Ego was shipping Iran money with no oversight on their nuclear weapon development or terrorist funding, thinking, what, that your own goodwill or intentions would somehow change the evil intentions of others.
The US has introduced cheap low-tech drone boats like the Iranians and Ukrainians use. Like flying drones, these have proven to be surprisingly effective. We have also introduced low-cost low-tech aerial drones similar in design to the Iranian Shaheds and Russian Gerans. They can be produced in large numbers and it's not a big deal to lose them because they don't carry secret high-tech. We are learning drone warfare tactics from the Ukrainians.
Today the Iranians launched a missile/drone attack on Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia, where the US has been operating aerial refueling tankers. One US aircraft was destroyed on the ground and several others may have suffered more minor damage. Ten Americans wounded along with about 15 Saudis and other nationalities. Apparently most of the injuries are minor though two are reported as serious.
CNN is reporting (for whatever that's worth) that total US killed in action for the entire war stand at 13. 303 military members have been wounded since the beginning of hostilities, of which 273 have already returned to duty, while 10 remain seriously injured.
The Iranians are targeting the Gulf Arabs tonight with missiles and drones. At least two have gotten through in Bahrain, one hitting an industrial area and the other the BAPCO (Bahrain petroleum company) refinery. Damage is unknown at this time. The United Arab Emirates are under attack as well, with interceptor rockets being launched, loud booms and thuds in the air, but no reports of significant impacts yet.
And US bombing of Iranian military/IRGC infrastructure and weapons industries continues. Once again, photos from inside Iran show lights on and electricity working. So clearly we are being rather selective in what we hit, trying to weaken regime armed forces while minimizing harm to the civilian population.
One of the targets hit in the Tehran area today was a radio/TV jamming station. Tehran residents can suddenly pick up broadcasts from outside Iran that were previously blocked.
And the Yemeni Houthis may have entered the war. There are reports in the last few hours that an Iranian made missile fired from Yemen was intercepted over southern Israel.
(Mar 29, 2026 06:53 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Trump's Carnival of Chaos
Fareed Zakaria's Take
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMLnltuYanM
Like you, Fareed fails to understand how Trump negotiates. The "big ask" and threats to bring people to the table.
He even wrote a book about this strategy he constantly uses, but because of TDS or willful ignorance, lefties are perpetually baffled.
Key Aspects from the Book regarding Threats/Negotiation:
Leverage: Trump emphasizes that the biggest strength in any negotiation is leverageāhaving something the other side needs or cannot do without.
"Truthful Hyperbole": He describes using exaggeration to create interest and force others to take notice, which often acts as a form of pressure or perceived threat to their interests.
Walking Away: A recurring tactic in the book is being prepared to walk away from a deal, which is presented as the ultimate threat to bring others back to the table on better terms.
"Ivan the Intimidator": While not a phrase coined by Trump himself, his negotiator style described in the book (and identified by others like George Ross) involves adopting a position of power and sometimes using intimidation to control the negotiation, often changing tactics from nice to tough depending on the situation.
- Google AI
Quote:While not a phrase coined by Trump himself, his negotiator style described in the book (and identified by others like George Ross) involves adopting a position of power and sometimes using intimidation to control the negotiation, often changing tactics from nice to tough depending on the situation.
That's the precise opposite of intelligent negotiation and dialogue. It is manipulating others thru threatening and a pretense of inflicting harm. Then when he backs off and does nothing, he is exposed as all bluster and no integrity. That doesn't make any deals. It only creates distrust and increased animosity, just as it has with Iran.
(Mar 29, 2026 08:11 PM)MagicalĀ Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:While not a phrase coined by Trump himself, his negotiator style described in the book (and identified by others like George Ross) involves adopting a position of power and sometimes using intimidation to control the negotiation, often changing tactics from nice to tough depending on the situation.
That's the precise opposite of intelligent negotiation and dialogue. It is manipulating others thru threatening and a pretense of inflicting harm. Then when he backs off and does nothing, he is exposed as all bluster and no integrity. That doesn't make any deals. It only creates distrust and increased animosity, just as it has with Iran.
Guess what, numbnuts, brutal authoritarian regimes only understand threats and negotiating from a position of power. When he backs off, it's accomplished his goal without having to make good on the threats.
Iran has always lied about their intent and willingness to make any compromises. If you believe them, after decades of lies, you're a gullible useful idiot.
Quote:Guess what, numbnuts, brutal authoritarian regimes only understand threats and negotiating from a position of power. When he backs off, it's accomplished his goal without having to make good on the threats.
Threatening and then not making good on the threat like resetting deadlines and changing your offer is seen as bluster and a sign of weakness not strength. That's Trump's "Art of Deal"--- exposing yourself as a manipulative liar with nothing of substance to say, no end game, and who just can't be trusted. It's why most Americans hate him. And it's why Iran is gaining an upper hand over him.
An Iranian missile struck an Israeli factory outside Beersheva in southern Israel. No injuries were reported, since workers were in shelters, but the factory was destroyed. Initial word is that the factory produced agricultural products.
Large portions (about 1/3) of Tehran were without electrical power and blacked out last night. It isn't believed that the electrical grid had been targeted. Instead an attack on a different target a considerable distance outside Tehran severed a high voltage electrical transmission line nearby and the resulting imbalance in the grid tripped circuit breakers. Reportedly electricity in Tehran has already been restored.
Two Marine Expeditionary Units of about 2,500 Marines each have been sent to the Middle East. In addition, US Army elements are being deployed including the entire headquarters of the 82'd Airborne division. There's talk that enough ground forces (~8,000?) should be in the area by the end of next week to perform a variety of possible missions.
My own speculation is that a major invasion of Iran isn't going to happen. Iran is just too big and trying to occupy it could become precisely the kind of 'forever war' that President Trump is determined to avoid. Afghanistan and Iraq were hard enough and Iran is much tougher. If we conquered the Iranian military on the ground, which we could definitely do though not without a lot of casualties, we would be stuck essentially owning Iran, responsible for it until a new government is put in place strong enough to control the country. So we would find ourselves back in the thankless task of nation-building. While the majority of Iranians would probably welcome us, a large minority are religious fanatics who wouldn't. So we would probably be faced with a serious insurgency, like we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq. We don't need that.
So whatever the ground forces end up doing will be far more limited. I see two general possibilities:
1. A deep-penetration in-and-out raid to make sure the Iranian nuclear sites are as destroyed as possible. The problem is that the most sensitive of these sites are located in tunnels deep underground, and they might be impossible to reach without lots of time and heavy equipment. So the United States could ensure that the tunnel entrances are well and truly sealed such that Iran can't get in without time and heavy equipment of their own. Then the US raiding parties could withdraw and watch kept from above by spy satellite and on the ground by agents and informants. If the Iranians sent in the necessary crews and equipment to unseal the sites, we'd know and missiles and air strikes could be directed to disrupt those attempts. In fact, it's entirely possible that plan could be accomplished without the risk of American boots on the ground deep inside Iran at all, simply by deep penetrator bombs like we've already used to destroy the tunnel entrances, and then close surveillance. So I'm gradually becoming less convinced that the nuclear sites are America's target. We've already pretty much succeeded with them.
2. An island campaign to take (A) Kharg island, Iran's main oil terminal, and/or (B) various largely uninhabited Islands around the Strait of Hormuz. Occupying Kharg island without destroying the oil facilities would enable us to control Iran's oil exports without cutting them off entirely. That would exert tremendous pressure on the Iranian regime as we would have effectively seized them by the balls. Downside is that Kharg island is defended and fighting would be required to take it. Of course we have been bashing military facilities on the island for weeks and our control of the air and sea reduces Iran's ability to reinforce it. So it should be entirely doable by the US Marines, hopefully without a lot of casualties. The more deserted islands by the Strait of Hormuz could be taken without a lot of combat since they are minimally defended, and would put us in position to protect shipping moving through the strait against mines and drones. In-and-out raids could be launched from the islands against drone launching sites on the mainland shore. Again, things that the Marines should be able to do fairly easily. Neither island campaign would put the US in the position of occupying a large civilian population like Afghanistan or Iraq. Without a functioning air force or navy, about all that Iran would have to attack Americans on the islands and the passing oil tankers we are protecting would be drones, a capability that we are already pretty good at intercepting and that is already severely degraded as Iranian drone factories are destroyed.
![[Image: qZglhYX.jpg]](https://iili.io/qZglhYX.jpg)