Unlike Past U.S. Conflicts, Iran Attack Is Opposed by Most Americans(www.nytimes.com)
11 pointsby duxup7 hours ago4 comments
  • tim-tday4 hours ago
    I wonder what would happen if we declared a “mission accomplished” and simply stopped. Does the conflict stop? Does Israel go it alone? Does Iran continue their campaign of “bomb everyone“ because they’re pissed?

    I would guess a little negotiation could end the conflict immediately if the us pushed for it. I don’t think the current administration can afford for gas prices to be high during the midterms.

    You could probably predict the end of the conflict by assessing the rate of depletion of the strategic oil reserves. (+/- 30d)

    • JojoFatsani35 minutes ago
      We would end up exactly where we were on Feb 27 except with a ding in the global economy, a worse dictator in charge of Iran, and ~1500 people dead. Great success!!!!!!
  • pbiggar6 hours ago
    Of course it is. There was no reason for the attack, except as Rubio admitted, Israel was going to attack so the US joined in. Why are we attacking anyone? Why are we dropping bombs on civilians in Tehran, destroying schools and hospitals, for no reason at all?

    Same reason we did in Gaza - because Israel's goal is to destabilize the Middle East so that they can expand into Syria, and Jordan, and take over Palestine. Which is exactly what they're doing: https://theintercept.com/2026/03/10/israel-iran-war-west-ban...

  • mothballed7 hours ago
    The absolute most compelling argument for voting for Trump for a lot of people was that he promised no new wars.
    • duxup6 hours ago
      It’s not the first time. Bush Jr. campaigned on “no nation building” and then went on a massive nation building effort that arguably was a failure.

      Granted Bush Jr.’s efforts were popular and followed some logic. Not so much Trump.

    • Copyrightest6 hours ago
      [dead]