80 Comments
User's avatar
Kathleen Weber's avatar

Give us a call when Iran collapses. It seems to me that North Vietnam had far fewer resources and resisted the United States quite successfully.

PapayaSF's avatar

Trump is waging a war in a different way, and with much better weapons. The Iranian population is also much less supportive of their government.

alx west's avatar

=PapayaSF

sure. you must posting from iran

quit watching fox on SF!

Alex-GPT's avatar

The idea that North Vietnam had "far fewer resources" is factually false.

Ho Chi Minh & Giap had Soviet rocket artillery & howitzers. The fact that they didn't have General Motors & Ford making tanks for them meant nothing -- the US had tanks and they didn't do a whole lot of good out in the hillside jungles and river deltas.

The NVA had extensive, bunkered supply chains. They had widespread intelligence collection support from "industrialized" Warsaw Pact countries. The NVA had a serious excellent Soviet jets & skilled pilots -- and they also had best-at-the-time anti-aircraft systems (the SA-2, among other options.)

Most importantly, they had *years* of experience fighting -- and *beating* -- first the Japanese, then the French and then the Americans.

North Vietnam was an Eastern Bloc-trained, intensely motivated, brilliantly and brutally led military machine.

The fact that they didn't have some Silicon Valley machine pumping out high-tech drone solutions is beside the point -- the North Vietnamese were an industrialized, premium military opponent.

Les Vitailles's avatar

North Vietnam resisted because the two US presidents it faced never attempted more than a holding action in the South.

This President is using America's powers to strike at the heart of the Islamic Republic. The US only tried this once in Vietnam, during the 1972 Christmas bombings and it was too late by then.

Not every US was is necessarily an imitation of Vietnam.

Capio79's avatar

North Vietnam didn’t have 85% of its population hating it

the long warred's avatar

North Vietnam had the Democratic Party and the Boomers. Neither still exists.

Daniele Vecchi's avatar

What does it mean collapse? Unconditional surrender? Regime change? Not sure these would be great outcomes as we learned from Iraq, Lydia, Syria, Afghanistan. Comparison with the Vietnam war is non sense and your comment seems ideologically driven.

TimCNY's avatar

Regime change by force was attempted in Iraq and Afghanistan. It failed in the long term. It won't be tried again under this President.

Francis Turner's avatar

N Vietnam had easy resupply via land. Iran doesn’t. The nations most likely to provide weapons to Iran are Russia and China. The Russian ones were transferred across the Caspian until the Iranian Caspian ports and Naval ships in them were destroyed. China would need to have permission from Pakistan and that’s probably not happening. Nor is seaborne resupply now that the USN is enforcing a blockade

Kathleen Weber's avatar

Iran has large enough stockpiles of small missiles, drones, and ground weapons ro keep the Strait of Hormuz closed as long as they want to. They can resist any American ground operation that is anything more than a quick raid Americans aren't going to tolerate a prolonged ground engagement in Iran. You forget that Iran has been manufacturing weapons for decades and shipping them to all their proxies throughout the Middle East.

Francis Turner's avatar

What they have shipped to their proxies is not useful against the US. I don't think Hezbollah is doing much good against Israel either for that matter.

But yes, they have some stockpiles. Given the enormous explosions reported I'm not sure how much of their stock remains, though I'm sure some does. I note that they entirely failed to send anything at the USN vessels passing the Strait.

I don't think the US has any plans for long term ground operations. Raids to seize enriched uranium perhaps. Temporary occupation of Hormuz or Qeshm Islands also possible, but that's probably it. And those island operations are likely to be of short duration, just long enough to make sure that there is no surviving IRGC presence or stockpile.

The weapon is the blockade. There will be no oil exports from Iran and no ships transporting anything else either. And unlike N Vietnam Iran needs both to survive. Food in. Oil out to provide currency to buy food etc. because Iran is not close to self sufficient in food. When both stop the economy collapses and we see civil war.

Kathleen Weber's avatar

I mentioned the arms shipped to proxies simply to emphasize how abundantly Iran is supplied with arms. They have been manufacturing them for decades now. For a long time, they were the major supplier of drones to the Russian army. Iran is heavily armed! simply cannot be thought that they would be run out of arms any time soon.

the long warred's avatar

No one forgot, that’s why the factories have been destroyed.

No one forgot anything , including the Vietnam vets who trained a generation of us.

I hope you have had the credibility to leave American soil and any nation protected by treaty with the USA, because you can’t stay here- Boomer.

Try Russia or China.

the long warred's avatar

Gracious. North Vietnam was defeated repeatedly then handed South Vietnam by the first Boomer Congress.

They invaded they didn’t resist.

Have the last Boomer call the world when you’re finally gone. Amen.

Gordon Shriver's avatar

Another loserdonkey braying in the wilderness.

Kathleen Weber's avatar

Schoolyard name calling. Hmm.

Gordon Shriver's avatar

Loserdonkey is faster to type than Western liberal armchair intellectual doomer slopslinger

Kathleen Weber's avatar

So, the motivating force is sloth rather than immaturity. Thanks for the explainer

Gordon Shriver's avatar

No the motivating factor is to call out loserdonkeys like you making idiotic Vietnam comparisons as if you know what you're talking about. That war was fought without satellite-guided standoff munitions, complete air superiority, and rapid, computer-assisted targeting—a lethal combination. The US flew under 10,000 sorties over North Vietnam in it's busiest month and lost ~75 aircraft a month on average over the ~12 years of war; the US and Israel have flown 30,000+ sorties over Iran in this month-long war and the US has lost two aircraft in combat (six including friendly fire and accidents) and Israel none.

The biggest difference: Hegseth, while not the sharpest tool in the shed, isn't a metrics-obsessed moron like McNamara and is letting the generals do their job.

Kathleen Weber's avatar

One thing that you do not know about me is that I would very much welcome the Trump administration achieving its goals by the means it has chosen. My guess is that all this precision targeting would have achieved the goals by now, if that were possible. I actually think that the current American blockade is a more effective and less costly strategy, but it will still not achieve all the administration's goals.

There just seems to be a way that small, dispersed weaponry continues to be effective is quite effective in countering expensive American armaments. This pattern was seen in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq (roadside attacks by militia), and now Iraq.

I'm not calling Trump's war immoral, I'm calling it ineffective

Sawyer23's avatar

Actually Vietnam was well supplied w Soviet equipment. The US mining of their harbors brought them

to the table again

Kathleen Weber's avatar

Well, the North Vietnamese seem to have conquered Saigon just fine with the diminished armaments they had left. I don't remember the North Vietnam brass leaving Hanoi by helicopter. I remember Americans leaving Saigon by helicopter.

For all the years we engaged Vietnam, they never ran out of armaments. I predict that Iran will similarly not run out of armaments. yes, we bombed their visible factories, so that source is temporarily cut off. But they share a large border with Russia by which armaments can be sent from China and North Vietnam for delivery

User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 13
Comment removed
Erie dearie's avatar

And Joseph Stolin was CiC.

James Black's avatar

Very informative about Iran's dispersed, asymmetrical tactics, especially on the financial and non-military side. I imagine it will trigger Western masochists no end. I also very much appreciate your writing style. Refreshingly free of wonkish jargon and a pleasure to read.

the long warred's avatar

When Iran made this decision to have 31 separate defense zones they quite ran the risk of warlordism and fragmentation.

So outsiders knock on every door purse in hand.

This just happened in Syria. As it turns out the warlord that pays best and has the most powerful allies or at least isn’t getting bombed emerges as President.

No one cares he’s Jihadi in a suit. ALL OF THEM ARE JIHADI it’s just a matter of not cutting off the wrong heads.

Peper&Zuur's avatar

This reads like a fantasy, this is not a serious piece, nothing substantiated. Expect nothing else from the post though

alx west's avatar

Prior to joining Hudson Institute, Ms. Riboua was a research assistant at the Center for Jewish Civilization at Georgetown University, where she worked on Jewish identity in Morocco, Moroccan-Israeli relations, and the cultural impacts of the Abraham Accords.

=====

what would you expect from j-eew from Morocco!

Jean-Marc Pelletier's avatar

What a nice theoretical exposé...

As mentions Kathleen Weber, since North Vietnam had so few resources compared to the US but was able to defeat the US, "... give us a call when Iran collapses..." !!

PapayaSF's avatar

Stay tuned. Trump will wrap this up soon.

Richard Pate's avatar

Let me guess, two weeks?

PapayaSF's avatar

That stale gag can blind you to the visible reality of Trump. Regardless of Q, Trump is an experienced planner who is aiming at a Golden Age. Breaking geopolitical deadlocks in favor of the US and the world in general is part of that.

alx west's avatar

= Trump is an experienced planner who is aiming at a Golden Age.

no . he is not planner!

he is 3x divorced, and 6x bankrupted NE real estate hustler

PapayaSF's avatar

You can’t build skyscrapers or run reality TV shows without planning.

alx west's avatar

=You can’t build skyscrapers or run reality TV shows without planning.

sure!

how do you know? have you built one ?

see above about 6x bankrupted NE real estate hustler!

the long warred's avatar

Give us a call when the last French speaker dies in Paris, for that matter Quebec.

Jean-Marc Pelletier's avatar

What a bright comment... Not surprised: it comes from a fellow Red Neck Canadian bashing on others...

Great you've been suspended in your duties...

the long warred's avatar

No, retired

And 🇺🇸

Jean-Marc Pelletier's avatar

No. Info says you were fired...

If US then I better understand your maga pov

the long warred's avatar

Are you really French Canadian or did you get fired?

Jean-Marc Pelletier's avatar

Yes: Québécois as you should know.

And no need to extend further this discussion

Vic patel's avatar

Amazing insight in to conflict world doesn’t appreciate.

Mike's avatar

LOL, the clueless bullshit artist from the Hudson institute is at it , again.

Kenan Meyer's avatar

What is the author smoking?!

Shield of Muffins's avatar

Since I started to read your analysis and looked at some world tanker traffic maps, I finally understand the larger strategy. I was a naysayer, now I am optimistic the US will come out on top.

Nate the Pretty Good's avatar

It does seem like anything besides removal of the Islamic Repuplic Gov't & IRGC along with all of the fissile materials will just lead us back here in a few years, or to a worse, as-yet-unseen outcome.

TimCNY's avatar

Pundits comment that "Iran has been two weeks away from a nuclear weapon for 40 years" has a ring of truth because the US and Israel have been conducting overt and covert actions to counteract Iranian progress towards a nuclear weapon.

In any event if that is where Iran chooses to go, the U.S. will return better prepared and with better equipment.

alx west's avatar

what would you expect from j-eew from Morocco!

alx west's avatar

Prior to joining Hudson Institute, Ms. Riboua was a research assistant at the Center for Jewish Civilization at Georgetown University, where she worked on Jewish identity in Morocco, Moroccan-Israeli relations, and the cultural impacts of the Abraham Accords.

Ms. Riboua is a native of Morocco, and she speaks Arabic and French.

==

yeah no bias here.!

alx west's avatar

Iran’s military defeat is in plain sight

===

I don't know about Iran, but stupidity of author is definitely in plain sight!

who are you kidding whom? what do you even know about wars? stupid cu1nt who never kept weapon in own hands.

yeah , no bias. just another war mongering wh11ore doing tricks for money!

YOU DAD MUST BE VERY PROUD OF YOU!

jesus!!!!!!

=

Prior to joining Hudson Institute, Ms. Riboua was a research assistant at the Center for Jewish Civilization at Georgetown University, where she worked on Jewish identity in Morocco, Moroccan-Israeli relations, and the cultural impacts of the Abraham Accords.

Ms. Riboua is a native of Morocco, and she speaks Arabic and French.

Dan Conrad's avatar

If President Pezeshkian's apology to the Gulf States was reported by any media in the USA, I missed it. This is the first that I've heard of it.

TimCNY's avatar

Great article. Thanks for a clear eyed analysis of the situation in Iran. I apologize for the crude comments from the pea brained couch potatoes who suddenly discovered they are geopolitical experts.

Operation Epic Fury is a military operation designed to removed the threat of a nuclear missile attack by Iran. It has been 100% successful. The USA could walk away today knowing that Iran would need hundreds of billions of dollars and ten years or more to rebuild this program, assuming the U.S. did nothing in the interim.

Regime change was never a military objective, but is an opportunity that could be exploited. Whether it comes to pass remains to be seen. Regime change by force has been attempted by previous administrations and proven to not be durable. The citizens need to be motivated to effect change.

The passage of commercial traffic through the Strait was never a military consideration except for the support of our military. The expectation is that most shippers would stay out of a war zone and not risk their ships and cargo in the middle of a military conflict.

It is relatively easy to "close" the Strait of Hormuz by mining and rocket attack (Iran) or interdiction (USA). Opening the Strait and guaranteeing safe passage is a considerable effort that the USA is reluctant to perform. The commitment of resources is uncertain and indefinite, characteristics that could lead to an "endless war" claim.

So our President has stated, rightly so, that those who need access should figure it out. Fortunately for us, Starmer and Macron have taken the lead and will have an action plan "soon". This is another example of the President playing 3D chess and the Europeans walked right into the trap. The fact is that all the European nations combined do not have the military resources e.g. naval, air and forward operating bases, to make such an objective reality, further exposing the inherent weakness of the EU and U.K. Regardless, this is beyond the military objectives of Epic Fury.

alx west's avatar

Operation Epic Fury is a military operation designed to removed the threat of a nuclear missile attack by Iran.

===

are you not supposed to have NUCLEAR before being threatened by nuclear?

i guess you were born after 2001. and dont know about WMDS in Iraq hoax..

google it mo11ron!

Deee's avatar

Third last paragraph says "Iran’s response has been to threaten the Strait of Hormuz, the final lever a regime reaches for when it has exhausted all others. That threat is a measure of desperation, not strength." That must explain why Trump just did the same thing. I couldn't see any strategic benefit to a blockade of a blockade, but now I get it.