Post

I'm worried. I sat with things for a bit today to try and see through the immediate fears, but I still land largely here: there's no obvious offramp, and the men behind it are not of a caliber which allows for humiliation. Does that automatically mean nuclear use? No, but… we should be serious. 1/x

Elizabeth N. Saunders@profsaunders.bsky.social

So, there's no bargain to strike (& haven't even talked about Israel or Gulf complicating any TACO), there are no guardrails left and we have a personalist regime feeding Trump's anger, and an adversary with huge, geographic (brute fact) leverage. Grim choice between humiliation and escalation. 12/

115 reposts418 likes

Trump's 'philosophy' is that he has to be the winner, and you can't have a winner without having a loser. Who is a bigger winner than the man who can walk away from a pile of bodies? The answer, of course, is the guy who piled up those bodies in the first place. So I take nukes as very plausible.

I'm worried! But I'm not alarmed and not trying to alarm folks. It's hard to write about this work without tripping into it, but this moment is important and the more people who can know a bit more about it the better, is my motivation here.

I don't have anything constructive to add to this, but I would like to thank you for this and other analyses you have publicly done. I don't feel better, but I do feel like I know more and can understand more, and I'm grateful for that.

The unhingededness of the last few days' statements and the seeming rejection of any building offramps up til now. Back then I was more sure that we had things militarily / physically in hand, and no brass would go along with an urging to escalate (i.e. it would take a big loss).

Is it this dynamic - escalation v humiliation that concerns? bsky.app/profile/prof...

Elizabeth N. Saunders@profsaunders.bsky.social

So, there's no bargain to strike (& haven't even talked about Israel or Gulf complicating any TACO), there are no guardrails left and we have a personalist regime feeding Trump's anger, and an adversary with huge, geographic (brute fact) leverage. Grim choice between humiliation and escalation. 12/

To be clear and I'm trying hard not to alarm folks - I'm at like a 5/10 worry where back then I was at my usual 1-2. Aug 2017, Feb 2022 were both like 2-3 for moments at a time. But this is a more desperate bunch of dudes with negative respect for norms or morals.

Why are you not trying to alarm folks? Fine to urge calm so people will act in light of facts intelligently but quite another to not state dire threat clearly: Trump is insane, Hegseth is insane and we already know these weapons are not precise or reliable. There is actual danger. Be alarmed.

Also like the then expectation that such a severe move would necessarily come with other strategic goals and visible changes leading to them and well... No it's been a few weeks and we're just not really doing that

5/10 seems correct. They are clearly not bound by any sense of restraint or decency, and have purged enough generals to get to the ones who will go along. Will the world be forever changed...

Good points, I think today Trump hinted more at infrastructure, more bridges and energy facilities. I am always interested in the motivation, what could be sold as 'success' if you can't get to something, perhaps make it inaccessible for years to come. Tis what I would consider the 'US motivation'.

this kind of rationalization is not how trump works. people are desperate to find cohesion in his actions but that's projection. it's all impulse, emotion and guts. he revels in fantasies of violence and his own grandiosity, and humiliation is an essential threat to him. 1/

this is what frames his motivation. on the other hand he's a coward and easily bribed with money (though the dimensions have changed immensely since he retook office) - which only adds to he unpredictability.

While Israels motivation is most defenitely regime change. To have a 'permanent solution' for uninterupted expansion plans. The voices against Turkiye grow louder already, Jerusalem post had a gobsmacking article today.

Failure, to reach the objectives is a none starter at least politically. The first cracks are showing with demonstrations in Tel Aviv and there is no let up in the amount of missiles, rockets & drones . So I don't think it will be tomorrow but if tomorrow is unseccussful it will be more likely.

Here's my fear. He is absolutely determined to leave his name on the historical record. Ballroom, Kennedy center, bullshit arch, anything he can put his name on. He absolutely does not fear or care about any repercussions of nuclear weapon use. He does know it'll mean he's remembered.

First - I still think conventional bombardment of civilian infrastructure is the more likely order. There are few legal or moral justifications for such punishments, but the alarms have been loudly there for months that such concerns are not part of this admin's (or its military's) thinking.

But watching the last few days, I *am* increasingly worried about nuclear use. Yes, it's my focus and I'm sensitive to it to begin with. And yes it remains unlikely! But there are few other ways to take the visible frustrations of the WH and imagine which options they are considering.

That caveated, the only credible scenario for nuclear escalation in the current context is roughly a single, low-yield nuclear strike against a buried / isolated facility. Militarily plausible enough that the order goes through; something that wields signaling value yet reduces atrocity optics.

...and of course, such a move satisfies the cruelty bravado instincts which have been celebrated over the last 16 months. This is the crux, since there's no military need for these weapons here. But if the above about the choice being between humiliation and escalation is right... it's an opening.

Greg Sargent@gregsargent.bsky.social

Hegseth is very skilled at ministering to the despot's pathologies. His bloodlust and obvious relish of military violence and killing appeal to Trump. He's willing and eager to carry out Trump's threats of war crimes. His loyalty to Trump is unquestioned. newrepublic.com/article/2086...