The Iran War: The Eagle and the Lions

Big Serge Thought ^ | 3/17/26 | Big Serge

[EnderWiggin1970]

Like most people in the western hemisphere, I woke on February 28 to an overwhelming rush of footage, reports, and rumors from the Middle East. The United States and Israel had launched a surprise attack on Iran overnight (after the markets closed for the weekend), and were pummeling the Iranians with massed air strikes. Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Hosseini Khamenei - a longtime fixture in regional politics - was dead, according to soon to be confirmed Israeli reports. A few hours later, Iran began retaliating with missile strikes on targets all around the region, including Israel, American bases, and the Gulf States. We were off to the races.

In the weeks that have since elapsed, the emerging Iran War has been subject to analytic confusion that becomes nearly overwhelming. In some sense, this is baked into the conflict given the participants. Israel is, to put it mildly, a controversial state that occupies an inordinate amount of cognitive real estate in the United States. Depending on who you ask, Israel is either a prophetically heralded political avatar of God Almighty, which the United States is bound by sacred obligation to defend, or it is an overtly nefarious parasite which manipulates the American government through a mixture of campaign contributions, religious trickery, and blackmail.

All of this is bad enough on its own, and sure to confuse conversation about why and how the war is being fought. To make matters worse, however, the Trump Administration has been unusually bad about communicating either motives or explicit aims for the conflict. In the span of barely a week, rationales were furnished which ranged from a need to preempt an Iranian first strike, destroy Iran’s conventional missile capabilities, prevent Iranian nuclearization, secure Iranian natural resources, preempt Iranian retaliation ...

---

TOPICS: Government; Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: hahasubstack; idf; iran; iranwar; israel; lookwhohatesjews; mullahloversonfr; strategy; substackloser

[EnderWiggin1970]

If anyone can cut through the fog of war and analytical confusion, it is this guy, so I'm glad to see he has weighed in on the Iran war.

[Candor7]

Any analysis of the Iran war that does not couch itself in the fact that this is a wart for world wide ascendancy, a battle between a World Wide Caliphate Movement and freedom of economy, freedom of the seas and life beyond fear.

In simple terms it is a war between the demon Allah and YHWH.We are at war because the West will NOT surrender to Islam.The Islamofascists regard this war as a religious war, and we must also see it as a war for freedom from such tyranny.

So this analysis is not properly contextual.

Lets get real about the context.

The enemy will fight to the death, they are apocalyptic religious fanatics.We must acknowledge that we must destroy them utterly down to the last man.

[mitch5501]

"...because the West will NOT surrender to Islam." Christianity will not, the west is already in the process.

[mitch5501]

"...because the West will NOT surrender to Islam."

Christianity will not, the west is already in the process.

[Candor7]

Amen.

[DeplorablePaul]

Recall that a key item in Obama’s Iran nuclear deal was that the US committed to defending Iran from an Israel air attack. Obama.

[Uncle Miltie]

Pluswhich, China.

[nathanbedford]

Yes, I think you have gone right to the heart of the matter.

The article is good, it's reasonably well balanced, although slightly biased, and deals with all the factors point by point. Yet, with all its reasoned analysis and depth of detail it fails to grasp the essential truth about this war: it is for existential survival, or we have no business in it at all.

It comes down to this: whether one believes that Iran's theocratic regime is irretrievably committed to a murderous jihad that will in high probability eventually attack the United States with nuclear weapons. If one so believes, our war in Iran is the only prudent policy.

But if one does not believe that, or instead believes the regime will be overthrown by their own people, or, if one believes that the mullahs of Iran will come to Jesus in the fullness of time, that is before they and get the bomb, then one would certainly conclude that the war is worse than ill-advised, it is criminal, likely to fail at best and very likely to lead to unanticipated wars and misery.

It is this question, this issue, that should decide the war for the nation. All the rest is buttressing arguments that come down on one side or the other for those who have already made their decision. One can consult the author for those arguments.

Your reply brings the issue home.

[fruser1]

why and how the war is being fought

It's actually pretty simple.

Trump has thought for decades that Iran is a pain in the ass and should be dealt with.

Now that he's prez, he's doing it.

If you don't like that, don't vote for him in 2028.

[Candor7]

Thank you for your kind words. Trumps opponents will continually refuse the existential context required.

And we need to call them out on it.

[marktwain]

Good work. You framed it properly.

The Iranian regime itself, in its doctrine, is the best proof that your analysis is correct.