War on Terrorism (Politics)

[Mick Harper]

I demand you stop making nuclear weapons.
I'm not making nuclear weapons.
I'll give you billions of dollars if you stop.
Oh, all right, if you twist my arm, I'll carry on not making nuclear weapons.
In that case I can lift the sanctions imposed on you for making nuclear weapons as well.
Does that mean I can buy some new Swiss centrifuges?
Whatever.

[Mick Harper]

You haven't achieved any of your war aims, have you?.
Like what?
Regime change, for instance.
Of course I achieved regime change.
So how are you getting along with the new one?
Really well. They seem very sensible.
So their leader has forgiven you for putting him in hospital with life changing injuries and killing his revered father?

[Mick Harper]

The Cage Fight Plot is of exceptional technical interest for professional conspiracists such as myself. The methodology--organising dozens of people via chat rooms to go out and buy roomfuls of heavy weaponry then meeting up in Washington on Donald Trump's birthday, to launch drones during the UFC event on the White House lawn, thereby creating sufficient pandemonium in the audience and disarray among law enforcement as to enable the picking off of individual targets with sniper fire--was visionary, though perhaps open to criticism in detail.

It introduced a new term in the revolutionary lexicon to most people (not me obviously): Accelerationism. The people who espouse the doctrine are hence 'accelerationists' though they prefer the more homely accelarists.

They are part of the broad church of what we would call 'nihilism' though of course what they mean is the engendering of a period of chaos of such intensity that they would ride to the rescue with their solution, and be thanked for it.

Their broad political position can be understood by the fact that their plot was intended to remove the Trump government for being too liberal. Their goal is a return to the eighteenth century--hence outflanking socialists who look to the nineteenth--and the reinstatement of an America of exclusively male white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Though I understand there is a place for women and blacks.

Not being American I hesitate to offer any value judgements.

[Mick Harper]

Now the Memorandum of Understanding has finally been published, should we agree with the catcalls from all sides?

'It's a surrender by America.'
'It's a sell out to the Iranians.'
'We got this after all we've been through?'
'Obama's settlement was better.'

Yadda yadda. No, we shouldn't. It's true it is nowhere near what I was confidently predicting but there are reasons to be pleased. And not just because it is a return to the relative peace and quiet of the status quo ante.

What people forget is that all the nuclear stuff was strictly performative. What was required was the reining in of the Iranians to prevent them going round causing mischief where 'ere they pleased. They cannot do this any longer because it will jeopardise all those billions she needs to rebuild what the USA and Israel have cast asunder by their bombing.

And, yes, we do have a regime change. Not the one Trump (and most Iranians) were hoping for but one consisting of a loose alliance of IRGC honchos and some parliamentary leftovers. Their number one task is not spreading the Shiite revolution so beloved of the previous entrenched Mullah regime, it is making Iran livable again. And fast or they won't be there long enough to get entrenched in anything except their graves.

That can only be done with vast inflows of capital and will only happen if a modicum of good Iranian behaviour is shown. So they can kiss goodbye to any thoughts of tolling the Strait. And the Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah (and allied outfits) can kiss goodbye to Iranian largesse.

Of course that means Israel running rampant but one bunch of arseholes at a time.

[Grant]

Most crucial goal for Iran must be to build more drones, preferably long-distance ones which can reach the USA. Only if Americans feel threatened by the mayhem they have caused will they stop causing the mayhem.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Iran is regularising it control of the Strait.

Shipping companies that want to transit the Strait must, contact the new Autority ie the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), submit a prior request (sic), include vessel contact details and route information, and then coordinate their route and transit timing with the (PGSA) before entering the Strait.

During the stated 60-day MOU period, no fees will be charged for security/safety/environmental services, and insurance will be covered by the Iranian government.

My guess is that during these 60 days, a regional transit scheme will be agreed, that will allow for the future charging of fees not tolls.

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

For now, Iran appears to retain the power to close the Strait, the IRGC merely announces it is closed and the majority of shipowners are going to play by Iranian (Persian Gulf Strait Authority) rules or will stay away.

There are no clear traffic management procedures' backed by a credible security guarantee, that would ensure the Strait returns to its pre war situation.

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

[Mick Harper]

In the hope this will end a fascinating (to us) but possibly overlong (for everyone else) dispute between us, Wiley, I will concede

1. There is a possibility that for reasons of expediency Trump will, formally or tacitly, allow an Iranian tolling system to be established.
2. There is a possibility that the UN will decide not to effectually intervene in this arrangement.
3. There is the possibility that the other Gulf states will acquiesce for the sake of peace and harmony.
4. There is a possibility that maritime nations will advise their ships to pay up.

I just don't think it will happen. Not in the long term. Say, two years from now.