Plus there are Russian and Chinese warships arriving in the Gulf of Oman today. Plus all of those Chinese satellite photos of every single American and Israeli land-based anti-missile system in the region they so thoughtfully made public.
Our old buddy MAD is back in the picture. RT's saying the Russians are working on some sort of uranium enrichment deal. I suspect they're trying to give Trump some face-saving thing he can claim victory over when he backs down.
PS: "It's the End of the World!" was clickbait before there was clickbait.
China will avoid war at all costs. Iran is quite capable to wiping Israel off the map -- although at a cost. But Iran remembers its war with Iraq -- bitterly. In any case, the US Empire is working hard at destroying itself.
If only Trump, after being hit on the head with the flat of God's Sword, could gather his few remaining brain cells together and say:
"Take me, good people for I have sinned. Spare my life and I will avenge you on all my former friends and colleagues with a wrath double yours, for though, through them, my soul is damned to Hell, I know where they reside."
Another that seems to me even more possible is this one:
Trump, because he couldn't or didn't want to attack Iran, he ordered to open as much sources as possible from the Epstein-files to give the world a few months to digest it and to dilute a possible publication of himself & Epstein kids by the ZIONISTS.
The whole publication shows urgent haste and confusingly many names.
Trump faces an Election he cannot afford to lose. (MAGA voters).
Does anybody remember when the USS McCain (as memory serves) was ordered into Crimean waters in 2014? Just because the US did not recognise Crimea's being absorbed into the Russian federation did not mean that the Russians thought this way. Crimea's waters were Russian.
So, by way of encouraging the US navy to understand this, the Russians sent two SU25s to greet it. The USS McCain had them on its radars, and then, once the aircraft were in missile range, the radar screens went fuzzy. The lights went off, the communications went off and the engines stopped. Nothing in the USS McCain actually worked. The captain tried using his personal mobile phone to see if he could get help because nothing else was working.
It was all jammed.
The jets then did a practise attack on the USS McCain, doing so in a way that would have destroyed the vessel had it been for real.
On arriving back in Romania, one third of the crew asked for early demobilisation.
And all because of a small electronic pod that jammed the ship's computer systems.
I am sure that the Iranians could come up with something like that which would stop the USS Abraham Lincoln in its tracks. The technique is not that hard to understand.
In April 2014, the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) was operating in international waters in the Black Sea following Russia's annexation of Crimea.
According to reports, a Russian Su-24 Fencer attack aircraft made multiple, low-altitude, close-range passes near the ship. Crucially, it was reported that the aircraft was equipped with a Khibiny electronic warfare (EW) system.
The Alleged "Disabling" Effect
The core of the claim is not that the ship was hit by weapons, but that it was targeted by electronic warfare.
· The Khibiny system is designed to jam and suppress enemy radar and electronic systems.
· Reports, often citing unnamed U.S. officials, suggested the system effectively shut down the Aegis combat system and the ship's radars.
· The narrative describes the ship's sophisticated sensors and missile systems being rendered useless, with crews unable to lock on to the attacking aircraft. This left the destroyer in a tactically "defenseless" state against a potential kinetic attack.
Official Responses and Analyses
· U.S. Navy's Stance: The U.S. Navy has never officially confirmed that the ship's systems were "disabled." They consistently stated that the Russian flybys were "provocative and unprofessional" but that the Donald Cook was never in danger and could have defended itself if threatened. They acknowledge the event as a clear demonstration of Russian aggression and testing of U.S. reactions.
· Russian Narrative: Russia has used this incident as a powerful propaganda tool. State media and officials have frequently claimed it as a stark demonstration of Russian military superiority, showing how a single aircraft could neutralize a billion-dollar U.S. warship. They frame it as a humiliation for the U.S. Navy.
· Expert Analysis: Military analysts believe the incident was a brilliantly executed act of psychological and information warfare. Regardless of the exact technical impact, it sent several powerful messages:
1. A Demonstration of Capability: Russia showcased its advanced electronic warfare technology, an area where it holds significant expertise.
2. A Signal of Resolve: It was a bold warning to NATO during a period of high tension over Ukraine.
3. Exploiting a Vulnerability: It highlighted potential vulnerabilities in even the most advanced Western warships to asymmetric EW tactics.
Significance and Aftermath
· A Wake-Up Call: The incident is widely cited within NATO as a major wake-up call regarding the potency of modern Russian electronic warfare and the need to harden systems and develop counter-tactics.
· Case Study in Hybrid Warfare: It became a textbook example of "hybrid" or "gray zone" tactics—aggressive actions below the threshold of open kinetic warfare.
· Psychological Impact: Stories persist (though are hard to verify) about the demoralizing effect on the Donald Cook's crew, with reports of many requesting transfers after the incident, underscoring the psychological dimension of the encounter.
· Changed Procedures: The event contributed to changes in how U.S. and NATO ships operate in high-threat EW environments.
Conclusion
While the U.S. Navy denies the ship was technically "disabled," the 2014 encounter between the Russian Su-24 and the USS Donald Cook is an established and significant event. It is best understood not as a traditional military engagement but as a highly successful Russian demonstration of electronic warfare capability and psychological operations, designed to intimidate, send a political message, and expose potential NATO vulnerabilities. Its legacy lies in its profound impact on NATO's perception of the Russian threat and its emphasis on electronic warfare in modern conflict.
In other words, the US military is trying to play down the situation.
If you understand the thinking that built ships like the Donald Cook (for which, thanks; I got the wrong one!) you will understand how the Khibiny system can be so effective.
A more important note: the Russians have not used it since. Why have they not used it?
This is the psychological element of their tactics, not the actual effect of their jamming system.
I have always had my question about Jeffrey Sachs.
However, I read in Naomi Klein's, "The Shock Doctrine" (the only real, good, book she wrote), that initially Jeffery Sachs attempted to get the US to invest in Russia with a plan similar to the Marshall Plan. However, he was denied this. I believe he left his Russia involvement shortly after this refusal to help the new Russia.
That method of investment you mention was precisely what Sachs had organised for Poland in the 1990s. Why on earth should he imagine it would not be allowed in Russia?
In 1991 after the Berlin Wall fell, I organized an international technical team (I am a software engineer), including quite a few people in Poland to assist with the upgrading of their computer technologies. However, we needed some startup funding and the person who was handling the liaison with the Polish Embassy to obtain it, completely screwed up the process. As a result, the project fell apart. We could have done some great work for Poland. I had people ready to go from California all the way to Poznan, Poland, including a leading Polish Computer Scientist. I was heartbroken for everyone when I had to close the project down.
We all have our specialities and our weak points. Sometimes a person learns something interesting about a subject he's generally weak on. Economists aren't usually expert on state-of-the-art military science, although they may know that Napoleon said that an army marches on its stomach.
It puzzles me how 2.4% of the US population is ashkinazi jew but always in or near positions of government. This is how izrael controls my country the USA. They control Congress hence our government by means of AIPAC and they have Americans enthralled.
I use the word "enthralled" instead of hypnotized because of its origin. The word "enthrall" is derived from the Norse word Thrall which means Slave.
So our nation is 97.6% Goyim. Goy is singular and Goyim is plural. This is the term jews use to describe us to non-jews, gentiles. It's a derogatory term.
To the jew Goyim are considered nothing but livestock. LET THAT SINK IN!!!🇵🇸❤️🖤🤍💚
Sachs is an economist and an intelligent man. What he is NOT is a Zionist. What you are describing of the effect of the Israelites and AIPAC has very little to do with ordinary Jewish folk.
Are you aware that in the US it was made clear that to be against the Jewish mafia (such as Mayer Lansky) was "anti Semitic"?
Anyone whether jew or goy, who supports izrael is a zionist. Sachs is the "economist" who was raping Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. Typical jew. I don't trust ANY OF THEM!
No, Sachs did NOT rape Russia. That was the US mafia who did that dirty little game.
If you think Sachs is a "typical Jew" because you have been told lies, then you really should read articles that are more fair. I suggest Substack as a good place to start.
Is that where you get your anti-Jewish potty mouth? From combing through Substack? How about a legitimate college course in political science ( I know , a bit oxymoronic). Perhaps one devoid of Zionist leaning elitist academics like Jeffrey Sachs so that you can voice your opinions without fear of having your 1st Amendment rights trampled by AIPAC funded agent provocateurs raised in Israel.
Tell me —was the 1969 moon landing real? Is Big Foot real? Please comb SUBStack and get back to us
Funny, coming from an Irishman. I used to be a neocon zionist. I was a supporter of izrael my entire life. I'm from Nederland and my grandparents were Dutch Underground during WW2. From 1941 to May 5, 1945 they lost half their group. During that time they hid and protected an entire extended family of jews without a single loss. My grandparents received certificates of gratitude from the nascent zionist state.
My grandparents would do the same for Palestine. Fuck you!
I can't see israhell giving up on its plans for the us to attack Iran, more likely a bit more Kabuki, while they wait for an opportune time, like past strikes during "negotiations" & the assination of the IRGC chief in Iraq!
The Persians appear very successful in resisting pressure to develop a nuclear weapon capability. I think it was Oliver Boyd Barrett, who pointed out that as things have developed over the past than the 20 years, there is no longer a need for a country in Iran‘s position to have such weapons. Iran is not North Korea. They can easily afford to promise they will not do what they’ve already declared that they have religious directives not to do. So Trump gets his “victory“ and maybe everybody will just go home. This time. Rinse and repeat.
Trump is easy to manipulate. He is a Me First, bipolar, kneejerk autocrat who can't even bully Cuba.
Trump exposed himself with the Epstein Files as a little pedo who fears his gullible followers will see the real "acting" President for who he really is.
The question is why the uss lincoln? The Lincoln is over due for retirement. If you were prepared to lose 1, it would be either the nimitz (which according to rumors is on its way over there) or the Lincoln which is up next to be decommissioned. So the next question would be how are you prepared to lose 1, would it be by Iran's drones and anti ship missiles or FF.
Also alot of ppl talking about taco by moving the Lincoln over back by Yemen. I look at that differently. My guess the US views that they can handle the retaliation from the houthis better than from Iran. They are actually in their opinion in a better striking distance by being over by Yemen away from anti ship missle range and too long of a drone flight. Eastern Yemen and the south is now Saudi controlled. Houthis would have a little harder time striking at that location. They are also out of radar range. Only real time data would be coming from monitoring ships, surveillance drones/satellites. Iran wouldn't know until the planes come into range. Just in my opinion
Sorry to say, but your Navy Seal buddy isn't very clued up.
Just as one gets ground to air missiles which launch from a static land platform to moving air targets, there are also ground to sea missiles which launch from a static platform to a moving sea target, which is much slower than a moving air target, and easier to hit.
There are also missiles launched from aviation platforms in a stand off position due to their elevation, which can hit moving air, land or sea targets, with land and sea being a cinch because both are slow moving relative to air targets.
No doubt that the Iranians and Russians, have between them many of these missiles in Hypersonic flavour, which means that the US could lose a whole carrier group in the bat of an eyelid.
To your credit, you did mention the drones, which in all probability the Iranians would use to crowd out US navy air defences, and exhaust them, as they have done in the past, then bring in the missiles to do the real damage.
Julian, my understanding of a “color revolution “ is that it is fomented from without; the U.S. needs a revolution without qualifiers—other than it needs to be a worker’s revolution.
'However, I think we are fortunate to have Trump in power rather than a Democrat.
Democrats are just as morally compromised as Republicans or NeoConservatives – but they are much better at peddling sanctimonious bromides for the worst atrocities, making it seem they are working in the public interest, rather than the interests of their donors. Or in their own interests.
Trump—by contrast — lacks both intelligence and subtlety.'
Exactly. There will be people - even in Iran - thinking that this war will have to be fought sooner or later and calculating if the sooner means now. I don't know the battlefield situation but I DO know that the US has put itself in a situation where unless it can wipe Iran off the map, it has lost politically. If Trump backs down it will mean a defeat. If the US takes losses it will be a defeat. If Israel is battered it will be a defeat. If Iran survives it will be a defeat.
Plus there are Russian and Chinese warships arriving in the Gulf of Oman today. Plus all of those Chinese satellite photos of every single American and Israeli land-based anti-missile system in the region they so thoughtfully made public.
Our old buddy MAD is back in the picture. RT's saying the Russians are working on some sort of uranium enrichment deal. I suspect they're trying to give Trump some face-saving thing he can claim victory over when he backs down.
PS: "It's the End of the World!" was clickbait before there was clickbait.
"It's the End of the World!" was clickbait before there was clickbait. LOVE it. Can I use ti and pretend I thought of it?
Everything I post here is free for you to use, and while I appreciate a mention, I’m even happier when I see others using my quips effectively.
There's something more to this :
https://youtu.be/hkAeqSN2xro?si=Nw_w66CjMpPKWD20
China will avoid war at all costs. Iran is quite capable to wiping Israel off the map -- although at a cost. But Iran remembers its war with Iraq -- bitterly. In any case, the US Empire is working hard at destroying itself.
Title of video is misleading but the facts remain. And there's even more to this:
https://youtu.be/lYr9tagwN9o?si=fLlk4lGp_sMO-8qp
I fully agree with your analysis.
Cassandra
If only Trump, after being hit on the head with the flat of God's Sword, could gather his few remaining brain cells together and say:
"Take me, good people for I have sinned. Spare my life and I will avenge you on all my former friends and colleagues with a wrath double yours, for though, through them, my soul is damned to Hell, I know where they reside."
That is certainly an Off ramp direction.
Another that seems to me even more possible is this one:
Trump, because he couldn't or didn't want to attack Iran, he ordered to open as much sources as possible from the Epstein-files to give the world a few months to digest it and to dilute a possible publication of himself & Epstein kids by the ZIONISTS.
The whole publication shows urgent haste and confusingly many names.
Trump faces an Election he cannot afford to lose. (MAGA voters).
Just saying.
Cassandra
Does anybody remember when the USS McCain (as memory serves) was ordered into Crimean waters in 2014? Just because the US did not recognise Crimea's being absorbed into the Russian federation did not mean that the Russians thought this way. Crimea's waters were Russian.
So, by way of encouraging the US navy to understand this, the Russians sent two SU25s to greet it. The USS McCain had them on its radars, and then, once the aircraft were in missile range, the radar screens went fuzzy. The lights went off, the communications went off and the engines stopped. Nothing in the USS McCain actually worked. The captain tried using his personal mobile phone to see if he could get help because nothing else was working.
It was all jammed.
The jets then did a practise attack on the USS McCain, doing so in a way that would have destroyed the vessel had it been for real.
On arriving back in Romania, one third of the crew asked for early demobilisation.
And all because of a small electronic pod that jammed the ship's computer systems.
I am sure that the Iranians could come up with something like that which would stop the USS Abraham Lincoln in its tracks. The technique is not that hard to understand.
In April 2014, the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) was operating in international waters in the Black Sea following Russia's annexation of Crimea.
According to reports, a Russian Su-24 Fencer attack aircraft made multiple, low-altitude, close-range passes near the ship. Crucially, it was reported that the aircraft was equipped with a Khibiny electronic warfare (EW) system.
The Alleged "Disabling" Effect
The core of the claim is not that the ship was hit by weapons, but that it was targeted by electronic warfare.
· The Khibiny system is designed to jam and suppress enemy radar and electronic systems.
· Reports, often citing unnamed U.S. officials, suggested the system effectively shut down the Aegis combat system and the ship's radars.
· The narrative describes the ship's sophisticated sensors and missile systems being rendered useless, with crews unable to lock on to the attacking aircraft. This left the destroyer in a tactically "defenseless" state against a potential kinetic attack.
Official Responses and Analyses
· U.S. Navy's Stance: The U.S. Navy has never officially confirmed that the ship's systems were "disabled." They consistently stated that the Russian flybys were "provocative and unprofessional" but that the Donald Cook was never in danger and could have defended itself if threatened. They acknowledge the event as a clear demonstration of Russian aggression and testing of U.S. reactions.
· Russian Narrative: Russia has used this incident as a powerful propaganda tool. State media and officials have frequently claimed it as a stark demonstration of Russian military superiority, showing how a single aircraft could neutralize a billion-dollar U.S. warship. They frame it as a humiliation for the U.S. Navy.
· Expert Analysis: Military analysts believe the incident was a brilliantly executed act of psychological and information warfare. Regardless of the exact technical impact, it sent several powerful messages:
1. A Demonstration of Capability: Russia showcased its advanced electronic warfare technology, an area where it holds significant expertise.
2. A Signal of Resolve: It was a bold warning to NATO during a period of high tension over Ukraine.
3. Exploiting a Vulnerability: It highlighted potential vulnerabilities in even the most advanced Western warships to asymmetric EW tactics.
Significance and Aftermath
· A Wake-Up Call: The incident is widely cited within NATO as a major wake-up call regarding the potency of modern Russian electronic warfare and the need to harden systems and develop counter-tactics.
· Case Study in Hybrid Warfare: It became a textbook example of "hybrid" or "gray zone" tactics—aggressive actions below the threshold of open kinetic warfare.
· Psychological Impact: Stories persist (though are hard to verify) about the demoralizing effect on the Donald Cook's crew, with reports of many requesting transfers after the incident, underscoring the psychological dimension of the encounter.
· Changed Procedures: The event contributed to changes in how U.S. and NATO ships operate in high-threat EW environments.
Conclusion
While the U.S. Navy denies the ship was technically "disabled," the 2014 encounter between the Russian Su-24 and the USS Donald Cook is an established and significant event. It is best understood not as a traditional military engagement but as a highly successful Russian demonstration of electronic warfare capability and psychological operations, designed to intimidate, send a political message, and expose potential NATO vulnerabilities. Its legacy lies in its profound impact on NATO's perception of the Russian threat and its emphasis on electronic warfare in modern conflict.
In other words, the US military is trying to play down the situation.
If you understand the thinking that built ships like the Donald Cook (for which, thanks; I got the wrong one!) you will understand how the Khibiny system can be so effective.
A more important note: the Russians have not used it since. Why have they not used it?
This is the psychological element of their tactics, not the actual effect of their jamming system.
Nothing on John McCain actually worked either, if you catch my drift.
"It's a brain, Jim, but not as we know it."
Cats can also be almost insufferably cute, while USraeli Presidents cannot.
I agree with your 'best-worst' dichotomy concerning Trump.
Reminds me of Dickens: "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times."
USreaeli Presidents don't like cats. I am not sure if they like people, for that matter.
I have always had my question about Jeffrey Sachs.
However, I read in Naomi Klein's, "The Shock Doctrine" (the only real, good, book she wrote), that initially Jeffery Sachs attempted to get the US to invest in Russia with a plan similar to the Marshall Plan. However, he was denied this. I believe he left his Russia involvement shortly after this refusal to help the new Russia.
That is correct, the attempts to smear Sach are pathetic!
That method of investment you mention was precisely what Sachs had organised for Poland in the 1990s. Why on earth should he imagine it would not be allowed in Russia?
It baffled him.
In 1991 after the Berlin Wall fell, I organized an international technical team (I am a software engineer), including quite a few people in Poland to assist with the upgrading of their computer technologies. However, we needed some startup funding and the person who was handling the liaison with the Polish Embassy to obtain it, completely screwed up the process. As a result, the project fell apart. We could have done some great work for Poland. I had people ready to go from California all the way to Poznan, Poland, including a leading Polish Computer Scientist. I was heartbroken for everyone when I had to close the project down.
I am sorry to hear that tale.
I thought Sachs was right on the money in his speech at the EU parliament last year (poorly attended, needless to say). He did not pull any punches.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfb4mOk9A8c
Whatever he might have done in the early 90s, he is certainly worth listening to today.
We all have our specialities and our weak points. Sometimes a person learns something interesting about a subject he's generally weak on. Economists aren't usually expert on state-of-the-art military science, although they may know that Napoleon said that an army marches on its stomach.
Since both Sachs and Klein are likely low-level CIA/Mossad/ MI6 (take your pick) assets, I will beg to remain skeptical.
Sachs is way beyond forgiveness in my estimation. Klein at least blubs from time to time.
Jeffrey Sachs is no economist. He's a goddam jew!
It puzzles me how 2.4% of the US population is ashkinazi jew but always in or near positions of government. This is how izrael controls my country the USA. They control Congress hence our government by means of AIPAC and they have Americans enthralled.
I use the word "enthralled" instead of hypnotized because of its origin. The word "enthrall" is derived from the Norse word Thrall which means Slave.
So our nation is 97.6% Goyim. Goy is singular and Goyim is plural. This is the term jews use to describe us to non-jews, gentiles. It's a derogatory term.
To the jew Goyim are considered nothing but livestock. LET THAT SINK IN!!!🇵🇸❤️🖤🤍💚
Sachs is an economist and an intelligent man. What he is NOT is a Zionist. What you are describing of the effect of the Israelites and AIPAC has very little to do with ordinary Jewish folk.
Are you aware that in the US it was made clear that to be against the Jewish mafia (such as Mayer Lansky) was "anti Semitic"?
Let that sink in.
I sense a contradiction in your thinking. How do you know that Sachs is not a Zionist?
A few years ago, over 80% of 'jews' globally bought Israeli Peace [sic] Bonds. Let THAT sink in?
If you sense a contradiction in my thinking, that probably means it lies in your reading of what I said.
Otherwise you would have pounced on it and told me about it.
Anyone whether jew or goy, who supports izrael is a zionist. Sachs is the "economist" who was raping Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. Typical jew. I don't trust ANY OF THEM!
No, Sachs did NOT rape Russia. That was the US mafia who did that dirty little game.
If you think Sachs is a "typical Jew" because you have been told lies, then you really should read articles that are more fair. I suggest Substack as a good place to start.
I read the hell out of Substack! I don't know where you're getting your bad info.
"Bad info" is a matter of opinion.
Is that where you get your anti-Jewish potty mouth? From combing through Substack? How about a legitimate college course in political science ( I know , a bit oxymoronic). Perhaps one devoid of Zionist leaning elitist academics like Jeffrey Sachs so that you can voice your opinions without fear of having your 1st Amendment rights trampled by AIPAC funded agent provocateurs raised in Israel.
Tell me —was the 1969 moon landing real? Is Big Foot real? Please comb SUBStack and get back to us
Funny, coming from an Irishman. I used to be a neocon zionist. I was a supporter of izrael my entire life. I'm from Nederland and my grandparents were Dutch Underground during WW2. From 1941 to May 5, 1945 they lost half their group. During that time they hid and protected an entire extended family of jews without a single loss. My grandparents received certificates of gratitude from the nascent zionist state.
My grandparents would do the same for Palestine. Fuck you!
I can't see israhell giving up on its plans for the us to attack Iran, more likely a bit more Kabuki, while they wait for an opportune time, like past strikes during "negotiations" & the assination of the IRGC chief in Iraq!
Thank You, Julian.
Things turned out like i was expecting.
We will see if there is a Nuclear agreement. I am afraid it won't.
But it may take a long time to conclude it was. You know Trump: all Words and no Truth.
And Bibi has at least prevented a complete destruction of the Zionist breeding pond in Palestine.
We can go to bed now without the question 'What will tomorrow bring ?'.
Cassandra
The Persians appear very successful in resisting pressure to develop a nuclear weapon capability. I think it was Oliver Boyd Barrett, who pointed out that as things have developed over the past than the 20 years, there is no longer a need for a country in Iran‘s position to have such weapons. Iran is not North Korea. They can easily afford to promise they will not do what they’ve already declared that they have religious directives not to do. So Trump gets his “victory“ and maybe everybody will just go home. This time. Rinse and repeat.
Trump is easy to manipulate. He is a Me First, bipolar, kneejerk autocrat who can't even bully Cuba.
Trump exposed himself with the Epstein Files as a little pedo who fears his gullible followers will see the real "acting" President for who he really is.
Putin and Xi know his dirty little secret.
Another great article!! Julian, your work is much appreciated!!
The question is why the uss lincoln? The Lincoln is over due for retirement. If you were prepared to lose 1, it would be either the nimitz (which according to rumors is on its way over there) or the Lincoln which is up next to be decommissioned. So the next question would be how are you prepared to lose 1, would it be by Iran's drones and anti ship missiles or FF.
Also alot of ppl talking about taco by moving the Lincoln over back by Yemen. I look at that differently. My guess the US views that they can handle the retaliation from the houthis better than from Iran. They are actually in their opinion in a better striking distance by being over by Yemen away from anti ship missle range and too long of a drone flight. Eastern Yemen and the south is now Saudi controlled. Houthis would have a little harder time striking at that location. They are also out of radar range. Only real time data would be coming from monitoring ships, surveillance drones/satellites. Iran wouldn't know until the planes come into range. Just in my opinion
Thank you for this piece, translated in French here : https://zanzibar.substack.com/p/fabriquer-un-ennemi-la-campagne-americano
Sorry to say, but your Navy Seal buddy isn't very clued up.
Just as one gets ground to air missiles which launch from a static land platform to moving air targets, there are also ground to sea missiles which launch from a static platform to a moving sea target, which is much slower than a moving air target, and easier to hit.
There are also missiles launched from aviation platforms in a stand off position due to their elevation, which can hit moving air, land or sea targets, with land and sea being a cinch because both are slow moving relative to air targets.
No doubt that the Iranians and Russians, have between them many of these missiles in Hypersonic flavour, which means that the US could lose a whole carrier group in the bat of an eyelid.
To your credit, you did mention the drones, which in all probability the Iranians would use to crowd out US navy air defences, and exhaust them, as they have done in the past, then bring in the missiles to do the real damage.
Julian, my understanding of a “color revolution “ is that it is fomented from without; the U.S. needs a revolution without qualifiers—other than it needs to be a worker’s revolution.
'However, I think we are fortunate to have Trump in power rather than a Democrat.
Democrats are just as morally compromised as Republicans or NeoConservatives – but they are much better at peddling sanctimonious bromides for the worst atrocities, making it seem they are working in the public interest, rather than the interests of their donors. Or in their own interests.
Trump—by contrast — lacks both intelligence and subtlety.'
Exactly. There will be people - even in Iran - thinking that this war will have to be fought sooner or later and calculating if the sooner means now. I don't know the battlefield situation but I DO know that the US has put itself in a situation where unless it can wipe Iran off the map, it has lost politically. If Trump backs down it will mean a defeat. If the US takes losses it will be a defeat. If Israel is battered it will be a defeat. If Iran survives it will be a defeat.