War: What is it good for?
Before you shout “Absolutely nothing!” maybe talk to Mohammed bin Salman and Jamie Dimon, both of whom suspect that in the end, the war with Iran might be worth it.
There’s now “a better chance” for peace in the Mideast, Dimon said Tuesday, during a chat with former Republican congressman Mike Gallagher, who now runs Palantir’s defense technology unit.
Dimon conceded that an all-out melee in the world’s most combustible region is “risky in the short run” because — and try not to laugh — “we don’t know the outcome of it,” but suggested any visionary worth his salt can see tomorrow’s opportunity in today’s armageddon.
“They all want it,” Dimon said, referring to the Sunni states’ desire for a lasting peace that includes cordial relations with Israel. “They can’t have neighbors lobbing ballistic missiles into their data centers.”
That’s right. It’s all about the data centers. Inshallah, the AI infrastructure will be safe. And no harm shall come Western FDI.
Meanwhile, The New York Times said that despite multiplying risks to Saudi infrastructure from Iran’s retaliatory attacks across the region, bin Salman privately encouraged Trump not only to keep bombing Iran, but to invade it if that’s what it takes to facilitate regime change.
America, bin Salman allegedly told Trump last week, has a “historic opportunity” to recast the region, but that opportunity can only be realized in full if the US military pursues the total “destruction” of Iran’s existing government.
That’s according to interviews the Times conducted with US officials familiar with the two leaders’ conversations, which included the Crown Prince pushing for US boots on the ground in Iran if air power fails to get the job done.
The Times article tacitly suggests that if Trump did consider invading and occupying Kharg Island (as multiple reports indicated), he did so in consultation with bin Salman, whose main concern is unfinished US business.
As the Times put it, “Prince Mohammed probably preferred to avoid a war” at the outset, but now worries he could “be left to confront an emboldened and furious Iran” on his own.
“A half-finished offensive,” the Times went on, “would expose Saudi Arabia to frequent Iranian attacks [and] could leave Iran with the power to periodically close the Strait of Hormuz.”
When Trump pressed bin Salman on soaring oil prices and, presumably, The White House’s desire to bring those prices down posthaste, the Crown Prince reportedly “assured” Trump that high oil prices and any associated damage to the US economy are “only temporary.”
Naturally, the Saudis denied the Times‘s characterization of the talks. Riyadh, the Kingdom said, is committed to a “peaceful resolution,” and not just for the sake of its own interests, but also for those of its sectarian rival in Tehran.
After all, the Saudis remarked, no “stakeholder” is harmed more by the war “than Iran itself.”
On Tuesday afternoon in the US, the Pentagon was preparing to order 3,000 troops from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to deploy to the Mideast.
TRUMP: NOW WE HAVE NEW GROUP OF LEADERS IN IRAN, LET’S SEE HOW THEY TURN OUT
I guess if he doesn’t like them…..
Trial balloons. Now Trump can deny them or accept them, depending on what the rest of the world (stock markets) thinks. But tomorrow, it will be something else someone, somewhere else, says.
And how many troops did MBS offer to commit to this excursion?
Four I believe, as long as you guys supply their chainsaws.
Experienced vets that rode roughshod over their opponent in Turkey.
or dollars, of which they have an abundance and stand to make more?
After all, they are owners, not workers; bosses not muscle. Wouldn’t expect them to do their own dirty work.
I am just excited for Heisenbergs next article about the new 30 day ceasefire and 15 point plan – I.e Tariff Pause 1.0 aka Phase 1 War Talks are Going Well
More of a concept of a plan……
MBS, whose last strategic venture was the price war launched to destroy US shale producers, a war which at least had the benefit of a defined strategic objective (even if a misguided one), may not be the best counsel here. Albeit probably better than Kushner and Witkoff.
I’m sure we’d be delighted to spend more of our time, resources and, sadly, lives, fulfilling MBS’s objectives. He’s free to take the lead.
Saudi have the best military in the GCC, a pipeline to the Red Sea, and the Suez Canal as a route for tankers (Suezmax ones, anyway) if the Houthis act up. UAE have a military plus the French are flying drone interdiction from their base and the Falraigah (sp?) port. Both are trying to diversify from energy and their plans requires peace and stability. Makes sense they are the two most “aggressive” Gulf countries.
I wonder, at some point does Saudi offer to pay in discounted oil for the US’ continued “attention to this matter”?
Honestly, I’ve heard that they are pretty mad about the Formula One races being cancelled due to ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
I’m also thinking, for Saudi, if “finishing” the war results in damage to your energy infrastructure such that your exports are cut in half for a while but oil price doubles, that’s not the end of the world. Seem different for Qatar, who has risk of its exports being mostly knocked out for 3-5 years and losing its long-term contracts while US LNG is on a huge expansion run.
I’m cool. Just send me a plane of my own.
Face it folks – We’re going to WAR. The Saudis, UAE and other oil interests have been funding the GOP since Reagan and beyond. No money, no reelection – that’s all we need to know.
There’s one thing about the previously announced Marine expeditionary forces en route that’s had me scratching my head. Why send them the slow way?
It’s one thing for your second air craft carrier to need a couple weeks to get into position–obviously there’s no fast way to move a ship that size. Marines though, even with all their heavy equipment, can be transported much more quickly. Remember how fast the build up in the ME was for both of the Iraq wars? Hundreds of thousands of soldiers moved in just a couple months.
Here’s my theory (my various calls for diverse island invasions notwithstanding): Washington knows that Tehran knows that “boots on the ground” is politically toxic, so they assume they won’t have to go toe-to-toe with American infantry. Having withstood the first couple weeks, it looks like they’re prepared to wait out an (incredibly expensive for the US) air war while applying maximum economic pain to the rest of the world. So the White House needs to scare them into negotiating. How to do that? Start by telling every news outlet on the planet that you’ve dispatched 3500 Marines or whatever. Next, stick them on the slowest transports you have in your inventory. Then send them steaming on a leisurely cruise across the Indian Ocean.
Hell, they probably instructed those soldiers’ officers to tell the troops, “Yeah, I think we’re going to go take some island or something? Not sure,” then gave everyone internet access with full permission to use their phones and laptops.
The Artesh and the IRGC might be okay with taking their chances with random aerial bombardment, but they no more want to square off wit the the Marine Corp than the Iranian air force wants to take on the USAF in a dog fight. The threat could be just the push necessary to get the military, to the extent they have decision making power, to agree to negotiate. Or at least that’s what the Pentagon is hoping.
…
Sending the 82nd Airborne seems fundamentally different to me. That feels a lot more like Action and a lot less like Threat. We’ll see I guess. Fun to speculate about, but the waiting’s a bastard.
You’re thinking too much like a grownup. This is Trump’s Apprentice President show. You don’t need a plot, just continuing drama to keep the audience tuning in. The show ratings are starting to fall so you really have to turn up the action to keep them watching. When the script requires body count, just remember Trump told you ‘it might get rough’! That’s showbiz. Next week’s show should be a real barn burner with Bibi and The Prince both riding shotgun. A real shoot-em-up.
Alternative thought … Marines can move with heavy equipment and land on the beach. 82nd airborne is mostly just boots. The two are complimentary.
This kind of ties in to my point. When (if) the Marines were en route just as a show of force/intimidation, they didn’t need the support. When you decide you might actually have to pull the trigger on Operation That’s What Shia Said, then you need to prepare actual practical support.
The ship those Marines are traveling on — the U.S.S. Tripoli — is a unique craft. It has no well deck for launching amphibious assault craft. Instead, the marines will have to be air-lifted into place by helicopter or (vertical take-off and landing) Osprey aircraft. That means the marines don’t necessarily have to land on the beach somewhere. The Tripoli also has something like two-dozen F-35B Lightning fighter jets, which are also capable of vertical take-offs and landings. It is hoped the Tripoli — a smaller ship — can get much closer to the action than our traditional aircraft carriers, as those are “too valuable to lose” and must remain at safer distances. That distance greatly reduces their aircraft’s effective “time on target” making them much less effective at policing the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. It is hoped the Tripoli can solve that puzzle, but as of yet it is untested in that role.
but suggested any visionary worth his salt can see tomorrow’s opportunity in today’s armageddon.
If so, this is the first war in all of history where the outcome is ‘easy to see’.
Everybody is talking about Kharg Island and so I think we can presume it will not be Kharg Island. Could we assume Qeshm then? Probably a better, more strategic, target.
This all appears to me like fiat news. Not one thing coming out of this WH can be assumed to be true or in good faith. Someone is paying Trump in crypto for something. I’m going to use the drop in vols to roll my hedges to June. Shit was getting real before this Iran fiasco.
I wouldn’t trust bin Salman any more than Trump, two liars frolicking. The Saudis want Iran and Israel dead. Iran is Persia who hate the Arabs and vice versa, deeply. SA wants to take over Iran and its oil supply. Someone will have to take over and it won’t be us or the Emirates. Who’s left? Egypt?