Scott Ritter guest on Daniel Davis deep dive.

1. The War Was Predictably Destabilizing The speaker begins by saying any competent analyst should have known that attacking Iran would disrupt global energy markets. Iran has the capability to interfere with oil flows (especially in key shipping lanes), so economic fallout was a “known known”—not a surprise. 2. Failure to Build International Support They contrast this conflict with earlier U.S. wars: 1991 Gulf War: A broad coalition was built before combat—European allies, Arab states, and NATO partners were aligned. 2003 Iraq War: Even though controversial, the U.S. at least attempted to gain NATO backing and international legitimacy. Current situation: No real diplomatic effort was made to build a coalition. Europe is refusing to participate. European economies are already strained (e.g., from Russia sanctions), and this war is worsening their situation. Conclusion: The U.S. acted unilaterally and now stands isolated. 3. No Serious War Planning The speaker argues the war was launched …More

7554
Mike the Pike

"#1 The War Was Predictably Destabilizing" Who benefits? Certainly not US interests. Destabilizing the region is exactly what Israel wants. Bibi's mission accomplished.

Mike the Pike

Starting this war was ill conceived; something a responsible world power would not do.

Not even the democrats were that stupid.

War was used to reduce the national debt…and today is no different…taking Iranian oil and Venezuelan oil could potentially be enough to pay down the trillions owed by the us…just a guess

Mike the Pike

The US government overspends way more than stealing oil will cover. There are probably multiple reasons and groups that support the war for their own interests.

occasnltrvlr

Wars invariably increase national debt.

This urgency to be stupid should have been recognizable after 9/11 and COVID