General Caine is not a gigantic man. Which is good. But his stars are just a little too big for his shoulders. They make his epaulets wrinkle.
Back in the day, he would just have a custom-made rank set sized to fit him. But since the 80s, we've been enforcing uniformity for everyone, even the generals. Even when it doesn't make sense. The regs say what size the insiginia is, and that's that. Even when it makes your uniform look messed up, which is what the regs are intended to avoid.
Maybe he and Pete can work on that once all our enemies are defeated.
I'm not being silly. Part of Hegseth's mission is to clear the Defense stables of all the useless stuff left behind from previous generations. Even stuff that once had a purpose. CC, JSM
I like that Caine is explaining how all the instruments of power worked together. He stated that the very first blows were struck by Cybercom and Spacecom. Trump was so ridiculed over the Space Force, but the reality of postmodern war says otherwise. CC, JSM
I trust the American people to see what’s going on here. Hesgeth’s speech was very defensive they know that this is a huge risk come the mid-terms and even with a trillion dollar military you don’t get to control events.
This is not going to end well for anyone. Lessons have not been learned from Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam. And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies. This one is not.
It's almost as if Trump took the Supreme Court ruling against the legality of tariffs as an opportunity to say 'hold my beer'..
Hegseth, in discussing the US KIAs, said "moments like that only stiffen our resolve" and for a split second had a little vulpine smile. Fucking excellent. CC, JSM
john mosby said...Hegseth opened with the "we're ending a long war, not starting one" logic that many commenters here have been using. CC, JSM
Trump has always been an anti-war president; it's important to explain how regime change in Iran fits that branding. He is still the anti-war president.
Is regime change an objective or not? If Iranians take to the streets with the goal of taking control of the government what kind of assistance are we going to provide them?. It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective.
Truly inspiring and comforting to see these two men speak so clearly and concisely about the limits of the mission. I fully trust they will do everything they can to keep our men and women safe.
What Breezy said. I am buoyed by this robust defense of The West; of restoring it as an ideal worth preserving.High time to bring back WesternCiv to every school!
When we invaded Iraq on March 20, 2023 we were on the offense. Military offense is in many ways easier than military defense. Especially when you own the sky. From say April 1, 2023 forward, we were on defense. Defensive military is harder in many, many ways. Defensive military is much harder to mange politically. Stay Strong DJT and Pete! Go America, Israel, Sunni world, and late arriving allies! America, Fuck Yeah.
Regime change is an objective, but it is not a decisive objective. It is possible that the mission will be a success, if a successor Islamic regime still retains power, but is no longer a threat to the region. If you know anything about the Iranian people, you know that any successor government MUST be viewed as self-chosen, NOT imposed by a Western power. If a new regime is seen as being a US/Israeli puppet, it will be violently rejected by the Iranian people. Keep that important fact in mind when you hear any discussion about US plans for a new government.
So these same moronic lefties who complained Trump was promoting the “handmaiden” status of women, now cry about and mourn the Ayatollah “Asshola” Khamenei… a clown who actually had handmaidens…
steve uhr said...It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective.
I don't see any issue with treating them as 2 different things. We are removing a threat to the United States and the west and the world generally.
If the Iranian people form a new government, it would be in our interests to assist them. But that is a separate thing managed by different people operating under different rules and with different goals..
Re-read the (nasty) comments from the left about the selection of our Sec. of War. Lack of knowledge, drinker, no managerial expertise.... Now look at the Venezuela action and now Iran.
I'm sure the media will be following up by asking those Congress Critters if they have learned anything.
(For the resident Orange Man Bad types, that was sarcasm.)
Kak, it's understandable why you're confused and blubbering. You're used to seeing wars sort of fought under Robert's Rules of Order and directed by Admirals in heels and makeup covering their 5-o'clock shadow. This is what wars look like when our military is allowed to fight to win. And this is what we voted for.
Pete was a good high school basketball player in MN. He had a good public school education. He got into Princeton and was on the basketball team.
For those who don't know, Princeton has the best Ivy League basketball team. Princeton can't sign the athletes like a MI or WI can, so they developed a very innovative offense under Pete Carrill.
Hegseth learned how to win from basketball. One thing that Creighton coach Dana Altman told his team is that when you have an advantage, press on it and go for the win. Step on their throats. No more running the clock and playing not to lose.
Hegseth is really a warrior. Healthy body, healthy mind.
Yes and the LUCAS drone swarms too, which went from EO in June 2025 to procurement to production to battlefield deployment by December in the Maduro raid and even more widespread use last weekend in the Iran Chicom air-defense decapitation. He has changed the DoD and its critical supply chains in extremely rapid and effective moves. Best SecWar in my lifetime.
Have you noticed that the very same people who keep yanking our military's leash to create the forever wars are the ones who always start whining about starting forever wars? Why is that Kak, gadfly, Dinky, Inga, DDD, Mark, etc.?
"Hegseth, in discussing the US KIAs, said "moments like that only stiffen our resolve" and for a split second had a little vulpine smile. Fucking excellent."
I noticed that live. It didn't strike me as "excellent." I thought he was showing pleasure that he'd gotten past the part that felt bad and back on his message: WARRIORS!
"he'd gotten past the part that felt bad and back on his message: WARRIORS!"
That's what is meant by the "excellent". Accepting the costs and continuing the effort. In other words, persevering, which is THE success of the warrior.
"Best SecWar in my lifetime." Whether you agree with the orders he was given or not, you have to agree with his accomplishment in turning our military around from embarrassing to the envy of the world's leaders.
steve uhr said... "Is regime change an objective or not? If Iranians take to the streets with the goal of taking control of the government what kind of assistance are we going to provide them?. It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective."
It is changing as we speak. The minute the first bomb dropped it changed. The question now becomes. Will Iranians in the street grasp this moment and make Iran their own again or will the remnants of the current order brutalize the population back into servitude? On a hopeful note. A militia garrison in some other Iranian city is marching toward Tehran killing ever republican guard and morals policeman that they find.
"Forever wars started with Vietnam when we accepted gradualism over total victory"
I think the change now is attributable to Trump's style and background. We've never had such a pure competitor, builder, results- oriented President since Teddy Roosevelt, with a hat tip to Eisenhower. He just want's to rack up wins, and succeed.
https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/3-us-fighter-jets-f15e-strike-eagles-mistakenly-shot-down-by-kuwait-air-defenses-during-iran-attacks-operation-epic-fury-central-command-friendly-fire Update on the friendly fire incidents - three USAF F15E's were shot down by Kuwati air defenses. All 6 crewmen are safe.
Kak just isn't used to seeing a President who puts the country over politics, and who is willing to pay the political price for failure, because this President doesn't consider failure an option, unlike his predecessors who could never shake the fear.
A major difference vs Vietnam. When the airwar began over Vietnam in 1965 the balance of power of US aircraft vs Vietnamese air defense turned out to heavily favor air defense. The USAF and USN did not understand that beforehand. The various high level targeting policies (micromanagement) did not help. This was because of the technological state of things at the time. Things are very different now.
The first Iraq war lasted through two administrations, ended with the third, recycled during the Obama administration , and was ultimately aborted with a well placed missile up an Iranian asset during the first Trump administration. History rhymes.
Whether the overall policy and strategy ends in political success or failure, we should all want the performance of the operation to be as competent as possible. We should want success or failure to be a result of a poor policy, not a poor military. The end result should be our responsibility as voters.
I can respect folks whom are against this risky war to neuter the military capabilities of Iran. Past history places reasonable doubt on success.
It's different this time, say the Trump supporters. No DEI ROI. No holds barred, no expense spared, relentless and systematic, like a heavy destruction engineering project. Shout out to Logistics.
Now that the boys and girls are in theatre, we have to root for their decisive and speedy success.
Unfortunate but not unexpected. Glad the crews got picked up quickly, BZ to the Kuwaitis for recognizing, reporting, and taking action on their mistake.
I care about the Persians of Iran. The women of Iran. Righting a very long horrendous cruel religious theocracy dictatorship - run by vicious backward vile male Islamist supremacist males.
fun fact - my mom was in Iran when she was pregnant with me.
Kakistocracy said... Lessons have not been learned from Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam. And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies.
What bullshite.
The Democrats have spent half a century trying to claim that JFK would have never involved us in Vietnam despite the assassination/coup against Diem carried out on his watch that almost guaranteed our involvement and the almost universal assessment that the Gulf of Tonkin attack was a pretext, not a serious threat. Here's a news flash, Kaka-Bich ... Nixon ended the Democrat's war, he didn't start it.
How about recalling "No War for Oil" and "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it"? And the constant drumbeat in 2004 that W "had no plan" for dealing with Iraq. How about recycling that old goodie "you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in (Iran)." that worked so well for John F'ing Kerry?
One more thing to add to the already-noted praises for the op, is the apparently solid support of the Arab neighborhood, there in the ME. ...the payoff, I suppose to the determined U.S. cultivation of Arab political alliances, location of U.S. bases, etc. Those neighbor Arab countries have seen & experienced the commercial, economic, and social benefits of adapting to / adopting some of our Western ways, and have apparently recognized that Iran is a religious and governance anachronism that is a disruptive mechanism to the Arabs' present overall peaceful goals and objectives.
"There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;"
It's different this time, say the Trump supporters. No DEI ROI. No holds barred, no expense spared, relentless and systematic, like a heavy destruction engineering project. Shout out to Logistics.
What is also different is that it sounds like there is no occupation plan. No nation -building plan. For now. No large build up of ground forces.
And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies. This one is not.
This prize bit of fatuity from the Kakistophage reminds me of Schwarzkopf's observation that going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without an accordion.
There are dozens of Democrats in Congress that would have picked up the phone and warned the Iranians beforehand, and more who would have been hoping for the death of American servicemen and errant bombs on schoolyards, all for a bit of temporary political gain for their party. And our "allies" are even worse.
Bret Baier: "Just talked to some diplomats and some leaders from overseas in that region.... It has stiffened the spine of Gulf Arab States… and I think that we haven’t seen that EVER.” https://x.com/RedWavePress/status/2028493543791018246?s=20
Luke Rosiak on X: "A DC-area mosque pledged its loyalty to the Iranian dictator “martyred” by the US. Its membership views Khamenei, not America’s elected representatives, as “our leader.” https://t.co/VsGxoapEF2" / X https://share.google/1Pjy6zxRRL5a5rWdi
I'm not so sure the Iranian people have the ability to overthrow the Islamists, but even if they don't, when this is over Iran -
will have no navy, no air force, no air defenses, no long range missiles, no ability to produce more, no command and control, no leadership experience, no support from the rest of the Middle East, no nuclear enrichment program or facilities or scientists, and importantly - no money.
And if they try to reestablish any of that, the Israelis will be watching.
We renamed the War Department the Defense Department so that we could get into wars without being seen as militarist (I don't literally mean that literally, but it does catch something that was going on). Some of those were no-win wars. Now we may be off the no-win defensive war track but may be prey to overconfidence and the temptations of militarism. We've lived long-enough to see that optimism about the Middle East hasn't usually been justified, and maybe we thought President Trump had come to the same realization.
Think about it for a minute. Why fly bombers halfway around the earth, and back? Partially, of course, because we can. But more importantly, I think, was what they brought. Which, I think, were the really big bombs. The MOABs. The big penetrators. Soon, they can use their B-52s. But not the first days. They would be the biggest targets in the air. B-2S can get in and out safely, only leaving big craters.
Prof and Bag: Hegseth's vulpine smile is not a smile of happiness; more an expression of anger or even grief. It's the smile of a guy who's about to punch someone in the face or do a samurai draw-and-cut without even taking the sword all the way out.
I contrast it with the behavior of leaders after Blackhawk Down or other relatively small losses, who were just completely discombobulated by the reality that Americans might die in a military operation.
Hegseth is saying that they're not going to be able to use the Dover caskets against us this time. CC, JSM
I think this has been discussed before, and it'll be a bit pedantic, but despite the jokes the Department of War was not renamed the Department of Defense. The Cabinet level offices before and through WWII were the Department of War supervising the Army (and the Army Air Corp/Forces after it was formed) and the Department of the Navy supervising that service. I believe the naming was chosen specifically because the Constitution provides for the permanent maintenance of a navy but for only for raising of armies in time of War. For a short time after the establishment of the Air Force as an independent service there were three Cabinet offices IIRC, one for each service, but then in the late 1940s the Department of Defense was established as the single Cabinet level office supervising all armed forces with the Department of War retitled as the Department of the Army.
He could have been honest and said, "Our objective is, and has always been, to distract public attention from the economy, the Epstein files, and other bad news."
For someone who is always pushing manhood, he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on.
’…he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on.’
"Hegseth's vulpine smile is not a smile of happiness; more an expression of anger or even grief. It's the smile of a guy who's about to punch someone in the face..."
That's how I read it. I don't think the feeling behind it is in Althouse's emotional warehouse. Or most women's.
"'He could have been honest and said, 'Our objective is, and has always been, to distract public attention from the economy, the Epstein files, and other bad news.'
"For someone who is always pushing manhood, he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on." 3/2/26, 3:17 PM
Kakistocracy's comment was so spot on and accurate it screamed to be posted again...so I did it for him!
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.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
104 comments:
Hegseth opened with the "we're ending a long war, not starting one" logic that many commenters here have been using. CC, JSM
With that speech, you can see and hear why Pete Hegseth was hired as Secretary of War. Magnificent!
Trump didn’t start the war, but he will finish. Fight ‘til the fight is won!
Hegseth’s speech is right there with Rubio’s Munich speech.
Rhetoric is important!
I like how the admiral running the operation is named Brad Cooper. The movie writes and casts itself! CC, JSM
They sound competent…what a contrast to the recent past…
General Caine is not a gigantic man. Which is good. But his stars are just a little too big for his shoulders. They make his epaulets wrinkle.
Back in the day, he would just have a custom-made rank set sized to fit him. But since the 80s, we've been enforcing uniformity for everyone, even the generals. Even when it doesn't make sense. The regs say what size the insiginia is, and that's that. Even when it makes your uniform look messed up, which is what the regs are intended to avoid.
Maybe he and Pete can work on that once all our enemies are defeated.
I'm not being silly. Part of Hegseth's mission is to clear the Defense stables of all the useless stuff left behind from previous generations. Even stuff that once had a purpose. CC, JSM
I like that Caine is explaining how all the instruments of power worked together. He stated that the very first blows were struck by Cybercom and Spacecom. Trump was so ridiculed over the Space Force, but the reality of postmodern war says otherwise. CC, JSM
Your parents would be proud, and yer man is making YOUR coffee today = progress! Baby steps.
Also nice to see Cybercom working for Trump instead of against him....CC, JSM
Elections have consequences!
Hegseth must drive the NYT crowd crazy. He’s an Ivy Leaguer like them!
If Trump 2016 understood the future Trump 2026's views, would Trump have voted for himself?
I trust the American people to see what’s going on here. Hesgeth’s speech was very defensive they know that this is a huge risk come the mid-terms and even with a trillion dollar military you don’t get to control events.
This is not going to end well for anyone. Lessons have not been learned from Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam. And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies. This one is not.
It's almost as if Trump took the Supreme Court ruling against the legality of tariffs as an opportunity to say 'hold my beer'..
Hegseth, in discussing the US KIAs, said "moments like that only stiffen our resolve" and for a split second had a little vulpine smile. Fucking excellent. CC, JSM
Hegseth must drive the NYT crowd crazy. He’s an Ivy Leaguer like them!
….they like to pretend he isn’t. The english lit types are good at compartmentalizing, too. The MBAs are dead to them…
john mosby said...Hegseth opened with the "we're ending a long war, not starting one" logic that many commenters here have been using. CC, JSM
Trump has always been an anti-war president; it's important to explain how regime change in Iran fits that branding. He is still the anti-war president.
As both vance and hegseth were junior officers in the last war they have the perspective that colonel blimps like austin or milley did not
Read and understand that these actions taken have been a long time coming…
https://x.com/RandyEBarnett/status/2028199940728516921?s=20
Kak, fuck off. No one cares what you think.
We can read the ap we chose not to
https://instapundit.substack.com/p/cutting-off-the-head-of-the-snake
A year of negotiations failed. War was inevitable.
Is regime change an objective or not? If Iranians take to the streets with the goal of taking control of the government what kind of assistance are we going to provide them?. It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective.
Truly inspiring and comforting to see these two men speak so clearly and concisely about the limits of the mission. I fully trust they will do everything they can to keep our men and women safe.
What Breezy said. I am buoyed by this robust defense of The West; of restoring it as an ideal worth preserving.High time to bring back WesternCiv to every school!
When we invaded Iraq on March 20, 2023 we were on the offense. Military offense is in many ways easier than military defense. Especially when you own the sky.
From say April 1, 2023 forward, we were on defense. Defensive military is harder in many, many ways.
Defensive military is much harder to mange politically.
Stay Strong DJT and Pete!
Go America, Israel, Sunni world, and late arriving allies!
America, Fuck Yeah.
The President is learning.
Rubio. Hegseth. Caine.
Tillerson. Mattis. Milley.
Regime change is an objective, but it is not a decisive objective. It is possible that the mission will be a success, if a successor Islamic regime still retains power, but is no longer a threat to the region.
If you know anything about the Iranian people, you know that any successor government MUST be viewed as self-chosen, NOT imposed by a Western power. If a new regime is seen as being a US/Israeli puppet, it will be violently rejected by the Iranian people. Keep that important fact in mind when you hear any discussion about US plans for a new government.
So these same moronic lefties who complained Trump was promoting the “handmaiden” status of women, now cry about and mourn the Ayatollah “Asshola” Khamenei… a clown who actually had handmaidens…
Just can’t get enough of this liver-lipped Chris Murphy (D)!
Regime change is a result not an objective
Shorter kak: "I hope the US fails. Victory for Democrats in November is more important than victory for the US against Iran."
Said no one evarr!
He’s an Ivy Leaguer like them!
He’s not like them. He didn’t have a 960 SAT with daddy helping him get placed.
steve uhr said...It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective.
I don't see any issue with treating them as 2 different things. We are removing a threat to the United States and the west and the world generally.
If the Iranian people form a new government, it would be in our interests to assist them. But that is a separate thing managed by different people operating under different rules and with different goals..
Re-read the (nasty) comments from the left about the selection of our Sec. of War. Lack of knowledge, drinker, no managerial expertise.... Now look at the Venezuela action and now Iran.
I'm sure the media will be following up by asking those Congress Critters if they have learned anything.
(For the resident Orange Man Bad types, that was sarcasm.)
James K said...
Shorter kak: "I hope the US fails. Victory for Democrats in November is more important than victory for the US against Iran."<./i>
Democrats were the inspiration for Petyr Baelish in Game of Thrones--they will let the country burn if they can rule over the ashes.
test
Let's see what happens to US public opinion when the Iranians do their worst . This isn't over yet.
Kak, it's understandable why you're confused and blubbering. You're used to seeing wars sort of fought under Robert's Rules of Order and directed by Admirals in heels and makeup covering their 5-o'clock shadow. This is what wars look like when our military is allowed to fight to win. And this is what we voted for.
https://instapundit.substack.com/p/cutting-off-the-head-of-the-snake
Pete was a good high school basketball player in MN. He had a good public school education. He got into Princeton and was on the basketball team.
For those who don't know, Princeton has the best Ivy League basketball team. Princeton can't sign the athletes like a MI or WI can, so they developed a very innovative offense under Pete Carrill.
Hegseth learned how to win from basketball. One thing that Creighton coach Dana Altman told his team is that when you have an advantage, press on it and go for the win. Step on their throats. No more running the clock and playing not to lose.
Hegseth is really a warrior. Healthy body, healthy mind.
The Creighton school song, "We will fight 'til the fight is won!"
Now look at the Venezuela action and now Iran.
Yes and the LUCAS drone swarms too, which went from EO in June 2025 to procurement to production to battlefield deployment by December in the Maduro raid and even more widespread use last weekend in the Iran Chicom air-defense decapitation. He has changed the DoD and its critical supply chains in extremely rapid and effective moves. Best SecWar in my lifetime.
Tim Kaine(D) reveals his dishonest/ignorant take on actual history. No surprise.
Could we wait at least a couple of weeks before labeling this a "forever war?"
The chimps hit it like adderall
Have you noticed that the very same people who keep yanking our military's leash to create the forever wars are the ones who always start whining about starting forever wars? Why is that Kak, gadfly, Dinky, Inga, DDD, Mark, etc.?
"Hegseth, in discussing the US KIAs, said "moments like that only stiffen our resolve" and for a split second had a little vulpine smile. Fucking excellent."
I noticed that live. It didn't strike me as "excellent." I thought he was showing pleasure that he'd gotten past the part that felt bad and back on his message: WARRIORS!
"he'd gotten past the part that felt bad and back on his message: WARRIORS!"
That's what is meant by the "excellent". Accepting the costs and continuing the effort. In other words, persevering, which is THE success of the warrior.
Forever wars started with vietnam when we accepted gradualism over total victory
"Best SecWar in my lifetime."
Whether you agree with the orders he was given or not, you have to agree with his accomplishment in turning our military around from embarrassing to the envy of the world's leaders.
steve uhr said...
"Is regime change an objective or not? If Iranians take to the streets with the goal of taking control of the government what kind of assistance are we going to provide them?. It appears the answer is none since Pete didn’t mention regime change as an objective."
It is changing as we speak. The minute the first bomb dropped it changed. The question now becomes. Will Iranians in the street grasp this moment and make Iran their own again or will the remnants of the current order brutalize the population back into servitude?
On a hopeful note. A militia garrison in some other Iranian city is marching toward Tehran killing ever republican guard and morals policeman that they find.
Vietnam's a great example but Korea set the stage. Truman sacked MacArthur and set the stage for the DMZ.
"Forever wars started with Vietnam when we accepted gradualism over total victory"
I think the change now is attributable to Trump's style and background. We've never had such a pure competitor, builder, results- oriented President since Teddy Roosevelt, with a hat tip to Eisenhower. He just want's to rack up wins, and succeed.
https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/3-us-fighter-jets-f15e-strike-eagles-mistakenly-shot-down-by-kuwait-air-defenses-during-iran-attacks-operation-epic-fury-central-command-friendly-fire
Update on the friendly fire incidents - three USAF F15E's were shot down by Kuwati air defenses. All 6 crewmen are safe.
Kak just isn't used to seeing a President who puts the country over politics, and who is willing to pay the political price for failure, because this President doesn't consider failure an option, unlike his predecessors who could never shake the fear.
In conflicts persons die, but their deaths are not Planned, but rather a consequence of irreconcilable differences and bad Choices.
A major difference vs Vietnam. When the airwar began over Vietnam in 1965 the balance of power of US aircraft vs Vietnamese air defense turned out to heavily favor air defense. The USAF and USN did not understand that beforehand. The various high level targeting policies (micromanagement) did not help.
This was because of the technological state of things at the time.
Things are very different now.
The first Iraq war lasted through two administrations, ended with the third, recycled during the Obama administration , and was ultimately aborted with a well placed missile up an Iranian asset during the first Trump administration. History rhymes.
Whether the overall policy and strategy ends in political success or failure, we should all want the performance of the operation to be as competent as possible. We should want success or failure to be a result of a poor policy, not a poor military. The end result should be our responsibility as voters.
I can respect folks whom are against this risky war to neuter the military capabilities of Iran. Past history places reasonable doubt on success.
It's different this time, say the Trump supporters. No DEI ROI. No holds barred, no expense spared, relentless and systematic, like a heavy destruction engineering project. Shout out to Logistics.
Now that the boys and girls are in theatre, we have to root for their decisive and speedy success.
A war to end a war in progress. Novel.
"A war to end a war in progress. Novel."
Think of it like filing for divorce after a long contentious marriage.
buwaya @ 0925
Unfortunate but not unexpected. Glad the crews got picked up quickly, BZ to the Kuwaitis for recognizing, reporting, and taking action on their mistake.
I care about the Persians of Iran. The women of Iran.
Righting a very long horrendous cruel religious theocracy dictatorship - run by vicious backward vile male Islamist supremacist males.
fun fact - my mom was in Iran when she was pregnant with me.
Plenty of us are prepared for the negative and hoping for the best.
The left root for failure - and stand shoulder to shoulder with the Islamic theocracy.
“We are not defenders anymore.”
There’s an unintentional truth there that almost qualifies as a gaffe.
Kakistocracy said...
Lessons have not been learned from Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam. And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies.
What bullshite.
The Democrats have spent half a century trying to claim that JFK would have never involved us in Vietnam despite the assassination/coup against Diem carried out on his watch that almost guaranteed our involvement and the almost universal assessment that the Gulf of Tonkin attack was a pretext, not a serious threat. Here's a news flash, Kaka-Bich ... Nixon ended the Democrat's war, he didn't start it.
How about recalling "No War for Oil" and "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it"? And the constant drumbeat in 2004 that W "had no plan" for dealing with Iraq. How about recycling that old goodie "you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in (Iran)." that worked so well for John F'ing Kerry?
One more thing to add to the already-noted praises for the op, is the apparently solid support of the Arab neighborhood, there in the ME. ...the payoff, I suppose to the determined U.S. cultivation of Arab political alliances, location of U.S. bases, etc.
Those neighbor Arab countries have seen & experienced the commercial, economic, and social benefits of adapting to / adopting some of our Western ways, and have apparently recognized that Iran is a religious and governance anachronism that is a disruptive mechanism to the Arabs' present overall peaceful goals and objectives.
"There is a tide in the affairs of men,
Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;"
The best defense is a good offense.
"There’s an unintentional truth there that almost qualifies as a gaffe."
No, Left Bank, that was not unintentional- he literally meant it exactly the way you interpreted it.
It's different this time, say the Trump supporters. No DEI ROI. No holds barred, no expense spared, relentless and systematic, like a heavy destruction engineering project. Shout out to Logistics.
What is also different is that it sounds like there is no occupation plan. No nation -building plan. For now. No large build up of ground forces.
BZ to the Kuwaitis for recognizing, reporting, and taking action on their mistake.
Human error acknowledged and corrected is a mature affirmation.
And those invasions were properly planned with backing of the US congress and allies. This one is not.
This prize bit of fatuity from the Kakistophage reminds me of Schwarzkopf's observation that going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without an accordion.
There are dozens of Democrats in Congress that would have picked up the phone and warned the Iranians beforehand, and more who would have been hoping for the death of American servicemen and errant bombs on schoolyards, all for a bit of temporary political gain for their party. And our "allies" are even worse.
This post, from Don Surber, also notes the Arab-country participation. Along with a bit of info re: drone development that is ... interesting:
https://donsurber.substack.com/p/magas-best-weekend-since-trumps-re
Whichever nest o’ vipers is funding kak’s efforts is being shortchanged… in a big way.
Dave Begley said...
Hegseth must drive the NYT crowd crazy. He’s an Ivy Leaguer like them!
They hate him for the same reasons they hate Trump - both are apostates and Not Our Kind, Dear.
’Trump was so ridiculed over the Space Force, but the reality of postmodern war says otherwise.’
The midwits who are always screaming ‘progress’ can’t discern actual progress when it appears in their sight.
"fun fact - my mom was in Iran when she was pregnant with me."
I think we found the new Shah-ette.
Many things are different this time.
Bret Baier: "Just talked to some diplomats and some leaders from overseas in that region.... It has stiffened the spine of Gulf Arab States… and I think that we haven’t seen that EVER.”
https://x.com/RedWavePress/status/2028493543791018246?s=20
Surgically, overwhelmingly, and unapologetically. Indeed.
Mike (MJB Wolf) (8:46am):
“Best SecWar in my lifetime”? Unless you’re 79 years old, he’s the only Secretary of War in your lifetime.
https://x.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2028440970228818081
Luke Rosiak on X: "A DC-area mosque pledged its loyalty to the Iranian dictator “martyred” by the US. Its membership views Khamenei, not America’s elected representatives, as “our leader.” https://t.co/VsGxoapEF2" / X https://share.google/1Pjy6zxRRL5a5rWdi
Iman said...
"Whichever nest o’ vipers is funding kak’s efforts is being shortchanged… in a big way."
Not the sharpest propagandist in the cadre.
A wit by half
I'm not so sure the Iranian people have the ability to overthrow the Islamists, but even if they don't, when this is over Iran -
will have no navy, no air force, no air defenses, no long range missiles, no ability to produce more, no command and control, no leadership experience, no support from the rest of the Middle East, no nuclear enrichment program or facilities or scientists, and importantly - no money.
And if they try to reestablish any of that, the Israelis will be watching.
It's a big country, but we've got a lot of bombs.
Our B-2's are bringing Hell right now.
Also, Kier Starmer can go to hell. England died with the Queen.
bagoh20 said...
[Quoting Peachy "fun fact - my mom was in Iran when she was pregnant with me."]
"I think we found the new Shah-ette"
The Queen. Peachy Queen!
Hmmm. After 47 years, it took #47.
Peachy Queen - I like that.
Shah-ette - I like that, too.
Drone=unmanned suicide aerial vehicle
We renamed the War Department the Defense Department so that we could get into wars without being seen as militarist (I don't literally mean that literally, but it does catch something that was going on). Some of those were no-win wars. Now we may be off the no-win defensive war track but may be prey to overconfidence and the temptations of militarism. We've lived long-enough to see that optimism about the Middle East hasn't usually been justified, and maybe we thought President Trump had come to the same realization.
“ Our B-2's are bringing Hell right now.”
Think about it for a minute. Why fly bombers halfway around the earth, and back? Partially, of course, because we can. But more importantly, I think, was what they brought. Which, I think, were the really big bombs. The MOABs. The big penetrators. Soon, they can use their B-52s. But not the first days. They would be the biggest targets in the air. B-2S can get in and out safely, only leaving big craters.
That, plus each of them can carry 80 500 pound individually targeted JDAMS.
And we had to fly them halfway around the earth because the cowards running Great Britain refused permission to launch from our bases there.
Prof and Bag: Hegseth's vulpine smile is not a smile of happiness; more an expression of anger or even grief. It's the smile of a guy who's about to punch someone in the face or do a samurai draw-and-cut without even taking the sword all the way out.
I contrast it with the behavior of leaders after Blackhawk Down or other relatively small losses, who were just completely discombobulated by the reality that Americans might die in a military operation.
Hegseth is saying that they're not going to be able to use the Dover caskets against us this time. CC, JSM
I think this has been discussed before, and it'll be a bit pedantic, but despite the jokes the Department of War was not renamed the Department of Defense. The Cabinet level offices before and through WWII were the Department of War supervising the Army (and the Army Air Corp/Forces after it was formed) and the Department of the Navy supervising that service. I believe the naming was chosen specifically because the Constitution provides for the permanent maintenance of a navy but for only for raising of armies in time of War. For a short time after the establishment of the Air Force as an independent service there were three Cabinet offices IIRC, one for each service, but then in the late 1940s the Department of Defense was established as the single Cabinet level office supervising all armed forces with the Department of War retitled as the Department of the Army.
He could have been honest and said, "Our objective is, and has always been, to distract public attention from the economy, the Epstein files, and other bad news."
For someone who is always pushing manhood, he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on.
’…he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on.’
Okay, ski bunny…
"Hegseth's vulpine smile is not a smile of happiness; more an expression of anger or even grief. It's the smile of a guy who's about to punch someone in the face..."
That's how I read it. I don't think the feeling behind it is in Althouse's emotional warehouse. Or most women's.
"'He could have been honest and said, 'Our objective is, and has always been, to distract public attention from the economy, the Epstein files, and other bad news.'
"For someone who is always pushing manhood, he seems perpetually childish, whiny, defensive, and has patience only for the time he spends on his hair and appearance---just like the drag-queens he likes to pick on."
3/2/26, 3:17 PM
Kakistocracy's comment was so spot on and accurate it screamed to be posted again...so I did it for him!
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.