Considering his first two predictions, this prediction is more than a little concerning.
Silly rabbit, America’s never lost a war. It’s impossible for us to lose a war. We just choose to stop fighting one day, it’s totally different I swear.
He posts his class lectures on YouTube which are worth a watch since he predicted this almost a year ago, and now he has an updated one for this semester.
I think the only thing he got wrong (for now) was the US deploying ground troops. It could still happen, but I think it’ll take some time if it ever does.
But aside from that he even guessed the details right like the IRGC shooting thousands of protesters, and Israel pushing Trump into the war, and the idea that they would mostly bomb city areas which would completely remove the chance of any revolution or regime change.
“Can the US lose in a way that allows the crazies in office to save face in their eyes?” seems an important question to me. Because if the options are the US clearly losing vs. the US clearly losing but nuking Iran so everyone loses…
Your experience is important to us. For optimal functionality on Pennlive.com, please disable your ad blocker before continuing.
Meaning: fuck you, we want your money, your data, your life and if you don’t let us we won’t let you read our article
Well that is something I’m very fine with, I’ll find my info elsewhere. Wanting to serve ads is one thing but I seriously can’t stand the “we love you so much, here, take another bullet!” type speech
US warfare relies on strength and thinking modern weaponry is all that matters. There’s a lot more to warfare than that. Also they always attack others in their land who have existential reasons to fight to the last. The US, not so much. It makes a huge difference. They also don’t seem to understand that others have different views to them and belittle their enemies which is never wise. And let us not forget, the US hasn’t won a war since WW2 (Pacific theatre only - the European theatre was mostly won due to Russia and its method of providing cannon fodder).
And they won’t win in Iran. Not overall. Nobody wins in Iran. Even empires who have conquered the place eventually become Irani. It’s one of the Old Empires. A classic. It never dies completely.
Since they can’t even define what “winning” it would look like, it would definitely be hard to claim they didn’t.
Or maybe very easy. There’s no way to know.
Pretty easy for them to claim. They went to war with Afghanistan with a deck of cards and Bin Laden as the Ace of Spades. 48/52 of those cards were executed or in custody.
This time Israel and the U.S. started the war by killing who they would claim is the Ace of Spades.
The U.S. isn’t going to try to colonize Iran, they could back out tomorrow and already call the war a win. They won’t though, because people aren’t the reason they are there, they are their to funnel money, and Israel is there so they can expand their borders, not into Iran, down through Gaza and into the West Bank, maybe part of Lebanon who knows what with Jordan… but when the Iran war ends they will hold more land and the world will say they lost.
It’s like if Russia and Ukraine reached peace tomorrow, people will say Russia lost because they dont control Ukraine. But Russia will have expanded its borders, and Ukraine would have shrunk a lot. Russia will have “won” all of that land, and wouldn’t give a shit that all those people died. (Because Putin got what he wanted, to keep appearing strong to his people, which he only cares about because it keeps his head on his neck, and stays rich beyond imagine)
They have no idea how to win it.
Which makes you wonder if it’s chapter 1 in some other plan.
You are trying to assign logic. That is the problem. There is probably no 4D chess. Just vibes. Bad vibes.
I knew someone would call it 4D chess but I’m not suggesting mad genius. I’m just maybe waiting for the other shoe to drop.
They have no idea what their goal even is.
The goal is to be at war. The US is always at war. There is always an enemy to fight, if there is no convenient enemy to fight then you go to some random country, invade it, and thus create an enemy, who they proceed to then lose to.
For bonus points you should kill as many civilians as possible while claiming to be the liberators. Also you should, on the way out, backstab as many people that assisted you as possible.
Bring back Jesus or die trying
Its an onion, thats just one layer of the onion. Dig deeper.
I have. They have no clue deeper than that either
If you begin a task with no clear goal you cannot succeed, nor can you fail. The best you can hope for is to learn something from the process. This will be a costly lesson.
Americans and learning are mutually exclusive at this point.
Please do not mistake a government for its people.
This isn’t the “learning type” of party or administration…
That sounds like something Yoda would say.
Could they lose? Name one war in the past 70 yesrs they didn’t lose?
From the GOPs point of view they won all of them. This war will be no different. The world will call it a loss because the U.S. won’t take control of Iran and hold it permanently, which the U.S. never has any intent of holding these countries permanently. They don’t care how many soldiers die, they don’t even really care who ends up controlling that area when they leave. Did they destabilize the region and get approval to funnel mass amounts of money into defense company contracts. Yes and yes. U.S. oil comes from the U.S. yet gas prices are rising in the U.S., why… Because wars with countries that control oil elsewhere help line the pockets of oil companies who fund these politicians campaigns. If you have oil, lift it at costs less than the U.S. and don’t have nuclear weapons, you are a target to exploit. It’ll raise costs for every working class sod in the world, but they couldn’t give a shit about us. They are winning. We are losing.
Arguably they “won” the Korean war as their stated goal was to keep the democratic south alive. As well, the original Gulf war was also a win, but that was a “coalition” force.
The more I think about it the more every one of those ‘lost’ wars transfered a lot of money from working people to weapons manufacturers and all it costed the people in charge was other peoples kids lives and global stability, so maybe I’m looking at the whole thing wrong honestly.
Fuck off moving the goalposts. I’m sorry the west isn’t as incompetent as Russia.
Wtf are you talking about?
You could also argue that the Korean war is still going. The War was formally declared, and has a militarized border instead of a formal ending.
While the DPRK isn’t exactly a bastion of freedom, having no end to hostility with the US explains so much wrong with their society. They’ve been at formal war with the US for the entire existence of their country. Surviving this requires certain “compromises”.
Meanwhile, Cuba? Settled in and took a different interpretation. Guantanamo may be an ongoing incursion, but the state reached some actual status quo with their neighbor (even if it was deeply negative with the 60+ year blockade). Castro passed, his brother passed, a non-Castro got elected. Cuba passed the most progressive LGBTQ+ protection laws in the world as the “Family Code” in 2024 by what we’d call a ballot initiative. Aside from the blockade, they are a free people - more so than the US in the age of Epstein.
What if we just… Quit fucking with Iran? Tried for peace talks with North Korea? Just welcomed Cuba to the neighborhood? Anything else produces disaster.
Most definitely could see the Korean war as “not finished”.
I think the DPRK would have many of the same problems even if they didn’t have make the US the big scary enemy. Every uniting force, be it a democratic government or a dictator, needs an external thing to rally against. I think many of the decisions the Kims came to wouldn’t be that different vs a different external threat.
Definitely feel like the US could quit fucking with Cuba, but they won’t. Fucking with the Americas just seems to be a thing the US thinks is their god-given right.
They also won’t stop fucking with iran until oil stops being the thinf the US projects power with. Especially since Iran was China’s “ally” and that’s who the US is really worried about.
I love how there’s a ton of comments and upvotes here, yet OP’s article is paywalled behind a subscription. Did anyone here actually read it?
It reminds me of a post I just saw elsewhere, with total nonsense in the link. Since it was already upvoted, the moderater left it up as an experiment: it got a boatload of upvotes and comments. No one cared, even with someone pointing this out in a comment. It was just a bunch of the same comments affirming what they already believed.
…That about sums up the internet for me now. People don’t actually care where information came from; they just want to drive by, then keep scrolling :(
Is the article pay walled? I can read it in its entirety. I’d happily copy and paste it into the comments but it’s probably against the rules.
Probably not, a lot of posts have the article’s content in the post itself, or they add a link to a paywall removal service
And also youtube is a cesspool of AI misinformation. Just blatant lies about major world changing events. And tons of comments about the completely fake news article. Have to scroll a mile down to finally see someone using a little bit of critical thinking. I think we are in trouble 😳
We just comment based on the title.
I skipped the paywall by opening the page in my browser’s article mode. Strips out most CSS and JS popups.
I have a hard time believing every claim in this piece, since the prof makes a claim that the US economy is a ponzi scheme. I think that words matter, and “ponzi scheme” is a very specific thing, which I do no believe accurately describes banking or wall street. I notice that grifters and crypto-bros are quick to describe the traditional economy as a ponzi in order to make their own scam look better in comparison. Example.
That’s not to say that the capitalist economic system is fair, good for the world, or sustainable. Whether this is a mistake or an intentional mischaracterization, it makes me question the conclusions drawn.
“I skipped the paywall by opening the page in my browser’s article mode. Strips out most CSS and JS popups.”
Thank you, I guess I shouldn’t assume people have their web browsers configured to get past that. :/
I was able to view the article without a paywall.
No.
They are just a bunch of anti-USA types who just think this conflict is evidence of the collapse of America, or something. And they are eager cheering on the supposed downfall, and begging for any narrative or infopoint that makes america look bad.
No needs a narrative to make America look bad. The Americans do it to themselves.
Or I am someone who lost his enlisted best friend to the Iraq war.
But yeah, you totally know me and my motivations.
You worthless fucktard.
Bombing alone has never worked as a means of forcing regime change. So Trump will either have to succeed at this for the first time in history, back down (seems unlikely at this point) or put boots on the ground (for which he has not manufactured consent).I guess he could also just die on the shitter and make it the next guys problem. There are many avenues for the US to lose here.
No
The article was perfectly readable to me but sure cope harder.
He’ll back down like he always backs down. He doesn’t have the patience to be a true warlord, he’s the laziest man alive, he gets bored of things even when he’s not the one doing the work.
He already backed down. Regime change isn’t the goal. It’s destroy the Iranian military. Which they will accomplish easily.
Regime change isn’t the goal.
According to his latest tweet “unconditional surrender” is his goal. I wonder what his goal will be next week.
It seems likely that this will be a Pyrrhic victory for the US.
Paywall
Well, they lost to Vietnam and Afghanistan. Greater military might doesn’t guarantee success.
Win? Lose? Either way, the U.S. has a strong pullout game.
Problem: You can’t lose a war you have no definition for winning.
So in the end, the US literally can’t win or lose the war, all they can do is simply choose to end it.
What is the end goal? What does winning the war look like? 🤷 Yeah, me either. But if you don’t define it, you can’t lose it either.
The goal was to distract from the Epstein files and to cede to the Israeli’s demands so they don’t release the dirt. It’s already won.
