Olivia
Online
Mohammed Bâqir
@ossembe
Joined April 2013
7.1K Following
438 Followers
20.2K Posts
The reason here is that Kagan/Nuland represent a political camp in the US that’s heavily invested in prolonging the conflict in Ukraine, while Iran is a rival project of the rival political camp. The fact that each camp has its own pet conflict, this results in a conflict of conflicts. I wrote about it here:
https://t.co/13e5HmAnua
There’s no overstating how extraordinary this Atlantic article is, given the author and the outlet.
As a reminder Bob Kagan is:
- The co-founder of Project for the New American Century, probably the single most imperialist Think Tank in Washington (which is quite a feat)
- A man who spent his entire life advocating for American military interventions, especially in the Middle East, and a vocal advocate of the Iraq war. He started advocating for intervention in Iraq before 9/11, which speaks for itself...
- The husband of Victoria Nuland, an extremely hawkish former senior U.S. official (a key architect of U.S. policy in Ukraine, with the consequences we all witness today)
- The brother of Frederick Kagan, one of the key architects of the Iraq surge
In other words, we ain’t exactly looking at some sort of anti-imperialist peacenik. This is quite literally the guy Dick Cheney called when he needed a pep talk.
And the man is writing in The Atlantic, the most reliably pro-war mainstream media outlet in the U.S. (also quite a feat).
So when HE writes that the U.S. “suffered a total defeat” in Iran that has no precedent in U.S. history and can “neither be repaired nor ignored,” it’s the functional equivalent of Ronald McDonald telling you the burgers aren’t great: it means the burgers really, really aren't great.
Extraordinarily (and somewhat worryingly, for me), his arguments for why this is such a defeat are virtually the same as those I laid out in my article “The First Multipolar War” last month (https://t.co/tbnOpdYqux).
Here they are 👇
1) Vietnam/Afghanistan were survivable, this isn't
He agrees that this war - and the U.S. defeat - is fundamentally different in nature from previous U.S. interventions.
Where I wrote that the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan didn’t change the equation much in terms of power dynamics (“in the grand scheme of things, the giant walked away with little more than a bruised ego”), Kagan writes that “the defeats in Vietnam and Afghanistan were costly but did not do lasting damage to America's overall position in the world.”
And when I wrote that “it’s painfully obvious that the Iran war is of a qualitatively different nature” from these, he writes that “defeat in the present confrontation with Iran will be of an entirely different character.”
Same point.
2) Iran will never relinquish Hormuz and uses it as selective leverage
When I wrote that Iran has turned “freedom of navigation” on its head by establishing “a permission-based regime” through the Strait of Hormuz, Kagan arrives at the same conclusion: “Iran will be able not only to demand tolls for passage, but to limit transit to those nations with which it has good relations.”
He also agrees that “Iran has no interest in returning to the status quo ante,” when I myself cited Iran’s parliament speaker Ghalibaf in my article, saying: “The Strait of Hormuz situation won’t return to its pre-war status.” Same point and virtually the same words.
3) Gulf states will have to accommodate Iran
He agrees that most Gulf states will have no choice but to accommodate Iran, effectively making Iran into a, if not THE, dominant regional power.
Kagan writes “the United States will have proved itself a paper tiger, forcing the Gulf and other Arab states to accommodate Iran.”
On my end, I wrote that “the Gulf monarchies will eventually have to choose between two security propositions. One where they stay aligned with a distant superpower that [can’t protect them]. The other proposition being: make peace with the regional power that just proved it can hit [them] whenever it wants.” Which is not much of a choice…
4) Military impossibility to reopen Hormuz
Kagan writes that “if the United States with its mighty Navy can't or won't open the strait, no coalition of forces with just a fraction of the Americans' capability will be able to, either.”
On my end, in my article I cited Germany’s defense minister Boris Pistorius: “What does Trump expect a handful of European frigates to do that the powerful US Navy cannot?”
The exact same argument.
5) Global chain reaction
Kagan agrees that this is a global strategic failure that fundamentally changes the U.S.’s position in the world. As he puts it: “America's once-dominant position in the Gulf is just the first of many casualties… America's allies in East Asia and Europe must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts.”
You’ll have guessed it, I wrote essentially the same thing: “Think about what it says if you’re Saudi Arabia, quietly watching your American-built defenses fail to protect your own refineries. Or any European country now facing the worst energy shock since 1973, caused not by your enemy but by your ally, and realizing that said ‘ally,’ supposedly in charge of ‘protecting’ you, couldn’t even protect Israel’s most strategic sites - when it’s the country with which it’s joined at the hip. I’m not even speaking about China or Russia who are seeing their worldview being validated on almost every axis simultaneously.”
6) Weapons stocks depleted, credibility shattered
Kagan: “just a few weeks of war with a second-rank power have reduced American weapons stocks to perilously low levels, with no quick remedy in sight.”
Me: “America’s most advanced weapons systems are much more vulnerable than previously thought - not theoretically, but in actual combat.”
Kagan: “America's allies… must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts.”
Me: “The U.S. security guarantee has been empirically falsified in real time.”
-----------
So, yup, Bob Kagan and I agree on nearly everything. I need a shower 🤢
Reassuringly though, we still differ on a few fundamental aspects.
First of all, arguably the most important one, the moral aspect. In typical neocon fashion, his article contains not a word about the human cost of this war - not the 165 schoolgirls, not the devastation inflicted on Iranians during 37 days of bombing, not the toll this war is taking on the entire world through its devastating economic consequences (the economic devastation on ordinary people worldwide is referenced only as a political problem for Trump). For him, this is purely a strategic chess problem, morality and people don’t figure in his mental map.
For me, the moral bankruptcy of this war isn't separate from the strategic failure - it is the strategic failure. Much like Gaza can only be a failure because of its sheer abjectness.
Secondly, there is not an instant of reflection in the article on how we got there. Which is unsurprising because he personally, alongside his wife, his brother, and every co-signatory of every PNAC letter, spent a generation pushing for exactly this kind of confrontation. The man spend 30 years advocating for military dominance in the Middle East and hostility towards Iran, thereby forging them as an adversary and facilitating this very war that he now says has “checkmated” America.
I know introspection has never been the neocon forte but at some point you have to stop setting houses on fire and then writing op-eds about how surprising the smoke is.
Last but not least, we differ on what should be done. This is the funniest part of Kagan’s article - showing that the man is decidedly beyond salvation. On one hand he calls this a “checkmate” by Iran, and a U.S. defeat that can “neither be repaired nor ignored,” yet an the other hand his solution for it is… surprise, surprise… a bigger war still!
He writes that what’s to be done is “engage in a full-scale ground and naval war to remove the current Iranian regime, and then to occupy Iran until a new government can take hold.”
The arsonist's solution to the fire is a bigger fire ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For my end, this was the conclusion of my previous article:
"There is almost a Greek tragedy quality to U.S. actions lately where every move taken to escape one’s fate becomes the mechanism that delivers it. The U.S. went to war to reassert dominance - and proved it could no longer dominate. It demanded allies send warships - and revealed it had no real allies. It waged forty years of maximum pressure to break Iran before this moment came - and instead forged the very adversary now capable of meeting it. It started the war in part to have additional leverage over China - and handed the world the spectacle of begging China for help. The prophecy was multipolarity. Every American action to prevent it reveals it instead."
I wouldn’t change a word. The only thing that's changed since I wrote it is that even the arsonists now smell the smoke.
Src for the Atlantic article: https://t.co/ItED9WS9Kn
![RnaudBertrand's tweet photo. There’s no overstating how extraordinary this Atlantic article is, given the author and the outlet.
As a reminder Bob Kagan is:
- The co-founder of Project for the New American Century, probably the single most imperialist Think Tank in Washington (which is quite a feat)
- A man who spent his entire life advocating for American military interventions, especially in the Middle East, and a vocal advocate of the Iraq war. He started advocating for intervention in Iraq before 9/11, which speaks for itself...
- The husband of Victoria Nuland, an extremely hawkish former senior U.S. official (a key architect of U.S. policy in Ukraine, with the consequences we all witness today)
- The brother of Frederick Kagan, one of the key architects of the Iraq surge
In other words, we ain’t exactly looking at some sort of anti-imperialist peacenik. This is quite literally the guy Dick Cheney called when he needed a pep talk.
And the man is writing in The Atlantic, the most reliably pro-war mainstream media outlet in the U.S. (also quite a feat).
So when HE writes that the U.S. “suffered a total defeat” in Iran that has no precedent in U.S. history and can “neither be repaired nor ignored,” it’s the functional equivalent of Ronald McDonald telling you the burgers aren’t great: it means the burgers really, really aren't great.
Extraordinarily (and somewhat worryingly, for me), his arguments for why this is such a defeat are virtually the same as those I laid out in my article “The First Multipolar War” last month (https://t.co/tbnOpdYqux).
Here they are 👇
1) Vietnam/Afghanistan were survivable, this isn't
He agrees that this war - and the U.S. defeat - is fundamentally different in nature from previous U.S. interventions.
Where I wrote that the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan didn’t change the equation much in terms of power dynamics (“in the grand scheme of things, the giant walked away with little more than a bruised ego”), Kagan writes that “the defeats in Vietnam and Afghanistan were costly but did not do lasting damage to America's overall position in the world.”
And when I wrote that “it’s painfully obvious that the Iran war is of a qualitatively different nature” from these, he writes that “defeat in the present confrontation with Iran will be of an entirely different character.”
Same point.
2) Iran will never relinquish Hormuz and uses it as selective leverage
When I wrote that Iran has turned “freedom of navigation” on its head by establishing “a permission-based regime” through the Strait of Hormuz, Kagan arrives at the same conclusion: “Iran will be able not only to demand tolls for passage, but to limit transit to those nations with which it has good relations.”
He also agrees that “Iran has no interest in returning to the status quo ante,” when I myself cited Iran’s parliament speaker Ghalibaf in my article, saying: “The Strait of Hormuz situation won’t return to its pre-war status.” Same point and virtually the same words.
3) Gulf states will have to accommodate Iran
He agrees that most Gulf states will have no choice but to accommodate Iran, effectively making Iran into a, if not THE, dominant regional power.
Kagan writes “the United States will have proved itself a paper tiger, forcing the Gulf and other Arab states to accommodate Iran.”
On my end, I wrote that “the Gulf monarchies will eventually have to choose between two security propositions. One where they stay aligned with a distant superpower that [can’t protect them]. The other proposition being: make peace with the regional power that just proved it can hit [them] whenever it wants.” Which is not much of a choice…
4) Military impossibility to reopen Hormuz
Kagan writes that “if the United States with its mighty Navy can't or won't open the strait, no coalition of forces with just a fraction of the Americans' capability will be able to, either.”
On my end, in my article I cited Germany’s defense minister Boris Pistorius: “What does Trump expect a handful of European frigates to do that the powerful US Navy cannot?”
The exact same argument.
5) Global chain reaction
Kagan agrees that this is a global strategic failure that fundamentally changes the U.S.’s position in the world. As he puts it: “America's once-dominant position in the Gulf is just the first of many casualties… America's allies in East Asia and Europe must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts.”
You’ll have guessed it, I wrote essentially the same thing: “Think about what it says if you’re Saudi Arabia, quietly watching your American-built defenses fail to protect your own refineries. Or any European country now facing the worst energy shock since 1973, caused not by your enemy but by your ally, and realizing that said ‘ally,’ supposedly in charge of ‘protecting’ you, couldn’t even protect Israel’s most strategic sites - when it’s the country with which it’s joined at the hip. I’m not even speaking about China or Russia who are seeing their worldview being validated on almost every axis simultaneously.”
6) Weapons stocks depleted, credibility shattered
Kagan: “just a few weeks of war with a second-rank power have reduced American weapons stocks to perilously low levels, with no quick remedy in sight.”
Me: “America’s most advanced weapons systems are much more vulnerable than previously thought - not theoretically, but in actual combat.”
Kagan: “America's allies… must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts.”
Me: “The U.S. security guarantee has been empirically falsified in real time.”
-----------
So, yup, Bob Kagan and I agree on nearly everything. I need a shower 🤢
Reassuringly though, we still differ on a few fundamental aspects.
First of all, arguably the most important one, the moral aspect. In typical neocon fashion, his article contains not a word about the human cost of this war - not the 165 schoolgirls, not the devastation inflicted on Iranians during 37 days of bombing, not the toll this war is taking on the entire world through its devastating economic consequences (the economic devastation on ordinary people worldwide is referenced only as a political problem for Trump). For him, this is purely a strategic chess problem, morality and people don’t figure in his mental map.
For me, the moral bankruptcy of this war isn't separate from the strategic failure - it is the strategic failure. Much like Gaza can only be a failure because of its sheer abjectness.
Secondly, there is not an instant of reflection in the article on how we got there. Which is unsurprising because he personally, alongside his wife, his brother, and every co-signatory of every PNAC letter, spent a generation pushing for exactly this kind of confrontation. The man spend 30 years advocating for military dominance in the Middle East and hostility towards Iran, thereby forging them as an adversary and facilitating this very war that he now says has “checkmated” America.
I know introspection has never been the neocon forte but at some point you have to stop setting houses on fire and then writing op-eds about how surprising the smoke is.
Last but not least, we differ on what should be done. This is the funniest part of Kagan’s article - showing that the man is decidedly beyond salvation. On one hand he calls this a “checkmate” by Iran, and a U.S. defeat that can “neither be repaired nor ignored,” yet an the other hand his solution for it is… surprise, surprise… a bigger war still!
He writes that what’s to be done is “engage in a full-scale ground and naval war to remove the current Iranian regime, and then to occupy Iran until a new government can take hold.”
The arsonist's solution to the fire is a bigger fire ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For my end, this was the conclusion of my previous article:
"There is almost a Greek tragedy quality to U.S. actions lately where every move taken to escape one’s fate becomes the mechanism that delivers it. The U.S. went to war to reassert dominance - and proved it could no longer dominate. It demanded allies send warships - and revealed it had no real allies. It waged forty years of maximum pressure to break Iran before this moment came - and instead forged the very adversary now capable of meeting it. It started the war in part to have additional leverage over China - and handed the world the spectacle of begging China for help. The prophecy was multipolarity. Every American action to prevent it reveals it instead."
I wouldn’t change a word. The only thing that's changed since I wrote it is that even the arsonists now smell the smoke.
Src for the Atlantic article: https://t.co/ItED9WS9Kn](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HIBa-IQacAAr9O1.jpg)
Imam al-‘Askari (AS) said, ‘To show happiness before the grieved is not a sign of good mannerism.’
- Tuhaf Al-Uqoul
Make religion your refuge and justice your sword, [then] you will be safe from every evil and will triumph over every enemy.
Imam Ali (as)
Ghurar al-Hikam, p. 145
#Iran
![ImamRezaEN's tweet photo. Make religion your refuge and justice your sword, [then] you will be safe from every evil and will triumph over every enemy.
Imam Ali (as)
Ghurar al-Hikam, p. 145
#Iran https://t.co/KP3cJ7UEXr](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFXBX9ka8AIAdoB.jpg)
Who to follow
Bosco Mukendi
@BoscoMukendi1
Médecin et Coordo Provincial Adj de la Jeunesse. Chargé de la Formation et relations avec les partenaires de @Ensemble MK dans le Haut - Katanga...
Dr. Patrick Kikuni
@Nazdaq_MS
Dr. Patrick Kikuni;Medecin formé en Suède. Doctorand,MD,PhD. Maitrise en Biomedicine.Businessman et Directeur General Havila Medical Group & TurCon Group LTD.
Rodrigue kabwe+243🇨🇩
@RodrigueKabwe
🇨🇩
The Shia will prevail. Even if the entire world from East to West, Muslims, Christians, and Jews
were to unite, the Shia would still prevail. This is a divine decree.
Shaheed Qasim Soleimani ❤️🩹
'Or should We treat those who believe and do righteous deeds like the mischief-makers in the earth? Or should We treat those who fear Allah like the wicked?' (38:28)."
(Source: al-Kafi, Vol.8, Hadith.1)
of the people of falsehood, because in His sight, Allah has not placed the people of truth on the same level as the people of falsehood. Do they not comprehend the meaning of Allah's words in His Book when He says -
~ Don't fall to the level of people of Falsehood ~
From the letter of Imam Sadiq (as) to his Companions:
Therefore, recognize your true standing in comparison to the people of falsehood.
It is not befitting/appropriate for the people of truth to lower themselves to the level
The believer is he whom all things fear, and that is because he is empowered by the religion of Allah, and does not fear anything. This is the sign of every believer.
Imam Sadiq (as)
Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 64, p. 305
#Iran
Al-Fudayl Ibn ‘Iyad رحمه الله a dit :
« Il viendra un temps où tu verras des gens qui ne font plus la différence entre la vérité et le mensonge, entre le croyant et le mécréant, entre le digne de confiance et le traître, entre l’ignorant et le savant ; […] »
☁️ الإبانة
![al_imanu_biLlah's tweet photo. Al-Fudayl Ibn ‘Iyad رحمه الله a dit :
« Il viendra un temps où tu verras des gens qui ne font plus la différence entre la vérité et le mensonge, entre le croyant et le mécréant, entre le digne de confiance et le traître, entre l’ignorant et le savant ; […] »
☁️ الإبانة https://t.co/KBqpbrREFK](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFOHg9UbAAAsODa.jpg)
Cheikh Al Islam Ibn Al Qayyim رحمه الله a dit :
La piété attire le rizq et l’abandon de la piété attire la pauvreté
Jamais la subsistance d’Allah n’a été attirée par quelque chose de plus efficace que l’abandon des péchés
[Ad Da wa Dawa]
![abou_salman98's tweet photo. Cheikh Al Islam Ibn Al Qayyim رحمه الله a dit :
La piété attire le rizq et l’abandon de la piété attire la pauvreté
Jamais la subsistance d’Allah n’a été attirée par quelque chose de plus efficace que l’abandon des péchés
[Ad Da wa Dawa] https://t.co/VvBToGkCzY](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFOgZ2OXEAA9D8c.jpg)
Al-Junayd al-Baghdādī: If ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib were to have had free time apart from fighting battles, he would have left behind such a treasure of knowledge that our hearts would not have been able to grasp it. [Shawāhid al-Nubuwwah]
![ClarifyingLight's tweet photo. Al-Junayd al-Baghdādī: If ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib were to have had free time apart from fighting battles, he would have left behind such a treasure of knowledge that our hearts would not have been able to grasp it. [Shawāhid al-Nubuwwah] https://t.co/lkFHqXh2TR](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFPJs0PWYAAWPLD.jpg)
Ali ibn Abi Talib
« Je veux sa vie et il veut ma mort...»
C’est par ces vers qu’Ali Ibn Abi Talib désignait Abdurrahman Ibn Muljam lorsqu’il le croisait.
Il savait, par une information prophétique, que cet homme serait son assassin. Pourtant, il refusa de l’emprisonner.⤵️
Exactement. Mais c'est difficile à faire comprendre aux militants.
🇮🇷🇮🇱 En cette fin de semaine Sainte, l'#Iran a lancé un drone au nom de Jésus-Christ sur #Israël 🇮🇱 : « En mémoire de toutes les souffrances endurées par Jésus-Christ, Fils de la Sainte Vierge Marie et dans l'espoir du jour il reviendra avec la promesse du Mahdi. »#IsraelIranWar
🚨 VIDÉO TRÈS IMPORTANTE SUR LA FIN DES TEMPS ET CE QUI SE PASSE ! 🇮🇷🇺🇸🇸🇦
Les prophéties du Prophète ﷺ se réalisent sous nos yeux et beaucoup ne sont pas avertis de ce qui arrive !
🛑 Les événements actuels en Iran et au Moyen-Orient sont un déclencheur qui nous mènera aux fitnas du Dajjal ! 👇
Le Prophète ﷺ a dit :
« Celui qui maîtrise la colère tout en ayant la possibilité de lui laisser libre cours aura son cœur rempli de lumière au jour de la Résurrection. »
🔖 [ Rapporté par at- Tabarani, 12/453 et cité dans Sahih al- Djami, 176. ]
le Prophète ﷺ a dit: « Allah a dit : Le fils de Adam insulte le temps (*). Et Je suis le temps, le jour et la nuit sont dans Ma Main ».
(Rapporté par Boukhari dans son Sahih n°6181 et Mouslim dans son Sahih n°2246)
L’imam Al Qoucheyri dit :
« Quand Allah veut faire passer un serviteur de l'humiliation de la désobéissance à la noblesse de l'obéissance, Il lui fait aimer la solitude pour se retrouver, lui donne le contentement pour ne plus dépendre des autres et lui ouvre les yeux sur ses propres défauts. Celui qui reçoit ces trois choses a certes reçu tout le bien de ce monde et de l'au-delà. »
Risala / volume 1 / page 226
Le Prophète ﷺ a dit :
« Regardez ceux qui sont dans une situation moins bonne que la vôtre et non pas ceux qui sont dans une situation meilleure, vous éviterez ainsi de mépriser les bienfaits qu’Allah vous a octroyés. »
📕 Riyadh As-Salihin 467
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
240.2M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
109.4M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
106.9M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.4M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.7M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
87.1M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.9M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.4M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.5M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.5M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
61.5M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
60.1M followers