Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Decision Time in Ukraine
In the Land of Confusion podcast covering the six-month anniversary of the start of the Ukraine War, I stated that the behavior of the Ukrainians over the last six weeks struck me as consistent with their shaping the battlefield for an offensive around Kherson. The types of strikes that Ukraine had been making were designed to isolate Russian forces in Kherson by cutting supply routes, destroying ammo and fuel dumps, and forcing the Russian aircraft out of Crimea. I thought it would start in September, likely mid-September.
It appears I was off by a week or two. Both Ukrainian and Russian sources are reporting that such an offensive has begun. At this point, both sides are declaring they are winning. That, too, is to be expected.
I will make another prediction: This offensive probably means the war will end within the next ten weeks. I am not predicting who will win — just that this battle will likely settle the war. If the Ukrainians succeed, the Russians will be playing the British at Yorktown. If the Russians succeed in stopping the Ukrainians, the Ukrainians will be playing the Germans in the Ardennes. In short, the loser will lack the military assets to continue the war.
We will know better in a week who the likely winner is.
Published in Military
Because it gave them cover for continued nuclear development even though it’s in violation of the agreement, and because Obama sent them lots of cash as a reward.
Well, maybe wishful thinking?
It’s not so easy to dismiss history because it’s inconvenient to one point of view. Even the BLM protests and the whole thing about the Confederate statues (first being erected during Jim Crow, now being taken down) are just the latest iteration of the Civil War’s aftermath.
This stuff didn’t ‘just happen’.
How does that follow? If you liked what they were doing would their grievance suddenly have weight?
Consider: the way they are in the world is due – at least in part – to that grievance. If you don’t like how they are in the world, would addressing that grievance result in a situation more to your liking?
Do as you would be done by. It’s not that complicated.
Hezbollah has been really good for Lebanon. Without Hezbollah they’d likely still be occupied.
It never was.
Sure.
How much US support for Israel is due to the religious beliefs of a critical mass of American voters? If significant, how should the Arab World deal with that?
Is it just me, or was that a huge giveaway?
Actually the IRGC shooting people in the street was pretty much the kiss of death for that movement.
Not so much they just shoot or jail people who disagree with them. There is no popular will in Iran for either the Supreme council or the IRGC. Generally speaking I don’t think the Iranian people favor the foreign policy objectives of the Supreme council and IRGC, but Iran is a republic in the same way China, Russia, and Iraq were republics. i.e. on paper.
There is no resolving the Palestinian’s issues. They are stuck on a maximalist interpretation and won’t be satisfied until they have purged “Palestine” of the Jews, since Israel isn’t going to commit suicide and the Palestinian’s can’t win that issue is going to remain forever. it isn’t even going to be solved by demographics because there is birth rate parity between the two populations.
To gain space to maneuver. They didn’t use the money they received in the JCPOA to help their citizens they used it to support foreign adventures.
Under attack by who? I mean if they were to stop lobbing missiles at their neighbors they wouldn’t be under attack at all.
It is not a colonial project. Their has been a Jewish presence in the region for thousands of year. It was suppressed, ruthlessly by the Romans and eventually the Ottomans. Your opinion is what that the last set occupiers, prior to the British of course have dibs. Why is that the case? Because once Islam conquers some place it must remain Islamic forever more?
We don’t actually. If we would get our act together we wouldn’t need the gulf. Although we do have alliances with the gulf states, so we would prefer that they were not dominated by what they perceive as a hostile power. Also we have a great interest in protecting navigation of the seas. This puts us at odds with the Iranians who want to close the gulf to control oil exports.
I don’t see how the JCPOA changes their leadership’s goals it didn’t the last time. Why would a 2nd attempt change anything.
Well the Iraq war is over. When we left, the first time we got the Islamic State, so we are back somewhat, but that is a complicated quagmire. I agree it was foolish starting the Iraq war. I am not sure we should still be there but Afghanistan was a debacle so not sure that a repeat of that is wise either.
Politifact isn’t really worth the paper it is printed on, but leaving that aside. We know that Iran has been able to hide parts of its nuclear program from the IAEA so their statement that they were broadly in compliance doesn’t pass the smell test. We also know that Iran was suppose to stop working on ballistic missile technology as part of the agreement and they broke that several times. Iran used much of the money from the JCPOA not to support their own people or public spending but to fund foreign adventurism, so not a lot of upside in JCPOA for US.
See article about Iran hiding nuclear information from IAEA:
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-707661
Speaking in general. I think the Iranians always expected to roll the US.
I think the easiest way to avoid it is swift retaliation. I don’t think that there is another way to avoid it. I have noticed that Russia and China don’t have the same issues. I am going to assume that is because people understand the consequences those actions would likely engender. The US is a different matter apparently.
Once again we are discussing pretext verses true cause. BLM is an avowedly Marxist organization. They aren’t tearing down statues because of the aftermath of the civil war or Jim Crow. They are tearing down statues to destabilize the current society in the hope they can remake it in a Marxist image. They will use historic grievances to further that end but to the extent that BLM isn’t just a grift it is a Marxist revolutionary organization.
I don’t think so. I think it is pretext. It is very similar to my feelings about Ukraine. Does Russia have grievance about NATO expansion and Maidan incident perhaps. Does it justify their actions, no. I don’t care about their grievances because I don’t support their goals of reestablishing a Russian Empire or invading a neighboring country. Also I have noticed the Russian leadership really aren’t very nice people. I don’t think a resurgent Russia is good for the world.
Similarly, Iran is a revolutionary state that wants to promote revolution abroad. The goal of these revolutions is to set up a bunch of totalitarian Islamic theocracies loyal to Iran. I don’t support the goal, so I don’t care about Mossadegh or the Iran/ Iraq war. I am also to a loss as to what I should do if I did care but still didn’t support the current goals of Iran. Obama went around the world apologizing for the perceived sins of America. It didn’t seem to buy any good will abroad. Trump blustered and threaten people and yet he is the first president in the last twenty years that didn’t start a new conflict in the world.
That doesn’t work though does it. It would work if Iran wanted to be left alone to grow and prosper, but they don’t. They want to be left alone to export their revolution. Your assumption is they should be allowed to dominate the region. Why? because the British and Americans were mean to them in the 50s? What happens if they get to do what the want. A bunch of kleptocratic terrorist sponsoring states in the Middle East, bonus with nuclear weapons. Doesn’t sound like a great deal to me.
You must be joking. Have you seen Lebanon recently. Beirut use to be a thriving cosmopolitan city. Lebanon had a constitution that tried to deal with it sectarian problems. Now the whole city is an armed camp and the country basically in a civil war that waxes and wanes between cold and hot. Hezbollah is right in the middle of it too. Trying to carve a theocratic Islamic state out of a region that has a diverse religious identity or to put it a different way Hezbollah is one of the reasons Lebanon is a failed state.
Then what is your solution? A free Palestrina from the river to the sea. i.e. another failed kleptocratic militantly Islamic state in the region with a bonus of a genocide thrown in for good measure.
Not much. US supports Israel because it is the only real democracy in the region. We have a lot of interests in common. They are a good trading partner and In general have a pretty good record on human rights. Israel also punches well above its weight in technical and scientific endeavor. Also broadly speaking they do just want to be left alone to thrive and prosper. It is an alignment of values, interests, and culture. Why should the Arab World need to deal with that? (obvious answer so they can destroy Israel and kill all the Jews) I don’t want that to happen so not a fan. Ultimately what I want the Arab world to do is make peace with Israel and start looking at ways to make life better for their own citizenry. I think the world would be a better place if more countries adopted this attitude.
Plenty of kisses of death to go round. But vocal US support would be the equivalent of loud Russian support for a movement in the US. Not helpful.
Iran is not quite that, but I don’t want to quibble, it’s close enough. Iranian public opinion is far from homogenous. There are people who hate the current dispensation, but there are also parts of the population that feel empowered by it and by the Islamic Revolution. I’m personally more sympatico with the first group, but the dispensation is not completely lacking in support.
Of course there is.
Here’s the impact of removing sanction and then the US exiting the deal (basically re-imposing sanctions).
https://tradingeconomics.com/iran/gdp-per-capita
Depends whom you ask, right?
US Bases:
The easiest way to avoid it is to NOT overthrow democratically elected Governments, install an autocrat, back him as he brutally suppresses opposition till the only part still standing is the religious extremists, and then freeze a country’s bank accounts when the autocrat is finally overthrown. If you asked them most Americans might agree, not to mention also see these as actually bad actions.
Well it’s one of the reasons…certainly the reason the statues are there and that tearing them down has resonance.
Put yourself in Iran’s shoes. If another country organised a coup in the US, then installed a dictator who ran the country in a way that benefited him and his pals (and that other country) rather than the American people, backed a brutal suppression of dissent and then kept trying to bankrupt the US when the dictator was finally overthrown – how would you feel about that other country? Truthfully?
History happened. Recognising that it did or not shouldn’t be dependent on whether you like somebody or not. And recognising it certainly doesn’t mean that you support Islamic Revolutions across the world.
Put yourself in their shoes.
Lebanon has a terrible constitution because it entrenches confessional divisions and doesn’t give primacy to the individual. That’s precisely why they have such a disfunctional state, currency, port, you name it.
That said, Hezbollah was born due to the invasion of Lebanon, and without Hezbollah they’d probably still be occupied in part.
I would like people to be free, to get along, to be treated equally and fairly. Which is pollyannaish, I know, but that would be my solution. And I do recognise that if you’re privileged equality can feel like oppression.
If you’re sure.
https://religionnews.com/2022/05/26/poll-white-evangelical-support-for-israel-higher-than-any-other-christian-group/
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/247937/americans-views-israel-remain-tied-religious-beliefs.aspx
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/05/26/as-israel-increasingly-relies-on-us-evangelicals-for-support-younger-ones-are-walking-away-what-polls-show/
But I think it’s something that the Palestinians – Muslim and Christian – need to take into account.
We’re going through that now. Same organization of the same country in our country.
May seem crazy to some here, Hang On, but it is certainly happening here.
From website “MoonofAlabama.org” on Sept 6th or 7th:
AFU has launched an offensive on Balakleya, heavy fighting started is underway
▪️For more than a month, the AFU pulled together reserves and created a strike force in the Kharkiv direction.
▪️Now, after a powerful artillery preparation, they have gone on the offensive, throwing forward armored vehicles, fighting is going on on the outskirts of the city.
▪️The artillery and aviation of the Russian army are hitting the sprawling advancing enemy forces.
▪️Allied forces blew up bridges to obstruct the AFU’s advance.
▪️Armored vehicles work in battles on the outskirts.
▪️Allied reserves are being tightened.
▪️The Russian Aerospace Forces struck the headquarters of the operational command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Chuguev
▪️The offensive in the south is not a distraction, it’s just that the enemy has planned and launched several offensive operations, and attempts to break through are also continuing in the Kherson region
▪️There is no panic. In Balakleya there are mostly mobilized. Now reserves are going to Balakleya. The barrel and rocket artillery are working. Aviation is actively working.
There is no talk of a deep breakthrough. The situation + is similar to the Nahtsee counteroffensive in the Kherson direction.
I believe it has fallen to the Ukrainians.
I was watching a podcast – maybe the Duran? – and heard an opinion that the pro-Ukrainian civilians in Kharkiv (and the East in general) had already fled West. The ones who remain are basically waiting for the Russians. Likely? If so, how would that influence Ukraine’s strategy in this area, especially if there’s a cease fire and Kharkiv remains on the Ukrainian side of the line of division?
Points stipulated. I think we are basically in the same place here.
Pray tell enlighten me?
Per capita GDP is just a statistic. It doesn’t mean the increase in GDP was used to make the lives better of the average Iranian. There were plenty of riots after the JCPOA in Iran specifically because the money wasn’t filtering down and was being used for foreign adventurism.
It always does.
I didn’t say we didn’t have interests an allies in the region. America isn’t interested in dominating the Middle east but we are interested in keeping the gulf open for shipping. Quite frankly if we came to our senses and developed our own domestic energy reserves we could exit the region entirely and make it China and India’s problem. Although given the current state of the world that would probably be unwise too.
Even if I stipulate this you can’t unscramble eggs. This happened over 60 years ago at the height of the cold war, so because of that we should what give the Iranian government freedom to dominate the region? Accept a little nuking among friends? Not be upset that they invaded our embassy and took hostages? You have contextualized their actions but it isn’t really that helpful as a policy prescription for dealing with Iran. In a going forward basis, I tend to agree but that does come with the hefty caveat that we aren’t quite yet in a new cold war.
It could also be that we locked a bunch of healthy young people away from their friends and peers for 6 months and generally ruined their economic and educational prospects and caused a bit of psychosis to develop and then they saw a truly disturbing injustice and were told that it was virtuous to gather and protest it and these people let their pent up passions run away with them.
I would not look on them kindly. I imagine I would fight back against their puppet and them if I could. I can empathize with them. Once again see above doesn’t provide a solution. In fact if I put myself in their shoes then the Last Thing on Earth I am going to allow is anything that makes it possible for them to get nuclear weapons.
Okay once again recognized. Doesn’t help.
Yes but two things. Hezbollah is a foreign backed mostly foreign staffed extra territorial military organization. It has amped up the sectarian violence in Lebanon and by attacking a better armed neighbor of Lebanon using Lebanon as a staging ground caused Lebanon itself to come under attack. I find it interesting that the US is the devil for Mossadegh in 53 and yet Iran is virtuous for inserting this foreign group into Lebanon, double standard much? Plus Hezbollah is most certainly not fighting for the primacy of the individual.
The Lebanese constitution was trying to get around the fact that the Christians and Muslims don’t trust each other and as in Northern Ireland everyone secular or not has a religious identity. It isn’t ideal but it is aiming toward something other than constant war between Christians and Muslims. Hezbollah is perfectly happy with constant war between Christians and Muslims.
Okay so a one state solution with everyone an Israeli citizen? I think that could work in the long term. It isn’t really feasible in the short term.
I agree certain religious groups support Israel. I don’t think it is as big a factor in politics as you do. Primarily because religion in general is in decline in the US. It is probably what has been responsible for the growing amount of partisanship in support for Israel so it is probably more of a liability than an asset, assuming you support Israel.
I doubt it will be pretty. While I generally support the Ukrainians in this conflict, I think there are deep problematic divisions on both sides, and this war will only make that worse.
Which is why the JCPOA is such a good idea! Not perfect, but something to build on and certainly better than nothing.
The Iranian regime currently hankers for a nuclear weapon – not, imo, because it wants to attack Israel but because the regime wants to insulate itself from the threat of “regime change”. So that is a possibility to address.
I know that the Pasdaran were involved in setting up Hezbollah in 1982 – uniting various Shia groups, etc. – but it’s a stretch from that to say that Hezbollah is foreign staffed. It’s solidly Lebanese.
Its political wing currently holds 12% of the seats in the Lebanese Parliament – and apparently, depending on sect and location, some of their support comes from Lebanese Christians.
Fair criticism. But Hezbollah is also the reason that Israel has been deterred from attacking Lebanon since 2006.
The US organised a coup against a democratically elected government. Iran helped a resistance movement that was created because Lebanon had been invaded by Israel. How are these even similar?
Currently none of Lebanon’s parties are.
The Lebanese constitution initially set up a permanent Christian majority in parliament by codifying a 6:5 ratio of Christian:Muslim seats. Predictably that led to conflict, and after the civil war that’s been amended to a 5:5 ratio – which is still problematic.
If the French wanted a permanently Christian client state on the Mediterranean they should have carved a smaller piece out of Syria. The maximum land with a slight Christian majority approach has proved unstable.
Just watched Military Summary – the Ukrainians have done really well and re-taken a lot of land East of Kharkiv, including the town of Balakliia – where, apparently, they have set up filtration camps to identify locals who cooperated with the Russian backed administration over the past few months. So….perhaps another Bucha in the making. War is ugly.
“War is hell. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation.” – Wm. T. Sherman
Not really. The JCPOA was basically unverifiable to begin with also it doesn’t stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon only slows it down for 10 years, assuming they adhere to it in the first place. When they were in the JCPOA they used most of the money not to improve the standard of living of the average Iranian, but on foreign adventurism. I suppose a fair amount was spent to line the pockets of the IRGC but that is to be expected. Iran is after all something of a Kleptocracy. The goals of the JCPOA may have been in the right direction, but in practice it failed to live up to those goals. I therefore don’t think it was a good idea. You could argue I suppose that this is with the benefit of hindsight; however, I would argue that this was totally predictable based on the past actions of Iran.
That may be the case. The current Iranian regime is doing a lot of awful things in the region and the world. I don’t think limiting options for dealing with them is a particularly good idea. As you have stated they believe they have a legitimate grievance against the US and may be willing to do a lot for vengeance, so I am not all that sanguine about trying my luck with them having a nuclear weapon. I believe that the eminent historian Bernard Lewis said that Mutual Assured Destruction isn’t a deterrent to Iran but an inducement. I am not sure if he was being hyperbolic or not. I am not willing to take the risk.
Plus once Iran has a nuclear weapon In very short order the Gulf states will likely acquire them. I imagine with that kind of wealth they will be able to purchase a few from somewhere. Then we have not one unstable regime with nuclear weapons but many. I don’t consider that a recipe for making the world a safer place.
Plus what is to keep Iran from giving a nuclear weapon to a terrorist group? They could then basically drive it across the southern or northern border into the US and detonate it where ever they wish. We might suspect Iran but would it be enough to retaliate? These are really scary scenarios. I lived with a healthy fear and respect of nuclear weapons in the hands of Russia and China. I am not really interested in having that extended to whole host other states.
Fair enough. I hadn’t done enough research into the origins of Hezbollah.
Has it really? I think it is more likely that Israel is responding to attacks on it by Hezbollah by attacking Hezbollah in Syria. Kudos for Hezbollah using a failed state next door as a proxy to keep Israel from attacking Lebanon again, I suppose that shows a better judgement than Hamas. I suspect if they were to launch strikes from Lebanon again Israel would respond in Lebanon.
Hezbollah is far from a simple resistance group. They have carried out attacks in Istanbul, they attempted an attack in Cyprus, and of course have helped destabilize the situation in Syria. They are a terrorist group or at least an exporter of Islamic Revolution.
True. They actually more worried about survival.
Like I said neither side trusts each other. I would assume that if Hezbollah were to control the parliament there would be another civil war in Lebanon.
I am not so much a fan of colonialism that I particular care what Frances desires are. I can understand the Christians of Lebanon not wanting to be massacred en mass by their Muslim neighbors. As occasionally happens to the Copts in Egypt, Baha’i’s in Iranian, or the Yazidis in Iraq. Islam isn’t very tolerant of minority religious beliefs in the Middle East.
No, I said that’s why they don’t trust you.
Why is that more likely?
You would assume wrong. Hezbollah was part of the ruling coalition until quite recently and there has not been civil war in Lebanon.
This is the best film about the aftermath of the Civil War that I’ve seen:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2730046/
https://www.netflix.com/au/title/81600613
I cannot recommend it enough – it’s a really excellent film and I think you’d enjoy it and learn something about Lebanon as well.
Best Regards
Then you asked me walk a mile in their shoes if you recall.
Because Israel has been attacking Hezbollah in Syria, and they haven’t attacked in Lebanon. I suspect the situation in Syria is chaotic enough that it makes for a fair enough way to wage a proxy war with Hezbollah without the messiness that an attack on Lebanon would incur.
Part of the ruling coalition is they same as in control. Technically the Arab parties in Israel are part of the ruling coalition in the Knesset in Israel right now. They have some power but not enough to fundamentally change the nature of the state. I suspect that it is the same with Hezbollah right now.
Thanks for the recommendation. I will have to check it out sometime.
It’s really excellent.
Re Hezbollah, just from wiki but:
This is dated, as the coalition recently lost the majority, but just to point out that there is more going on in Lebanon and with Hezbollah than is often assumed in the West6.
And since it’s great Lebanese movies time (I guess), here’s another which is set during the 2006 war:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1094275/
https://www.netflix.com/au/title/70084188
What’s interesting is that it was actually shot DURING the 2006 war, using refugees as extras – so their sets are pretty lifelike. It’s an entirely Arab cast – iow it does not involve Israelis as characters. But very interesting also.