Posted on 07/30/2026 5:48:33 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
At first glance, Iran's surprise missile strike on a US base in Jordan earlier this week appeared difficult to explain. The attack effectively ended the fragile pause in direct US-Iran fighting and prompted Washington to resume strikes inside Iran. It was also unusual.
If Tehran's priority had been a ceasefire, the strike is difficult to explain. But if Iranian leaders judge that a controlled confrontation could offer greater strategic leverage, the decision becomes more understandable.
One possible explanation is that Tehran believes that, despite its risks, a limited war serves its interests better.
Today, neither side appears ready for an all-out war. Washington has shown little appetite for a much broader regional conflict that could threaten energy infrastructure in the region, draw in more countries, push oil prices higher, and further stretch US military resources.
Iran may also try to avoid an all-out war because its weakened air defences, vulnerable industrial infrastructure and sanctions-constrained economy make rebuilding losses increasingly difficult and expensive.
Iran may have concluded that this creates room for a strategy based not on military victory but on sustained pressure.
A prolonged ceasefire under current conditions could actually leave Tehran in a weaker position. The US naval blockade of Iranian ports would continue, sanctions would remain, and Iran would still be largely excluded from international energy markets.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and other oil and gas exporting countries in the region could gradually resume normal exports while Iran remained economically isolated.
A limited conflict could change this landscape for Iran. Although Iran is paying a heavy military and economic price, disruption in the Strait of Hormuz and, through the Houthis, pressure around Bab al-Mandab continue to affect global shipping, insurance costs and energy markets. Even limited uncertainty forces governments, shipowners and importers to pay attention to...
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
Yeah BBC - that’s the “strategy”, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger - unless it maims and cripples you.
Others are learning about US strategy and weaponry whenever Iran “misbehaves”.
Not quite right. The election is in November, but the offices begin in January. If the Republicans lose big, Trump will have nothing to lose for almost 3 months and could really step up attacks.
Nuke their nuke sites, rendering them useless. Then make a post-WWII Japan out of them.
So you want to set the precedent that it's OK to use nuclear weapons and MAD no longer applies.
Ever think of the second-, third- and fourth-order consequences of that?
I disagree. If the Republicans lose the House and Senate, the Democrats will still be able to find courts to block anything he does, as they do now.
If the Democrats win, then the justices who would otherwise reverse these decisions will have to operate under a government that in January won't protect them from leftist retaliation, and he'll effectively be hamstrung.
We're that close to losing our country. We can't let that happen, and he can't let that happen by fumbling on Iran.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.