I think people in the US are seriously discounting this. The only thing that Iranian forces have to do is keep lobbing drones. You don't need leadership, heavy industry, or even a lot of drones as long as you keep lobbing them.
It takes very little for them to keep disrupting things which affect the global economy.
Even if leadership changes at the top and isn't killed, why would independent cells of fighters stop?
I think there's a huge possibility that Iran can keep being disruptive longer than the US is willing to spend $$$$$ bombing and intercepting.
One nuance here is where that $$$$ actually goes. The US has a history of diverting a staggering amount of money to the war companies every 2 decades or so. The spend here might be the goal, not the cost.
Because currently the working population pays what is effectively a tax for health insurance. I pay over $450 a month for a family plan, and that's cheap and subsidized AND I need to pay for copays/deductible/coinsurance.
So taxes could go up $5k/yr but if I got health insurance, I'm better off.
The savings would take longer to realize because they come from better contracts, better preventative care, increased screenings etc.
Would you still approve if the cost is 20x, the Iranian people are worse off, and the shipping routes and Middle East are dramatically less safe due to drones?
I disagree. If the argument is, "Someone else will", then you are just complicit. If good people don't comply, it will fall to someone who has lower ethical standard, but that person will likely be less competent.
Are we counting butter as milk? Because hollandaise sauce is an emulsion of egg yolk, butter, and lemon juice, so no milk directly unless we count butter.
I can think of a million things I'd rather do with my kids. I don't understand why people continue to go to these parks. The experience is bad with or without the Disney adults.
reply