No. of Recommendations: 19
"It's not clear what the goal is that's worth burning through so much of our military capabilities. We're destroying a lot of Iranian material, but we're destroying a lot of our own material to do it. Hard to see what goal that furthers, since they'll be able to replace their equipment over time (just as we'll be able to replace our own). Sure, they suffer from an intermediate-term lack of access to that equipment - just as we'll suffer from an intermediate-term lack of access to that equipment. Using up a massive amount of the US' anti-missile systems and protective capacity on Iran doesn't seem like an effective use of that resource, especially in a world where that's a major threat profile and where we might prefer to have those resources available to deploy in other theaters (like, IDK, defending assets and allies in the Pacific theater against Chinese missiles and drones)." - Albaby
It is an effective us of that resource if you look at it from China's or Russia's point of view.
You are operating under the assumption that Trump's attack on Iran are for the benefit of Americans. Maybe that isn't the case.
