts of violent terrorism against secular, Western, or minority targets. [1, 2]

NYC:

Shouting "Allahu Akbar"!

Subject: New details emerge about NYC stabber Raul Morales: Quran, book on Che Guevara, Marx found from his apartment – The Times of India


link

Subject: Possible 'antisemitic stabbing' on Manhattan's Upper West Side leaves 2 wounded | Fox News


link

It increasingly looks as though the administration has given up on finding either a durable military or economic solution and is instead searching for a political exit. The latest rounds of re-bombing appear reactive and unfocused, especially when compared with the planning that seemed to characterize the initial strikes.

At the same time, the escalation does not appear to be containing Iran. If anything, it seems to be widening the conflict. U.S. bases continue to come under attack, and additional countries are being drawn into the confrontation.

The media and Congress did not make these decisions. Responsibility for the current course of events rests with the administration that chose it and with its principal regional ally.

Regime change doesn't look any closer than it did when this started. If anything, it seems we've accomplished the opposite. A growing share of Iranians now appear to want the IRGC to hit back rather than negotiate. Instead of weakening the regime, we may have made it more popular and more secure if it chooses to keep fighting.

I understand Prime Minister Netanyahu is expected to visit the United States this week, where he is once again likely to argue that Iran is only hours away from acquiring a nuclear weapon. At some point, it begins to feel like Lucy, Charlie Brown, and the football: each time the same urgent warning is presented, with the expectation that this time it will produce a different response.

The administration now finds itself in a difficult position. It may not want to disengage before the midterm elections, while Iran may want to also drag this on to hurt the administration politically.

Yes,sorry 35th, jumped the gun, as I sometimes do here.

Inc, the buck will stop with POTUS for most of the country. He got suckered in by Netanyahu, gave it a shot. I was hoping for a win once it got rolling, still am, but for me that's a new government in Iran. But once again, another POTUS finds out how hard it is to deal with these people.

It will trigger some serious political consequences. Congress needs to be included in running the government. Bad as they are, that's the way this country is supposed to work. Gaming the system to keep the war going made it look like we were misled as a nation and accountability was avoided. At least Iran has been hard hit. Time to rebuild munitions and rotate some ships home for maintenance at least.

I never thought otherwise Legion, knowing your story as I do.

👍👍 Yeah but there is still a few on TMP. So I like to make things clear …

Ohio has a higher violent crime rate than Illinois

Yeah I know, where I live used to be "all mobbed up" back in the day. Most people here I know have pistols and/or rifles … However, we don't see the foolish bull that happens in NYC, Chicago, Minneapolis, LA, etc.

it increasingly looks as though the administration has given up on finding either a durable military or economic solution and is instead searching for a political exit.

I think the POTUS wants to limit more damage to Iran's infrastructure, etc. It is clear Iran's islamists don't want to stop their quest for nukes. With what is going on at/in Pickaxe Mtn. That should have been no surprise … Again I see a bit of a parallel with the WWII IJFs.

Iran likes to play the long game, like the Chicoms. They know as long as they hold out there will be another POTUS, etc. in the future. They win by not being totally destroyed. They don't care who and how many have to die. As long as they can survive, even if only a few. The are moslems … they believe no matter what happens they will die and go to paradise, etc., etc. As they are fighting and killing infidels. Which is most of us here …

The latest rounds of re-bombing appear reactive and unfocused,

It seems to me this a continuing attrition of Iran's islamists assets. As long as those are being destroyed or killed that is a good thing.

At the same time, the escalation does not appear to be containing Iran. If anything, it seems to be widening the conflict. U.S. bases continue to come under attack, and additional countries are being drawn into the confrontation.

Yes the war continues … like in any war. The enemy will attack or attempt to e.g. the Germans at the Bulge or Berlin …

It is always move – counter move – repeat … This is the only chance there will be to rid the world of this islamists fanatics and their proxies. No other POTUS have ever attempted this. And probably ever will.

This will take time … GEN Clarke has said that repeatedly …

The media and Congress did not make these decisions. Responsibility for the current course of events rests with the administration that chose it and with its principal regional ally.

I don't think anyone thought that. However, media and some in Congress act more like a 5th Column. And their solution appears to withdraw and leave Iran's islamists to get deployable nukes.

Like the other POTUS's did before him. Some of their solutions was to give Iran $. USD We see how well that worked out.

Regime change doesn't look any closer than it did when this started. If anything, it seems we've accomplished the opposite. A growing share of Iranians now appear to want the IRGC to hit back rather than negotiate. Instead of weakening the regime, we may have made it more popular and more secure if it chooses to keep fighting.

Yes, as we see that seems to be the case. However, to not continue the attrition only more often and heavier seems at this time the best CoA … At this time …

The administration now finds itself in a difficult position. It may not want to disengage before the midterm elections, while Iran may want to also drag this on to hurt the administration politically.

I think that is a consideration that both the POTUS and Iran are aware of …

Again, if the US's walks away now … the future will be bleak. With the IDF attempting to finish the job.

As sooner than later, Iran will be firing nukes at … everyone … Which seems that may be looming. As if this conflict ends in some way, with the IRGC and their quest for nukes still intact… Well that outcome will not be good, to say the least. More dead all around and possible nuke contamination …

Just heard on FOX/Newsmax that CENTCOM CDR recommended that strikes stop/pause. As intel reports the strikes on Iran has inflicted as much damage as possible at this point. No longer obtaining much effect at this time.

US combat assets are still deploying to region …

As I have said, we don't get the intel that those in the WH, DOW, etc. do …

Will be interested in seeing next moves …

Reports are Saudia Arabia is striking targets in Iran and Yemen …

The IDF is prepping to attack targets in Iran when required. They don't want the islamists still in charge of Iran.

The Ukraine has hit an Iranian vessel bringing oil to Russia. So the war expands to that front …

Like any conflict … it is like a Chess Game, so to speak … move – countermove – counter: countermove, repeat …

Like I said "ain't none of us safe"

Subject: Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24): "BREAKING: The man who carried out today's mass-stabbing against 3 women in Paris says "It was Allah who ordered me to do it"" | XCancel


link

That's 3 in two days

The threat and war with militant islam continues. And some just refuse to see, militant islam is dangerous. But yet some still vote them into power in the US. What are they missing ? Common sense ? Logic ? Reason ? Their understanding or lack thereof of history ?

The Limits of Air and Naval Power Against Iran

"In late February 2026, the United States and Israel launched a sustained air campaign against Iran that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and decapitated much of the regime's top leadership. The President of the United States quickly framed the objective in maximalist terms: there would be "no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER" to ensure that Iran "never" acquires a nuclear weapon. Months later, after intermittent ceasefires, a June memorandum of understanding that both sides spun in opposite directions, and a July resumption of strikes focused on degrading Iran's ability to threaten the Strait of Hormuz, the Islamic Republic's core institutions remain intact. A new leadership has coalesced. Missile and drone attacks continue. No nationwide uprising has threatened the regime. The United States has relied overwhelmingly on air and naval power, with only limited ground forces present in the broader CENTCOM area of responsibility—forces insufficient to execute major maneuver warfare, seize territory, or pose a regime-threatening ground capability.

This outcome should surprise no serious student of military history. Governments that perceive the stakes as existential—regime survival, loss of the homeland, or national independence—have repeatedly absorbed tremendous punishment from the air and sea when they retain the ability to contest the issue on the ground or simply outlast the attacker. The current campaign against Iran fits squarely inside that historical pattern. Without a credible threat of, or actual application of, substantial ground forces, the prospects for forcing full Iranian surrender or regime collapse remain low.

These patterns help explain why pure air and naval campaigns so often fall short of decisive political results. In his landmark study Bombing to Win, Robert Pape demonstrates that coercive air campaigns fall into two fundamental categories: punishment (inflicting pain on infrastructure and elites to break political will) and denial (destroying an adversary's physical capability to control territory or wage war). The current U.S. strategy mistakenly treats a punishment campaign as if it can achieve denial results without boots on the ground. Threatening tit-for-tat escalation—such as bombing a key bridge or power plant for every American warfighter killed—is classic punishment. It attempts to manipulate the regime's cost-benefit math rather than decisively pursue a singular objective. Against a leadership facing existential stakes, punishment rarely breaks political resolve; it merely escalates infrastructure destruction while leaving the regime's core coercive machinery intact…"

link

Armand

How China's Reported QW-12 Air Defense Missile Delivery to Iran Could Affect U.S. & Israeli Air Operations

"China's QW-12 man-portable air defense missile system (MANPADS) could significantly increase the operational challenges facing future U.S. and Israeli air campaigns against Iran by threatening aircraft and unmanned systems that sustain precision strike operations after the opening wave of attacks. While the missile is unlikely to deny the overwhelming air superiority enjoyed by U.S. and Israeli fifth-generation fighters, its mobility, passive operation, and modern infrared guidance could complicate helicopter operations, tactical UAV missions, special operations support, and post-strike reconnaissance around Iran's most sensitive military and nuclear facilities…"

link

Armand

It certainly appears that we are in a state of strategic stalemate. It also appears that we gravely miscalculated Iran's resolve. I read that the Military is asking the troops for ideas on strategies to bring Iran to heel. Forever-war accusations and negative popular opinion influencers aside, it does appear that the war is getting away from us.

t also appears that we gravely miscalculated Iran's resolve.

I think we called off Israel's regime change attacks too soon in order to try and cut a peace deal that wouldn't last anyway under current leadership. Restart the attacks on the regim and keep working down the ladder from top to bottom until you reach the people more interested in survival than ideology.

Yes, SB, I think this as well. The only way to win. Anything less is a political bailout. We can't continue with these BS announcement about talks that do not seem to exist just to relieve public pressure. We started this round and we had better finish it.

Trump can still win the Iran war Spare the bridges, crush the IRGC

"As the war in Iran enters its fifth month, President Trump is growing increasingly frustrated. He sees few good options to end the war and talks of "lunatics" and "revenge mode". As I write, he is meeting Netanyahu to add credibility to his implicit threat to the Revolutionary Guards, who now run Tehran very much as the SS did once Hitler died, with no plan other than to keep fighting, and a readiness to hang anyone who disagrees. (On Sunday they publicly hanged 18-year old Erfan Esfandiari in Isfahan, an exemplary victim precisely because of his youth and innocence.)

But there is a way. And to discover how, it is important to recall how this latest bout of warfare started: with June's botched "Memorandum of Understanding". This was hurriedly negotiated in chronically treacherous Pakistan by Vice President Vance — whose many talents do not include any expertise about the millenarian ideology of Iran's current rulers — and Trump's two favourite businessmen: his son-in-law Jared Kushner, and the real estate lawyer, Steve Witkoff, who habitually closes deals very rapidly by not being too obsessive about the details…"

link

Armand

I think Trump is listening to sh1tty advice like he did on the Covid issue. He's acting the same way -- with frustrate deference and constraint when his gut we telling him something else. Too many people are telling him he has to stop the war before the midterms, or Middle Eastern "allies" who want stability for themselves on almost any terms telling him that they can help him cut the peace deal he needs… I think his gut says crush 'em. He should stop taking bad advice, stop positioning against Israel for the midterms and just go blow the h3ll out of Iran's leadership at every level they can be found.

I vote for this…and stop telling everyone there are hopeful talks every few days so the gang can make another killing in the stock market. It may be that the expenditure of ammunition is playing a role in the strategy and this needs to be rectified. China will not run short of ammo in a war.

I will agree that it does seem like Charlie Brown and Lucy at times. We should never stop the attacks. Make them negotiate while continuously under attack.

Tort, almost everyone benefits off the market now. 401k's, pensions invested in the markets, etc. Not just those at the top.

I dare say, everyone on TMP from the U.S. benefits from what happens in the market.

It does seem those worrying the most about ammo today, are the same that kept telling us to send more! More! MORE! To the Ukraine.

We could never send them enough. 😉

The ammo being sent to Ukraine is on the whole different from the ammo in short supply due to the Iran conflict. There is some small overlap but very little.Most ammo supplied to Ukraine has been 105mm and 155m shells. There has also been significant anti-tank missiles and MANPADS. There has also been HIMARS missiles. None of these have been used in any quantity in the Iran conflict.
The overlap really comes on the Patriots and ATACAMS.
On the Patriot there have been about 600 sent to Ukraine compared to about 1400 used in Iran. However that is not the whole story. The majority of the ones sent to Ukraine were PAC-2 version (there were some PAC-3 but they were in the minority). The ones used in Iran were PAC-3 versions. so the usage of PAC-2s in Ukraine is not responsible for the shortage of PAC-3s which are the ballistic missile defense version,
On the ATACMS, the story is similar. The majority sent to Ukraine were block 1s (the short range version)while the ones used against Iran were Block 1As. (some block 1As have been sent to Ukraine but not many).
The main shortage in addition to the Patriot PAC-3s and ATACAM Block 1As are the PrSM, Tomahawks, JASSM, SM.2, SM.3, SM.6s and THAAD. So the majority of the shortage is totally unrelated to ammunition supplied to Ukraine.

A strange possibility, if Ukraine does set up production of a low cost Patriot PAC-3 production, as currently being discussed, and the conflict ends – then Ukraine may become part of the solution for recovering stocks.

On the comment about those on TMP worrying most about current missile stocks are the ones telling us to send more to Ukraine.

I would definitely count myself amongst those worrying most about missile stocks. I am very concerned about the implications for the Asia Pacific region, which I am more than open to discuss.

On sending more to Ukraine. I don't believe that I ever commented on that issue. However, I do not find myself disagreeing with the premise.

As explained in my posts above, I don't believe that they are as inconsistent positions as you may have believed.

I too am worried about our ability to face China with a shortage on missiles. But I have not said I want us to send more to Ukraine. Like Martyn said, most of that tends to be different weaponry and I think what we are sending now seems to be doing the job well.

I think that the "Pro" people here on TMP think we "Con" people are coming from the flaming liberal wing. Actually, most of us are more center or moderate or leaning right people. Thus, this leads to assumptions that are not always valid.

Go back through the old Ukraine posts and you will see them.

Yes, Patriots and ATACAMS are the overlap.

But not the point. The point is, they did not complain about the supplies going there, even when the shortages in certain shells was being pointed out.

"We must supply the Ukrainians!" Was what was shouted.

For me, Iran is and has always been a priority. More of a threat to individual citizens of the U.S. than Russia in the Ukraine.

But if you want to really start to produce these weapons more quickly, then contact your representatives and tell them to get rid of these. (Maybe why the talk of letting the Ukraine build them 🤔)

The inability of the U.S. defense industrial base to rapidly scale up production for complex weapons—like Patriot interceptors, Tomahawks, and precision missiles—is hindered by deeply embedded governmental acquisition regulations, strict export controls, and highly specific union contract frameworks. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
While the White House has pushed major defense contractors to drastically accelerate output, the system is bound by legal and labor structures built for peace, not rapid wartime mobilization. [1, 2]

1. Governmental Regulations and Bureaucratic Bottlenecks
* International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) & Security Clearance Controls:
* The Hinderance: ITAR strictly regulates the technical data, blueprints, and components used to build advanced missile systems.
* The Impact: Prime contractors (like Lockheed Martin and RTX) cannot easily sub-contract components to commercial or foreign factories to bypass domestic assembly lines. Every sub-tier supplier must be ITAR-certified. If a part is delayed, a manufacturer cannot simply swap it for a commercial alternative without going through months—or years—of federal recertification. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
* The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Slow Contracting Timelines:
* The Hinderance: FAR requires massive administrative documentation, cost auditing, and rigorous transparency checks before contracts can be modified or expanded.
* The Impact: Long procurement cycles disincentivize smaller, innovative Tier-2 and Tier-3 suppliers. These upstream vendors supply critical materials like thermal batteries, solid rocket motors, and specialized electronics. Because the Pentagon's contracting processes are historically slow, these single-source suppliers face high financial risks to self-finance or expand facility footprint on a whim. [1, 2, 3, 4]
* Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Specialty Chemical Regulations:
* The Hinderance: Building advanced solid rocket motors (used in Patriot, ATACMS, and Tomahawk missiles) requires toxic chemicals, heavy metals, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and complex propellants.
* The Impact: Expanding a chemical or manufacturing facility requires extensive environmental impact studies and EPA permits, a process that takes years. Factories face operational shutdowns if strict internal environmental controls or toxic material handling standards are breached. [1, 2, 3]

2. Labor Union Regulations and Constraints
The highly technical nature of weapon assembly means the labor pool is dominated by specialized aerospace union workforces (such as the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers). [1]
* Strict Overtime and Shift Limitations:
* The Hinderance: Defense manufacturing lines cannot easily operate on a mandated 24/7 emergency footing due to collective bargaining agreements designed to preserve work-life balance.
* The Impact: While the Pentagon pushes for faster output, newly negotiated union contracts (such as recent agreements at major missile assembly hubs) have actively quashed or restricted mandatory overtime proposals. Shifting to a multi-crew, continuous 24-hour cycle requires union renegotiation and extensive premium-rate overtime compensation, which drives up program costs and runs into strict contract caps. [1, 2]
* Highly Rigid Job Classification Rules:
* The Hinderance: Collective bargaining agreements strictly define what tasks specific workers can perform.
* The Impact: In a typical unionized aerospace factory, a worker certified to build a specific fuselage component cannot simply be shifted to an adjacent assembly line experiencing a bottleneck (like wiring or guidance systems). This rigid job-duty division prevents cross-utilization of the existing workforce, forcing defense companies to wait months to recruit, background check, and train entirely new workers for specific, vacant slots. [1, 2, 3]
* Federal Labor Compliance and Wage Laws:
* The Hinderance: Defense contractors are bound by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and specific federal contracting laws like the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act.
* The Impact: The government mandates that contractors pay severe premiums for overtime work (at least 1.5 times the basic rate) and maintains strict recordkeeping audits. To avoid budget overruns, defense program managers rarely authorize continuous overtime, artificially pacing production speeds to stick within rigid 40-hour workweek baselines.

35thOVI +1

And in a way both Ukraine and Iran are a "Spanish Civil War" teaching moment. Better to learn here than in a hot war with China (God forbid).