The US-Iran War Has Begun

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Times of India is discussing in great length that the Iran most likely used now the HQ-9B long-range air defence system Made in China instead of Russia's S300. And that it failed horribly to do its job. So experts are now discussing if the system suffered of technical shortcomings, or was overwhelmed by the sheer amount of the combined air strike.

Very interesting read.

Did China’s HQ-9B fail Iran? Big questions after US, Israel strikes - The Times of India

International News: Mass destruction across more than 20 Iranian provinces following coordinated US and Israeli airstrikes has raised serious questions about the performa.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Financial Times (Evernote link because paywall) Trump ‘very disappointed’ in Starmer’s stance on Iran strikes

Donald Trump has said Sir Keir Starmer “took far too long” to shift his position on the US using UK military bases to launch strikes against Iran, and that he was “very disappointed” in the prime minister.

The US president told The Telegraph on Monday: “That’s probably never happened between our countries before,” adding: “It sounds like he [Starmer] was worried about the legality.”

Starmer explicitly declined to endorse the initial US and Israeli operation against Iran, reflecting concerns that the strikes would be illegal under international law.

Well, errm, yes, HMG is a bit worried about the legality of the operation.

Following Iranian attacks across the Middle East, Starmer on Sunday night approved the use of UK bases by the US for the limited purpose of launching strikes against Iranian missile depots and launchers.

The UK prime minister said the move was “defensive” and cited the self-defence of British nationals and interests in the region, as well as the collective self-defence of allies.

I'm not sure Starmer was left with much choice. Quite apart from the fact Iran has been launching missiles at the UK's allies in the area -- Arab states as well as US bases and Israel -- there's the ever-present need, at least for the time being, to keep Trump onside with NATO, to deter the very real threat of Russian incursions in the Baltic republics, Norway and possibly Poland.

That shouldn't have to be a consideration but, unfortunately, it is.

Also, of course, now that Trump has started something in Iran he has no idea of how to finish, it's probably a good idea to degrade Iran's ability to launch missiles against its neighbours, since now no one has any idea of who, or how many conflicting factions, will be controlling them in a month or so's time.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

One thing is clear: in case the mullah regime or parts of it will stay in power this will refuel the will to get own nuclear arms.

Iran has the 3rd biggest oil reserves on the planet. When looking on the map its surrounded by countries with nuclear arms: Israel, Russia, China, Pakistan, India.

Also American nuclear arms are stationed in Turkey, and many people think that Saudi Arabia wants to get its own batch as well once its first civilian nuclear power plant becomes operational.

So from a geostrategic view getting nuclear arms makes a lot of sense to Iran.

 

[Beebo Brink]

I have a love/hate relationship with The Bulwark, but they do offer some interesting insights that I probably would not hear from more liberal-leaning sources. I've been subscribed for a month, just to test the waters, and that's given me access to Members Only videos at this crucial time.

Last night I listened to two conservative hawks and a retired miliary officer discussing the technicalities of waging war. It's pretty obvious that Trump's attack on Iran is burning through our stockpile of weapons at a brisk pace. Not only is there an enormous cost involved with this, but our stockpiles are not unlimited. It took years to produce what we have now, and they cannot be replaced quickly.

After the fall of Russia, the U.S. transitioned off of a war footing into peacetime. The Clinton administration oversaw the consolidation of a numerous war machinery companies, while others simply ceased to produce weapons. These large merged companies continued to innovate new weapons, but the stock of each product was very small.

Despite Trump's assertion about being at war for the next 4 weeks, the true limitation is how long before we reach a critical point on weapons we can spare versus how many do we keep in reserve for use in protecting our country against direct attack. If Trump ignores that caution, then he risks leaving the "most powerful nation on earth" indefensible against very real enemies who have kept their powder dry until we were vulnerable.

I don't credit Trump with any restraint at all, no matter the consequences. And I wish I lived farther away from Washington D.C.....

 

[Isabeau]

NATO secretary praises the “Leader of the free world”.

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com)

NATO Secretary Mark Rutte: "The commander in chief, the leader of the free world, President Donald J Trump -- I really commend what is happening here."

bsky.app

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Last night I listened to two conservative hawks and a retired miliary officer discussing the technicalities of waging war. It's pretty obvious that Trump's attack on Iran is burning through our stockpile of weapons at a brisk pace. Not only is there an enormous cost involved with this, but our stockpiles are not unlimited. It took years to produce what we have now, and they cannot be replaced quickly.

That the stockage is quite limited became evident with the start of the Ukraine war.

In terms of artillery ammunition for example, not exactly the most sophisticated ammo, Russia was producing in 2024 3x more in a year then Europe and America - combined. (https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html). Maybe this was a little bit better in 2025.

Also another limiting factor is that the more advanced the weapon system, the more likely it needs rare-earth elements at some degree, which China is only grudginly delivering to the West. But with the trade war going on this is for sure still quite full of tensions and delays.

Also we must not forget that China tried to become a diplomatic player in that region as well and negotiated the Saudi Arabia-Iran agreement in 2023, which contained both countries restoring diplomatic relations again and opening embassies. So China must be quite unhappy with what's going on there as well, which again will not help to increase rare earth minerals deliveries.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Exclusive | Trump won’t rule out sending US troops into Iran ‘if necessary’— tells The Post war is progressing ‘way ahead of schedule’

“I have to do the right thing,” Trump told The Post. “I have to do the right thing. This should have been done a long time ago.”

nypost.com

 

[Free]

Well that's good...wait, what!?

Goal of strikes on Iran is not regime change, Hegseth says

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said today that the US strikes on Iran is not meant to be “regime change,” while he acknowledged that the leadership in the country has changed.

“This is not a so-called regime change war, but the regime sure did change and the world is better off for it,” Hegseth said.

President Donald Trump has, however, pushed for regime change.

Yeah, I've actually heard him say that.

Who the fuck has the keys to this war machine? Are there even keys? Can just anybody get in and drive away with it?

 

[Free]

(just in case

 

[Free]

Kuwait ‘mistakenly’ shoots down 3 US F-15s: Pentagon

Kuwait “mistakenly” shot down three U.S. F-15 fighter jets on Sunday after strikes were launched against Iran one day earlier, according to U.S. Central Command (Centcom).

Centcom said in a statement that the fighter jets were downed in Kuwait shortly after 11 p.m. EST Sunday.

The jets “were mistakenly shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses,” according to the statement.

The six service members who were on board the jets “ejected safely,” Centcom added, and are “in stable condition.”

That at the very least is good to hear. Meanwhile...

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Uh, yes. No principles and no standards. It’s been on display for decades.

 

[Casey Pelous]

We elected George W. Bush. Someone out there still thought the US had principles or standards?

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

We elected George W. Bush. Someone out there still thought the US had principles or standards?

Bush was a step down but knew it was important to at least pretend to care about some basic rule of law. Not saying he genuinely cared, but Trump and his administration can't even pretend to give a shit. We hit rock bottom then continued to drill.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

BBC Verify: US-Israel war with Iran sees AI fakes and disinformation spread online

Latest updates from the BBC's specialists in fact-checking, verifying video and tackling disinformation.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Bush was a step down but knew it was important to at least pretend to care about some basic rule of law. Not saying he genuinely cared, but Trump and his administration can't even pretend to give a shit. We hit rock bottom then continued to drill.

Bush jr. at least believed in god, Trump just believes in himself and money. Big difference. I will take Bush jr. over Trump every time.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

Bush jr. at least believed in god, Trump just believes in himself and money. Big difference. I will take Bush jr. over Trump every time.

Yeah, Bush Jr. wasn't my ideal leader by ANY means, but Trump has managed to make him look okay by comparison.

 

[Isabeau]

Why not neither? \o/

 

[Free]

Why not neither? \o/

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

Why not neither? \o/

Well I mean... if I had unlimited power to pick a President of course I'd pick neither!

 

[Free]

The hits just keep hitting ourselves with our own hands.

‘Paranoid’ Pentagon Officials Are Secretly Panicking

Military officials are sounding the alarm over a looming disaster that Trump has not taken into account.

web.archive.org

Pentagon officials are worried about Donald Trump’s Iran strikes spiraling out of control if they stick to his timeline.

While the president boasts that the strikes could continue for several more weeks, military leaders are sounding the alarm behind the scenes about U.S. air defense stockpiles running out if the fighting goes on that long.

“The mood here is intense and paranoid,” one insider told The Washington Post.