"'We are undermining this regime in the hope of giving the Iranian people an opportunity to remove it,' Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said, although he conceded that would 'not happen easily.' The death of Mr. Larijani also renews serious questions about President Trump’s endgame for the war: he has not clearly articulated his goals or how the assault on Iran might end, and he has acknowledged that many of the Iranian officials that the United States might have negotiated with have been killed. 'We don’t even know their leaders,' Mr. Trump said on Monday. 'We have people wanting to negotiate,' he added. 'We have no idea who they are.'"
From "Iran War Live Updates: Israel Says It Has Killed Iran’s De Facto Leader/Ali Larijani, Iran’s top security official, was killed in an overnight strike, the Israeli military said. His death would deal another severe blow to Iran’s power structure" (NYT).
Posts
76 comments:
Trump losing because winning too much.
I have some good news ………..and some bad news. You are the new leader of Iran…….today. It’s been nice knowing you.
@DataRepublican (small r) has issued a new substack article on the Iran conflict, dated yesterday
https://datarepublican.substack.com/p/data-analysis-of-the-state-of-the-dad
Someone thought they were slowing down? I mean it is no longer a target rich environment, but who thought Israel wasn't serious about eliminating these threats? Even if you believe the silly TACO stuff, why would you believe Israel isn't staying the course? I know some people don't really understand how much the Sauds, Jordanians, and Emirates want Israel to keep taking out the Iranian leaders.
All these NYT articles seem low on inside sources hostile to the Trump administration. I sense frustration on the part of the NYT at the lack of leakers, so they backfill with other forms of speculative detraction.
The lack of an overtly stated endgame is by design. What the Trump team wants the Iranians to think is nothing is off the table. As far as a time table is concerned, the Marines are slowly steaming towards Iran. Trump is trying to get Iran to resign before checkmate.
Key Details on Potential Deployment:
82nd Airborne Division Status: The 82nd Airborne’s Immediate Response Force (IRF) remains "postured to answer the nation's call," often able to deploy within 18 hours.
Training Canceled: The abrupt cancellation of a major training exercise for the 82nd Airborne has sparked intense speculation regarding a potential deployment.
Official Position: The U.S. has not confirmed, but has also not ruled out, sending ground troops to Iran.
Forces in Region: The U.S. has recently moved 2,500 Marines and a warship to the region to support ongoing operations.
The Fayetteville Observer
The Fayetteville Observer
+5
While the 82nd Airborne acts as the "immediate response force" and is often used for high-risk, rapid deployment scenarios, no official orders for an invasion of Iran have been issued as of mid-March 2026.
'We are undermining this regime in the hope of giving the Iranian people an opportunity to remove it,' Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said
And if the Iranian people do not remove the mullah/IRGC regime, what then?
@Howard:
Yes, Trump's 2020 action against Iran was to kill their foreign terrorism manager -- Qasem Soleimani of the heavy eyebrows.
Soleimani spent years tormenting the US, Israel, and many others with impunity. Mister tit-for-tat Trump now wants Iran to "watch its back" for years.
See Wikipedia's sympathetic "kind old man" photo choice here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qasem_Soleimani
Don't forget, ground troops will have ROI's designed by Pete Kegseth, not JAG-offs.
Top U.S. Counterterrorism Official Resigns Over Concerns With Iran War ~ WSJ
"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby." ~ Joe Kent
If Tulsi Gabbard had any integrity, she would have resigned with Kent because she feels exactly the same war about the Iran War.
But she has no integrity.
Whatever-its-name-is-today is an expert in lack of integrity.
In a way, the Media and our weak kneed Allies are backing Trump into a corner. Personally, I think he's going to call everyone's bluff if Iran doesn't come to heel.
Kent, a former Green Beret and two-time GOP congressional hopeful, was confirmed as the president’s principal counterterrorism adviser by the Senate last summer in a 52-44 vote. He previously worked as chief of staff to Gabbard.
He served in the Army for two decades and completed nearly a dozen combat deployments, receiving six bronze stars. He later worked as a paramilitary officer for the CIA.
Kent's resignation is a sign that Trump is prepared to go the distance. This "betrayal" will only stiffen his resolve.
Kent was a Democrat as of 2021; this is typical party flipping in an era of major realignment. Many people are rethinking their politics, or actually thinking for the first time in their lives.
LE: maybe Tulsi thinks she can have more effect pissing on the inside of the tent rather than outside.
Shannon Mary Kent (née Smith, May 11, 1983 – January 16, 2019) was a United States Navy cryptologic technician and member of JSOC's Intelligence Support Activity who was killed in the 2019 Manbij bombing.
Kent has a ton of skin in the game
Kent has always been an isolationist, so his resignation shouldn't be a surprise. I can respect the fact he'd rather resign than participate in an action he does not believe in. Nothing wrong with that.
If Iran did want to negotiate an end to the war, would it be Trump or Netanyahu who would be the decision-maker? We don't (as far as I can tell) have any specific arrangement with Israel over these things.
"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation …”
Does Kent ever define what it would take for Iran to be an “imminent” threat? Is Iran not an “imminent” threat until they acquire nuclear weapons? Or do we wait until a nuclear weapon is detonated over Manhattan? Or do we let Manhattan slide and wait until one goes off in downtown Washington. DC?
Howard said...
The lack of an overtly stated endgame is by design. What the Trump team wants the Iranians to think is nothing is off the table.
Yep. To me, what is happening seems obvious, and I simply don't see the need to help correct those that don't "get it", and especially those that do not want to "get it".
I expect Democrats who voted against Kent's confirmation are likely singing his praises now. Shameless hacks.
“… serious questions about President Trump’s endgame for the war: he has not clearly articulated his goals….” Why in the world would Trump delineate his endgame or his goals in the face of seditious Democrats and their pet media? And what “serious questions” can the mediaswine at NYT have about his unarticulated “endgame”? Oh! I know! “Why won’t he tell us?” /s
"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation …” [My emphasis]
Does Joe Kent ever define what it would take for Iran to be an “imminent” threat? Does it become an “imminent” threat when it announces that it has constructed some number of nuclear weapons? Or do we wait until one explodes in downtown Washington, DC? Maybe at the corner of 13th and K streets?
Joe Kent is angling for a lucrative consulting gig with the leftmediaswine peddling Democrat bullshit. Trump is a billionaire lame duck. What are Israel and the Jewish lobby to him?
If memory serves, Larijani was the one in charge of gunning down peaceful protesters in the street.
Good riddance.
I simply don't see the need to help correct those that don't "get it", and especially those that do not want to "get it".
Not to mention those in Iran, whereby it undermines our war plans for them to "get it".
I guess the worst possible scenario is they get nukes. Which they might have done without the war.
The next worse is oil prices are elevated for a period. Let's say the Hormuz is permanently closed.
Pipelines would be built to get oil to the Med like the Petroline that already exists.
Expensive but it removes their threat.
Its just like how everyone re-routed ships to make the Houthi threat toothless.
Yes, its more expensive, but you remove their leverage.
Perhaps a salient feature of an "endless war" is for the President to tell everyone what we will and will not do, thus making it easy for the enemy to trap us in our own endgame?
"Shannon Mary Kent (née Smith, May 11, 1983 – January 16, 2019) was a United States Navy cryptologic technician and member of JSOC's Intelligence Support Activity who was killed in the 2019 Manbij bombing."
Its understandable that a guy who's wife is killed wants to create a mental model where a simplistic solution would have created peace.
But its cope.
When Iran took our embassy hostage, Israel was not the reason. When they sold weapons to Russia its not because of Israel.
Sunnis and Shias fight brutally among themselves. ISIS killed tons of Shia people. Israel didn't start that. Nor the Iran Iraq war.
So its very simplistic to assume "no Israel = peace"
Even the most nuanced thinking, might be the formation of Israel was a bad idea. This doesn't mean therefore that you "erase it" because that's also a bad idea.
Its kind of path dependent. oh if only...yeah, that's water under the bridge.
I'm being nice and not assuming anti-semitism.
"..Kent wrote that in his first term, Trump understood how to "decisively apply military power without getting us drawn into never-ending wars," citing the killing of former Iranian general Qassem Soleimani..."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-counterterrorism-official-resigns-protest-us-war-iran
NEVER-ENDING WARS
people "CLAIMED" that this war would end "on April 1"..
That was MORE THAN 11 and Half MONTHS ago!
This war has continued since the day it started,
and so far HAS NOT ENDED!
All HATERS of The Jooze MUST rally together to stop this insanity!
a nuclear armed Islamic Revolutionary Republic would be a
GOOD THING for ALL true believers!
RALLY TOGETHER!
only submitting to Islam will EVER bring an end to endless war!
Kill enough of the leaders and let Israel’s military supply ground troops.
And “endgame” is a consultant’s term for “goal(s).” You get to charge $1,000 an hour when you use buzzwords.
"I can respect the fact he'd rather resign than participate in an action he does not believe in. Nothing wrong with that."
Nothing wrong with quietly resigning and giving your explanation privately to your superiors. Resigning with a big public statement undermining your former employer is traitorous and opportunistic.
Howard - Now do Kent's current wife...
You don't rise to the top of the Mafia based on your fund raising efforts for the Red Cross. You don't rise to power in Iran based on you "pragmatism". I read the NYT article. It made it seem that this guy's death was a setback for peace......I see no reason to doubt Kent's honesty and commitment to his principles. I don't know how this will turn out. If it turns into splat, he'll look good. If not, well, no big deal.......It's much easier to effect regime change in America than in Iran. That's a good thing. I've heard of a lot of farms going bankrupt, but I never heard of any collective farm going bankrupt.....I like to think that if someone in the Trump administration can change his mind, then maybe it's possible for some in the IRGC to also change their mind.
The death of Mr. Larijani also renews serious questions about President Trump’s endgame for the war: he has not clearly articulated his goals or how the assault on Iran might end
Gaslighting at its finest. Let me guess, NYT, your'e still claiming the Holodomor didn't happen, and that Stalin never killed anyone, right?
Trump's been clear: unconditional surrender
Germany managed that after Hitler was dead, Iran will eventually manage it, too.
Yes, the goal is to completely and utterly destroy the gov't ruling Iran. Yes, the Left hates this, because they love anti-American and Jew killed terrorists.
That's all this is
Kent apparently got caught leaking classified information, and had his security clearance pulled. He was fired, he didn't quit.
But a guy who blames the Jews for his wife being killed by ISIS is clearly a worthless piece of shit whose absence benefits us all
Lance said...
'We are undermining this regime in the hope of giving the Iranian people an opportunity to remove it,' Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said
And if the Iranian people do not remove the mullah/IRGC regime, what then?
Then they keep on bombing until everyone in the gov't above their moles is dead, and their moles take over
"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation …”
Shit for brains Joe Kent was in charge of the Counter Terrorism Agency, and tries to claim that Iran, funder of world-wide anti-American terrorism, "posed no imminent threat to our nation".
Apparently he was sad that Iran hadn't managed to murder a hundred Americans in the last 10 months?
The Israelis think they have the right to kill anyone in the world they dislike. For any reason they want. The only way to stop them is with retaliation. It wont be by reasoning with them. Or appealing to their morality. They don't seem to have any.
I love how Trump goes "He killed 30000 people" and celebrates this Iranian's death. Bibi has killed 70000 in Gaza and Trump pulls out Bibi's Chair for him. And shakes his hand. No morality. Dead inside.
I dont think he said that, however we have allied ourselves to al sharaa, whose official killed a few of our men
You can tell a lot about a person by the reaction to whack-a-moleing the leadership. The only people who object are people in the leadership, people who aspire to be in the leadership, or people who want to suck up to the leadership. Everyone else is fine with it.
The Peace of Westphalia doctrine is dead, and long may it stay dead. A 'War of Assassins' that targets elites is highly preferable to the war of the bilateral slaughter of low-ranking normals that we've had instead.
General Caine, Tulsi Gabbard, JD Vance, and Marco Rubio all had objections to launching this campaign. Trump launched this “little excursion” conflict over the objections of many.
Mr Kent has really interesting background in special forces and also very tragic -- his wife died in a suicide bombing in Syria. It feels as though the dam has finally burst and public outrage about Israel’s foreign interference and lobbying in Washington is, after many decades of self censorship, now part of acceptable debate.
Fair to say Iran wasn’t an imminent threat a couple of weeks ago. It’s probably one now. That’s the genius of MAGA.
Howard said...
The lack of an overtly stated endgame is by design. What the Trump team wants the Iranians to think is nothing is off the table. As far as a time table is concerned, the Marines are slowly steaming towards Iran. Trump is trying to get Iran to resign before checkmate.
3/17/26, 9:45 AM
...
It's hilarious to me that the WH and military are disciplined and there are no leaks. The WH was clear that taking out their nuclear and missile capability and ensuring the free flow of oil is the goal. Is regime change the goal? They've not explicitly said it. But Trump this entire presidency keeps cards often close to his chest and doesn't reveal everything.
When I was in training one of my mentors used to say, commenting about others he trained "I taught him everything he knows ... but not everything _I_ know!"
It's the same here. Trump says a lot of what he means but not everything.
Just because the NYT doesn't know all his goals does not mean Trump does not have goals. He just chose not to share them all, especially with those who would betray the country like the media and Democrats.
Funny to me that this has been the case again and again and again. They think that just because THEY don't know the plan there is no plan. No. They don't trust you. They know you are on the side of the enemy. He's not telling you is not the same as there is no plan.
Also Howard I enjoy reading what you write. I don't get you. You seem right wing and then all of a sudden a bunch of left wing stuff. I never know what you're going to say but at least it's not uninformed nonsense like some of the others.
A few years ago I put forward the Two Howards Hypothesis: that there are two very different individuals using the same account. Nothing so far has disabused me of that.
RCOCEAN II said...
The Israelis think they have the right to kill anyone in the world they dislike. For any reason they want. The only way to stop them is with retaliation. It wont be by reasoning with them. Or appealing to their morality. They don't seem to have any.
3/17/26, 12:37 PM
...
I think everyone here recognizes from your many posts you hate Jews and of course Israel but mainly Jews. No need for me to repeat what everyone knows.
You do understand that EVERY country has not only the right but the obligation to keep its citizens safe. The goal of Islam is a worldwide caliphate where everyone either converts to Islam or is enslaved by Islam. That you are not opposed to this is disappointing. Israel/Jews are the foremost target in the sights of the Islamists. Terror leaders who plan attacks against Jews/Israelis - yes - are targets anywhere in the world. As should be the case for every country. Every country should have the clarity that if someone is planning attacks against its citizens they are legitimate targets.
You are not only a fool but of course an antisemite.
...Oh no, they're killing all of the Iranian leaders, now we'll never have peace ! ..."
NYT doing a lot of hard work trying to find something to criticize.
"...Ali Larijani had close ties to Iran’s two most powerful allies, Russia and China. He traveled to Moscow at least twice in recent months to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin to discuss Iran’s nuclear negotiations with the United States....."
Hmm, maybe this wasn't such a bad thing then, eh? Maybe if the Iranians run out of leaders like they're running out of missiles and drones, maybe then they might have to sue to peace? Like, 'peace, or die'. Maybe that's what 'defeat' would look like, where the victor states the terms and the vanquished accepts them - or dies. Maybe that's how you get peace to the region and an end to nuclear weapons ambitions by the Iranians, when only one choice remains. Accept or die.
RCOCEAN II said...
I love how Trump goes "He killed 30000 people" and celebrates this Iranian's death. Bibi has killed 70000 in Gaza and Trump pulls out Bibi's Chair for him. And shakes his hand. No morality. Dead inside.
3/17/26, 12:40 PM
...
You mean you believe Hamas?
Unbelievable. You know they kidnapped, tortured, and killed American civilians right?
Sorry - they were also Jewish so RC says they got what they deserved.
Interesting how you advocate for and use Hamas' propaganda against those would fight against terrorists. And you know that the vast majority of those killed in Gaza are military aged men - but you conveniently leave that out.
Despicable.
What a loser.
Excursion (Jaq?) - Iran started the war against us almost 50Y ago and continued to kidnap, torture, and murder Americans all since then, including being responsible for a great number of American deaths in Iraq.
That we finally have a President who addresses this crime is a credit.
Shocking you do not understand this (or pretend not to understand this.)
“The Peace of Westphalia doctrine is dead, and long may it stay dead. A 'War of Assassins' that targets elites is highly preferable to the war of the bilateral slaughter of low-ranking normals that we've had instead”
Before that, killing the enemy leaders was disfavored, because they could be ransomed. You can always kill them later, if no one c an or is willing to pay the ransom (Think Richard I, and his little brother John, who enjoyed ruling the country too much to pay his brother’s ransom).
Realistically though, it makes more moral sense to do just that - kill the leaders first. They very often have a lot of blood on their hands, and are the ones who took them to war in the first place.
Moreover, there are sound strategic reasons to do so, esp when fighting a regime like that in Iran. All of the holes at the top of the Iranian regime right now has significantly degraded their ability to respond to us. Something like closing the Hormuz Straights would take a fairly high level approval. No one could stay alive long enough to make the decision, and now it is problematic that they could. You hear “if you snooze, you loose”. Here, it’s if you die, you loose. And probably making high level decision making worse, the replacement Supreme Leader appears to be in a coma, missing one leg, and likely in Moscow now for his safety. Who is making his decisions for him? Is this like Biden and his AutoPen? No one really knows. And the Iranian military after Israeli Intelligence.
We are in a much better position here. From the lowliest enlisted, to the CinC, we plan for this. Times like the SOTU, there is always a designated survivor cabinet member, hidden somewhere outside DC.
I think Excursion is Kak
What the left Ignores, and wants us to ignore, is that Trump is a world class negotiator. I don’t know the last time we had anyone near his caliber in the WH. Our military have their plans and their time tables. And apparently are running ahead of it a little bit. But the last people who are going to know what they are, are the MSM and the Iranians (who depend on our MSM). If you watch him, he is always zigging and zagging, coming closer and closer to his goals. But you need to watch both his right and left hands, at the same time, because if you focus too hard on one, he wins with the other one. Dealing with Trump invariably involves a lot of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) on the part of his opponents, because that is how he wins.
RCOCEAN II said...
The Israelis think they have the right to kill anyone in the world
Who is trying to kill them
So do Americans. Even American Jews.
So sorry that makes you sad, RC.
Do yourself a favor: stop listening to, let alone believing, Hamas propaganda. They're Muslims, their religion tells them they're allowed to lie to you. Don't continue being a dumbshit
I, for one, like the Google AI response to "Did Trump call for Iranian unconditional surrender?"
Yes, President Donald Trump has repeatedly called for Iran's "unconditional surrender" as a prerequisite for any deal to end the ongoing conflict.
Key Details of the Demand
Ultimatum via Truth Social: On March 6, 2026, Trump posted, "There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!".
Vision for "MIGA": He stated that after such a surrender and the "selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s)," the U.S. and its allies would help rebuild the country to "Make Iran Great Again (MIGA!)".
Redefining "Surrender": Trump later clarified in an interview with Axios that "unconditional surrender" could mean when the Iranian regime "can't fight any longer" due to the destruction of its military capabilities, rather than just a formal announcement.
So we have that going for us, which is nice.
Just start negotiating with the janitor, then kill your way down to him.
Some speculate that joe kents second wife who has contributed to the grey zone might be an influence
Just start negotiating with the janitor, then kill your way down to him
Heh. Worked with the mafia…
Harun @ 10:39: +1
Not getting regime change is not a disaster if the regime is rendered toothless.
Listening the the NYTimes lie about what Trump does/does not know is a waste of air
Excursion is Kaka is Rich (a.k.a. The Man in the Room).
Let’s see… after Trump takes over the strait of Hormuz and all of irans oil, with Venezuela the us will control a ginormous amount of oil. I see a 10%+ fee to transport oil through the strait. And of course China/India/Europe may/may not get access until they pay the 10%.
Sorry about the mess.
Thanks, Keith. I'm a small ell libertarian.
I just love it that the NYT plays straight man for Trump's best lines:
' The death of Mr. Larijani also renews serious questions about President Trump’s endgame for the war: he has not clearly articulated his goals or how the assault on Iran might end, and he has acknowledged that many of the Iranian officials that the United States might have negotiated with have been killed. 'We don’t even know their leaders,' Mr. Trump said on Monday. 'We have people wanting to negotiate,' he added. 'We have no idea who they are.'
Imagine the NYT during WWII...
"serious questions about General Eisenhower's endgame for the invasion: he has not clearly articulated his goals or how the assault on the Germans occupying France might end"
He later worked as a paramilitary officer for the CIA.
Ahem.
The state of Israel may not have been responsible for pushing the Iraq War in 2003.
However, its lobby in the U.S. AIPAC, and Bibi Netanyahu (the longest serving Prime Minister in Israel's history) played an active role in promoting the war to the public, politicians, and through the media. Netanyahu has also loudly and publicly advocated for decades for war with Iran.
As a side note, it is kind of interesting that liberal Zionists have chosen this particular attack line to go after Joe Kent (along with labeling him as an "anti-semite"). i.e. that the Iraq War was somehow a purely organic war dreamed up by the U.S. political establishment after 9/11, and not something that was being pushed hard by AIPAC and affiliated groups (along with strikes against Syria and Libya).
Clearly hits a sore spot, even if Kent's remarks are true.
As far as what this might mean for MAGA, Trump is losing the young. However, the Republican Party itself is mostly a party of the old. These MAGA "dissidents" represent a current in the Republican Party, but it is still a marginal current within the Republican Party.
Kent's remarks are more significant in terms of what they signal with respect to attitudes within the veterans community. Anecdotally, I have heard similar things from relatives who served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even though Kent dances around the Trump issue, this Iran War is not popular.
Keith: "Howard I enjoy reading what you write. I don't get you. You seem right wing and then all of a sudden a bunch of left wing stuff. "
Could say the same thing about Trump. CC, JSM
Hayden, ref killing leaders: In 18th-century limited war, sparing enemy officers actually helped the little people. Neoclassical warfare was human chess, where maneuver was more important than fire. The highest expression of military art was 'checkmating' your enemy, showing him that he had no way to win. So he would either surrender in good order, or retreat in good order.
But that only works if the enemy commander is alive to see his predicament. If you kill him, then if his troops are well-drilled, they will do the last thing they were told, and fight you to the last man. Which means you will lose at least some of your men. If they are poorly disciplined, the enemy troops will break, run, and meld into the countryside, becoming brigands: robbing, raping and killing the peasantry.
So keeping the enemy commanders alive saved a lot of little people.
But that was then. The range and lethality of postmodern weapons means you have to fight a 'deep battle' against the enemy's highest leadership. But there is also the threat of brigandage when you do that: if your enemy force is all ideologically disciplined, they may try to swim in the sea of the general population as guerrillas. I kind of doubt the Iranian regime forces are that dedicated to their ideology, versus their families and pocketbooks. CC, JSM
Also Howard I enjoy reading what you write. I don't get you. You seem right wing and then all of a sudden a bunch of left wing stuff. I never know what you're going to say but at least it's not uninformed nonsense like some of the others.
I think there are two Howards who post here. One of them is Howard Hawks and the other one is Moe Howard.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.