[robowombat]

The interest of the US is that there be no significant disruption of hydrocarbon production and transport from the Gulf region. The economic falling dominoes would be more negative than any US Iranian clash. A clash with Iran would not mean a war unless the Iranian leadership is far more psychotic than it seems. A shooting even is just that. If some Iranian by some chance did score a parthian shot then the US forces under Trump would extract the appropriate pound of flesh. Military forces are the ultimate executive agency of national interest and diplomacy. That necessitates a certain degree of physical risk. There is a major difference between this operation and the gross fatuity and foolishness of the what and why of the the USS Cole incident.

A annoying as it is to many for the US as acting as protector of wealthy Arab oil states the reverse is worse. No US or great power to exert some control over the sheiks leads to general chaos in a vital part of the world. That is pretty much why Great Britain acted as the Gulf hegemon. It grew out of the armed chaos in the Gulf which was generating piratical depredations on shipping in Indian waters. It took a century but that was the basis for that expensive and tiresome activity. Today with the oil sheikdoms the situation is somewhat analogous.

Those who loudly protest this situation should consider they are 75 years late. The meeting of FDR and the King of SA in 1944 started the relationship.

[allendale]

Any disruptions of the Gulf oil supply (primarily to Europe and China) would be temporary and would not be catastrophic. However American deaths would be tragic and could never be recovered. Also every time an American bomb is dropped or American soldiers fire their guns, more and more implacable, needless enemies are created who with their nihilistic mentality will sacrifice themselves to do harm to America. These entanglements are weakening America in many ways.