OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
No bio...
User ID: 359
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
12hr ago
All the sources I have seen say the opposite - the negotiations leading up to military action was basically the US begging Iran to just give up on the nukes and Iran saying, "Nope, I'd rather die."
Laurence Norman, WSJ reporter in Germany, says, "My understanding comes from non-U.S. officials close to the talks as well as what Washington has said. This is what we have from 3 people."
Iran came to Geneva on Thursday with a draft text of a few pages as it had been asked. It did not permit the U.S. or others to keep the text. It was planning to do so Monday at the technical talks. But they talked through what was in it. But the draft text was not the key text
Attached to the text was a single piece of paper, which Iran described as its 10 year nuclear plan. The text was based around the idea that as Iran's enrichment needs expanded, it's enrichment should be permitted to expand. The paper set out an ambitious set of targets or expanding its civilian nuclear program. The new version of the Khondab reactor (formerly known as Arak heavy water reactor) would be completed. A number of other long-planned, never-built research and power reactors would be put into operation.
In order to fuel those supplies, Iran would need to run 30 cascades of IR-6 advanced centrifuges Tehran said. That's more than 5,000 advanced centrifuges. Iran would need to be able to enrich up to 20% to meet the demands. That is what Iran was proposing.
Let's compare that for a moment to JCPOA. For the first decade under that accord, Iran was permitted around 6.000 IR-1 basic centrifuges. For 15 years, its enrichment purity cap was 3.67%. In other words, Iran was saying the enrichment deal shld be weaker than the Iran deal.
I don't know why there are two such diametrically opposed narratives. I don't think there is any reason to believe the WSJ, which tends to be center left in the US, would try to run propaganda for Trump. I don't know what reason Oman might have to lie, except perhaps to increase their importance by making it sound like negotiations were going well.
Given Iran's past behavior regarding nuclear enrichment, I tend to believe the WSJ story as it is more in line with their past and present actions.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
2d ago
I'd rather be Spain or France than Qatar, so that's still pretty true.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
You may not like the US, but I would rather be arrested in the US for suspicion of killing my father than arrested in Iran for suspicion of not wearing a head covering.
I would rather be an enemy of the US than an ally of Iran. Iran has responded to attacks by bombing civilian infrastructure of previously friendly countries. Meanwhile, the US is very precisely (as far as these things go) targeting enemy combatants and the infrastructure of war.
There is a huge moral difference between the two regimes which cannot be conflated and it really does color the rest of the analysis.
You said Iran was stockpiling conventional weapons to take Israel hostage to buy time for themselves to make a nuclear weapon.
I mean yes, it is clearly a purpose of Iran to stockpile conventional weapons until the point where attacking them would be too costly to consider. You do not dispute that their long term goal is to make a nuclear weapon.
You do not have to be a conspiracy theorist to just think, if the first objective was achieved, how would it impact the second? It's not a conspiracy, even if absolutely no one in the regime was thinking on these terms it would still be true. If Iran had enough weapons they could hold the whole Middle East hostage and we would have no ability to intervene in their Nuclear ambitions.
And they are willing to do so as we can see with their present actions. It seems that the only fallacious thinking on my part is that they would be content to hold Israel hostage, when clearly they would also turn on the Gulf Coast as well.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
[Cardinal Pierre][https://x.com/BrianBurchUSA/status/2042307511504519366] also denies it.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
Don't launch or abet wars of aggression (extermination?) against Iranians, and you're good.
Which is why Iran armed and trained Hamas and Hezbollah to attack Israel. Israel, which was on Iran's side during the Iraq-Iran war.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
They also kill civilians en masse along with rape, torture and executions of prisoners.
When is the last time the United States of America shot over ten thousand of its own unarmed citizens for protesting? When is the last time the United States of America had as part of it's legal code a requirement to rape female prisoners before execution to prevent them from having a good afterlife? In what jurisdiction can you receive torture as a sentence in the United States of America?
Execution is fine and just but only for murder and only after a fair trial.
Is Iran intending on nuking eastern Europe?
No, that is to demonstrate how far their current delivery systems have been proven to reach, since most people don't know how far Diego Garcia is from Iran. They have been working on delivery systems to reach the US. That is the direction they are heading.
And yeah, I feel comfortable saying I want the US to be able to attack wherever it needs to, and I do not want Iran to attack me. This is only hypocrisy if you view the US government and the IRGC on equal moral footing. You seem to. I don't.
It's not a conspiracy theory that Iran has nuclear material and is working towards making nukes. This is something everyone has known and the framework everyone has been operating under for the past 20+ years.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
Well yeah. The IRGC literally talks like Saturday Morning Cartoon Villains out of GI Joe. They are behind October 7th, the Houthi's, Hezbollah, etc. They are a major source of instability and terrorism in the region (not the sole source, but one of the two big ones.)
A year ago 85% of Iranians did not support the IRGC and that was before the Basaji killed 45,000 protestors. Presumably the number is higher now. You are conflating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps with the people of Iran, who largely want their 2,500-year-old monarchy back and permission to do TikTok dances without getting raped then executed.
What are the priorities of the "Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp?" You might be able to guess it, given that the I doesn't stand for Iran but for Islam. The Iranian people, the country of Iran, is not their priority. Instead, they see it as their primary purpose, "to prepare the world for the emergence of Imam of the Age.” Mahdism is their stated purpose, and Mahdism requires that they destroy the US and Israel to bring about the return of Mahdi.
If you doubt me, why do you think the Iranian internet has been mostly shut off except for members of the regime for the duration of the protests and war? The people of Iran do not support the IRGC, the IRGC does not exist for the benefit of the people of Iran.
Iran even before the war was on the verge of collapse. Even before the war, Iran was looking to relocate the capital because they mismanaged their water supply so badly. "Iran is looking to relocate the nation’s capital because of severe water shortages that make Tehran unsustainable. Experts say the crisis was caused by years of ill-conceived dam projects and overpumping that destroyed a centuries-old system for tapping underground reserves."
Droughts lead to food shortages, food shortages lead to famine, famine leads to millions of dead people. Yes, even in the 21st century.
As far as the actions the US took during the Cold War, people forget that the Soviet Union and Communism were legitimately bad and that communists were and still are existential threats. Sure, if you take all the actions the US did during the Cold War out of context of the Cold War, remove the enemy from the descriptions of events, they sound bad. You can do that for any conflict. "Did you know in the 1940s, the US and Britain invaded Normandy Beach in France and killed 10,000 people. Can you believe it? What did Vichy France do to the US to justify that treatment?"
Meanwhile, the IRGC has enough enriched uranium to make several nukes and had delivery systems that could reach Eastern Europe (as shown by that they were able to target Diego Garcia recently.) They were working rapidly on stockpiling conventional weapons to overwhelm Israel and hold them hostage the same way North Korea is able to hold Seoul hostage. Once that was complete, they could complete their nukes in peace, just like North Korea. They aren't doing this for the love of science! There's only one reason to have these expensive and risky programs and to keep increasing the range.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
3d ago
I was around five years old when my mom first told me, "I love your father, I just don't like him very much." I wasn't really great at setting firm boundaries at the time.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
4d ago
Just War is so interesting, because we have the historical record where it is interpreted as, "My clerics say the throne is rightfully mine by both our laws, therefore I will wage war to press my claim," as just, but now we quibble about, "Sure they are destroying the weapons and weapon factories of a regime that is hellbent on killing us/our allies and executing their own citizens, but do we understand and believe our leaders' justification for doing so?"
New Polity did a podcast on the Iranian war and although they were very harsh on the war I came away believing that the war was not only just but that not prosecuting it would have been a wrong. Because they were just ignorant on the basic details of the whole matter, and when you substitute in the facts the argument goes the other way.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
4d ago
how we like to interact in social settings
I think this is something where it is good to have differences. One partner more gregarious, one partner more reserved. The reserved partner makes sure the gregarious partner gets rest and gives them an excuse to bow out of social gatherings. The gregarious partner makes sure the reserved partner gets to escape their own head from time to time.
How men and women communicate will always be different. The question isn't if you can learn to communicate the same way. The question is can you learn how to understand and respect each other even when you communicate your feelings differently.
But of course, I'm just a stranger on the internet spitballing based on key phrases you throw my way. I don't really know what you and your partner are like. My sole credentials are that I'm happily married after ten years and four kids, and my parents were miserably married and I got to see that up front and personal because my mom saw me as her confidante.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
4d ago
The capstone marriage vs. the cornerstone marriage, as I have heard it. Do you only get into relationships as a reward for putting in the hard work of becoming a person worthy of a relationship, or is the relationship the firm foundation the rest of your life is built on?
If you both view the relationship as "the firm foundation the rest of your life is built on" and you are both committed to giving 100% to each other regardless of if it feels like you are getting 100% back (because sometimes one person's 100% only feels like 50% to the other person), then you will be fine. If that level of commitment is the thing you are hoping changes, then run away screaming.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
4d ago
Oftentimes when people say scores they mean thousands instead of the actual number of 20.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
5d ago
Does a ceasefire reset the clock on getting congressional approval to continue the "Military operations?"
I give even odds that missiles are flying within a week. Largely because I think the US accepted thinking Iran would let all ships cross the strait unhindered, and Iran thinks they get to still control the strait. US will say Iran violated the ceasefire and there will be another ultimatum to the poor unfortunate power plants.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
8d ago
Being Indian was one of the known and accepted "exceptions" of the 14th Amendment. To figure out if new exceptions apply, we need to suss out an underlying logic to the exceptions everyone already agrees on. I think answering this question incorrectly would seem to indicate that the internal logic you took to get there must not be right.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
9d ago
If I recall correctly, carriers typically dock for maintenance every six months, this one's been adventuring for a year now.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
9d ago
Americans just find Europeans annoying.
Except the data showed the opposite effect. Americans think Europeans are more capable than Europeans believe themselves to be.
Or maybe that's the crux, Americans think, "Europe is about the same size as the US when considered together, they coordinate together through this EU thing. Even working individually, European nations conquered half the world in the recent past. Europe is capable of doing more, but they are not for some reason." Which is frustrating to Americans.
Meanwhile, Europeans think, "America is so big and we're so little, they are so rich and we're so poor, their military so dominating and ours so stagnating. We fall over at the smallest breeze and America blowhards keep puffing."
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
10d ago
I think we need to keep in mind the specific strategic goals Rubio laid out at the beginning and has been sticking two whenever he gives a speech:
- Destroy their weapons factories
- Destroy their navy
- Destroy their air force
- Destroy their chances of ever having a nuclear weapon
We've done the middle two very comprehensively. We're doing the first pretty thoroughly. The last one is hard to define a victory condition of, how do you destroy a "chance?" But the US can say, 3/4 isn't that bad, and take that as a win given the primary goals the leadership has been sticking to this whole time.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
10d ago
I have never watched Mad Men, but there is this meme where two men are in an elevator. The first says, "I feel bad for you." The second says, "I don't think about you at all."
If you had two stickers, one labeled US and one UK/EU, which sticker would you put on the first man, and which on the second?
On the first thought, maybe you'd put the US sticker on the guy who says, "I don't think about you at all." Because after all, the US is a superpower that just Leeroy Jenkins its way through foreign affairs and seems to have grown increasingly disinterested in what Europeans have to say about it.
When people are polled, however, something interesting emerges: https://ecfr.eu/publication/how-trump-is-making-china-great-again-and-what-it-means-for-europe/
Here is one poll question: Generally speaking, thinking about the US, which of the following best reflects your view on what they are to your country?
In Switzerland, 21% of people view the US as "An adversary—with which we are in conflict" compared to just 8% as, "An ally—that shares our interests and values." They seem to be on the extreme for Europe. The UK seems to be on the other (European) extreme: 25% view the US as "An ally—that shares our interests and values." The EU10 is in the middle at 16% seeing the US as an ally.
The reverse was polled to Americans: Generally speaking, thinking about the EU which of the following best reflects your view on who they are to your country?
The total for the US was 40% who would agree that the EU is "An ally—that shares our interests and values." This percentage is higher in Harris voters than Trump voters, but importantly, Trump voters were still at 30%, which is higher than even the UK's rosy view of the US compared to the rest of Europe.
Another interesting question is: Which of the following best reflects your view on the EU's global standing?
46% of Americans said, "The EU is a power that can deal on equal terms with global powers, such as the US or China." Comparatively, EU10, Switzerland, and UK were all in the 30s of percentage points. There seems to be a gap between how important/capable the US thinks Europe is compared to Europe's self-perceptions.
The pattern emerges that people in the US are more likely to think that the people of Europe are both capable and share our interests and values, while the people of Europe disagree. I don't know who is right, but I think it is important for both groups to be aware of this emerging dynamic.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
10d ago
Can you give an example of that?
In 2012, President Barack Obama stated that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government would be a "red line" that would make us likely to intervene militarily. A major sarin gas attack in Ghouta happened August 2013. President Obama pivoted to a diplomatic deal brokered by Russia. Hooray, we can't possibly have made the Europeans mad by not doing something!
However, you'd be surprised. France was particularly incensed. President Hollande had already authorized French jets to prepare for takeoff, expecting a coordinated strike with the U.S. When the US pulled back at the last minute, French officials felt humiliated and "left in the lurch." Foreign Minister Fabius later remarked, "We regret it because we think it would have changed many things," and suggested that this perceived American weakness emboldened Russia's later annexation of Crimea.
British PM Cameron remained frustrated that the world's response was being "contracted out" to a Russian veto at the UN. He argued that the failure to act would damage the credibility of international prohibitions on chemical weapons.
Germany was happy, so I guess we can make the Germans happy if we just stayed in our borders.
This event is often cited by European leaders as the moment they realized they could not always rely on U.S. security guarantees, fueling the modern push for European "strategic autonomy." Which, to be honest, more power to them.
But then if you look at the parallels to the current situation, it's striking. Trump gives a red line, "Don't harm protestors." Iran kills them by the thousands. This time, we act. Now like before there is wailing and gnashing of teeth.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11d ago
Iran blockading the Strait of Hormuz is not rationally ensuring their survival. It makes regime change more pressing. It is confirmation that they are indeed lead by a doomsday death cult, justifying the US treating them like that.
I'm tired of the US (or I guess Israel) being treated like the only country that has any agency in the world. We do something, it's our fault. We don't do something, it's our fault. Our enemies do something, it's our fault. If we didn't attack Iran and they went on a nuclear rampage in 10 years, it would be our fault. What does Europe even want from us? Why should we keep trying to seek their approval when it's just impossible to get? If we acted like Europe we'd all be dead or Soviets. Don't they want us to act differently? Don't they want us to be the Yang to their Yin? And if not, I think we just need to stop caring about what Europe wants at all.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11d ago
I don't think of myself as MAGA.
In 2008 Greenland held a referendum on self-governance, which Denmark agreed to honor. A 2009 law guaranteed Greenland the right to leave altogether, if they so chose, and in fact that's the direction Greenland is currently headed in. Greenland's governance has been up in the air as a potential opportunity for almost two decades now. It doesn't seem entirely contrary to Greenland or Denmark's preferences for the US to turn Greenland into a US protectorate. At least, up until the wrong person started trying to talk about it openly.
Consider that us approaching Denmark instead of going straight to Greenland itself was a sign of respect, which was completely misinterpreted.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11d ago
Danes already have about 150 permanent personnel in Greenland. That would have served as a tripwire force by itself. Adding more, and making a big show of it, but not enough to actually fight back, was manifestly ridiculous.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11d ago
Danes already have about 150 permanent personnel in Greenland. That would have served as a tripwire force by itself. Adding more, and making a big show of it, but not enough to actually fight back, was manifestly ridiculous.
OracleOutlook
🇺🇸 Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11d ago
Meanwhile you've killed scores of civilians, support displacement of millions, bomb population centers with impunity, and your president is threatening to escalate to committing large scale war crimes with childlike glee, as a Tough Negotiation tactic that he finds very clever. Let me cite it in full:
Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be. By scores do you mean dozens? We have certainly killed fewer than the Iranians own government did a couple months back. Most Iranians are not displaced. Most homes are in tact. The Iranians I see who can still get the occasional internet access say that they aren't afraid of the bombs, they're afraid of the bombs stopping because that means the war is over and the IRCG is still in charge.
Targeting mixed-use infrastructure is not actually a war crime and there are ways to target infrastructure without permanently destroying it. Trump might actually be legitimately senile and I hope he gets replaced soon, but the military is still run by competent good people. Don't pay any attention to anything on Truth Social ever and you'll probably have a clearer view of world events.
No, they didn't. The US offered to supply enriched uranium to Iran that is suitable for civilian use, a situaon similar to the UAE and Korea (two other nations that for various reasons have forfeited their ability to enrich fuel but still employ civilian nuclear programs). Iran rejected this - they want to be able to enrich their own.
Oman said, "Zero accumulation" which might be a trick of language. There is 0 accumulation if it all goes back into centrifuges. According to three other sources Iran had a 10 year nuclear enrichment plan which included:
Everything keeps coming back to the idea that Iran completely misread how serious Washington is being when they say, "No Nuclear Enrichment."
More options
Context Copy link