Post
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
at risk of being a twerp.... much of politics can be explained by large swathes of the population being unsophisticated and satisfied by symbols vs substance
Most people aren’t watching the situation that closely. There’s still risk of miscalculation and escalation.
Because the people who the symbolic strike was made for don’t read western news
They are being deliberate and restrained so the difference between them and their opponents is as clear as possible. The strike is supposed to make it as costly as possible on us so we don't keep thinking we can just bomb them at will, but they know we REALLY care about human
It’s more about domestic perceptions where they can control the narrative far more
closed, autocratic society - especially within the ranks of the IRGC
Because it still imposes real costs in hitting you. Because you won't mention the uncomfortable "telegraphing" on your domestic media. Because it's better than no strike at all
B/c it actually works if you have state controlled media
Ppl in the Middle East have fully untethered from reality conspiracy beliefs b/c they’ve had 75yrs of hearing “we actually destroyed the Zionists”
You could just lie for a loooong time
Why is this so surprising? We all agree that voters are stupid. They are stupid in Iran was well! Most people in Iran won’t read this.
1. Signaling that you could do more and are not a paper tiger, so the other guy climbs down
2. Posturing for domestic audiences, who won't understand that it was kayfabe and instead will watch the explosions on tv or twitter
If you don't strike then maybe it's because you can't, you've lost the capacity.
But if you do strike but make it symbolic, then it shows you still have the capability to fight back and that instead you're choosing not to.
It’s for their own domestic audience. By the way, even more democratic countries’ governments do this. Look at India for example whenever they boast about hitting a few bases or aircraft in Pakistan!
"the domestic audience" vs "they can read the NYT too" - yes to both - BUT - does the part of the domestic audience that cares actually read the NYT? And if they do read the NYT will they ignore that, either out of sincere belief or for their own safety?
All the dimwits celebrating the strikes on the nuclear program without knowing if they were successful.
The important context here is that Trump is spiritually an Arabic despot
Quote
Rick von Hagn 
@r_vonhagn
Replying to @r_vonhagn and @electionsjoe
The thing to understand about Trump is that he is heterodox to Western politics, but really not that dissimilar in instinct and temperament to West Asian autocrats. He’s one of the few Western pols who ‘gets it’ and is willing to play these stupid games.
Because vast majority of people won't read this reporting but they will see that Iran struck back. Your lens is biased by your level of information consumption.
Very few people will actually read the details.
Many people also don’t care that much.
Being able to point out that you struck back is probably an important signal to your population. But you don’t want to escalate with a significant superior foe
why do you egg someone's house when you can go straight to unloading an ar-15 into it?
I mean if you think about it, it's more of a publicity stunt, it serves to say "we will not cowar in the corner," or "take this sitting down," the fact they gave warning tells me they don't actually wanna fight either, but to talk or atleast fire a warning shot if you will. 
there’s an entire west wing episode on this that clearly shows how hollow it all is
*But 1) not all orgs are of one mind. 2) And your external visibility is part of your in-team visibility. 3) If its about who's toughest it will be about collective political backing X hardware. Here she's flexing the first part 4) it's like when 2 gorillas try to look imposing.*
That's why the ability of a government to control the information its population receives is so important.
Iran is a theocracy that strongly believes in social hierarchy & control. These strikes are a humiliation to their sense of authority & social dominance, so they need to demonstrate strength.
They need to do it because they are expected to do it. Its to uphold a norm. When they don't do it people will assume there has been some change.
They turned off the internet in Iran. That’s how it works. They telegraph to the West, but most people internally don’t see it.
Consider how well torpedoing Bidens border bill worked out for Republicans.
And then add that Iran's domestic audience is not just indoctrinated like MAGA, but also has a language barrier and has to deal with censorship.
You are fooling the people of your country! Thats the point. You continue to look like a strong leader ( else if you dont retaliate, you look weak! )
Wouldn’t it be fun if all the people in all the countries just simultaneously decided they’d had enough of all this shit and locked all these warmaking lunatics up in an asylum for the criminally deranged?
The USA’s initial strike was also symbolic based on reports of it “not doing shit” to the enriched uranium
They control media in Iran.. it’s to show their own people they ‘did’ something..
It's because people dont read.
You're not doing this to satisfy folks who will go in and read everything. You're doing this for the masses who will maybe see a news report that you struck back.
Given how braindead the current president of the United States is: probably Trump personally.
it's also very hilariously at odds with the whole "Iran is a bloodthirsty psychotic theocratic terrorist state" thing
maybe they're not that crazy!
Because they're trying to avoid looking weak to morons. Everyone with a functioning brain already hates the regime.
They’re not trying to fool anyone. It reminds everyone that they’re capable of hitting US interests while demonstrating remarkable restraint and avoiding escalation.