Vice President JD Vance spent the first half of the week telling us how “cool” it is that the IRGC is just like us, while Israel is an ungrateful pariah undermining the great United States.
I've never liked Vance. I was annoyed beyond measure when he was selected for VP because I've never liked Tucker, and I heard that's who was pushing his nomination. I wanted Rubio for President in 2016 and wanted him for VP in 2024. It's time for Republicans to disassociate with freaks like Tucker. Megyn and Candace were never Republicans to begin with, but Tucker pretended to be. Now, I don't know what he is beyond an exceptionally toxic presence among Republicans.
Compare Vance's naive comments, delivered in that simple question/answer cadence, with the sophisticated analysis of an Islamic Republic "moderate" by an Iranian intellectual
There's no parity between Tucker's blather and what Vance said. Hopefully he just wants to keep IRGC missiles in their bunker 'til after the midterms. He's a bit heavy-handed in nixing criticisms that Israel duped the US into fighting an unpopular war. The UAE is asking for a ceasefire so Iran will stop bombing their oil and water filtration facilities. They're also key in ending OPEC and forming a potential Arab alliance with Israel. Vance knows he's negotiating with ideological, historically untrustworthy people. For the sake of free Iranians, I pray the Trumpers are still committed to defanging the IRGC, but on a longer timeline. If things go against them politically, they're all screwed anyway.
You’re getting shrill, Batya. Vance did not “bring the US to its knees,” because the US is not on its knees. I’m not among those who claim Bibi seduced the US into this war, but at the same time I’m not among those who think US actions fail or succeed depending on whether Jerusalem approves.
VP Vance isn’t “shitposting.” He’s trying to balance difficult diplomatic demands. Can’t you see you’re feeding into precisely the narrative you don’t want?
It’s a bad look, and it doesn’t serve the US-Israeli relationship.
US actions fail or succeed depending on how American strength is viewed.
Right now the Middle East sees the United States accepting all of Iran's demands, including reparations, in exchange for a promise, made many times before, that it will not acquire nuclear weapons.
That looks like failure whether you view it from Jerusalem, Dubai, Berlin or New York.
First, this is all still in process. The MOU is not necessarily the endgame. For the US, it may well be a stalling mechanism, intended to at least ease the oil crisis for a time.
Second, as opposed to previous administrations, this one has actually acted. The Middle East sees a US at least serious about Iran’s rising capabilities. Serious enough to risk the global economy.
Yes. My take is that there was little choice. Trump can afford to stress the oil market, but not put it on hold. The war put the global economy at some risk, but didn’t push it over the edge. Another month of the Strait closed might have.
No Bibi did not "seduce us into this war". The Ayatollah and all the radical Islamists have been screaming --death to AMerica--death to the big Satan for 49 years ..all the while killing AMericans: the Marine Barracks etc.etc.
The IRGC is weaker, China and Russia have lost prestige and access to cheap oil, the US is the number one exporter of oil, UAE has dropped out of OPEC and Iran has prompted gulf states to open diplomatic channels w/ Israel. These are arguably good news. Trump has a tendency to talk in terms of resource extraction, though. I’m hoping he won’t America First his way to a deal that excludes the Iranian people. Vance was rumored to be against the war from the start.
Yes, all very good points. I initially saw the decision for war as part of Trump’s efforts toward a global reset. The immediate cause was to stop Iran from crossing the nuclear line, but the larger goal was an obvious need to push back against our main rival. Which is what links the Iran war with Trump’s Venezuela move.
Me too I’m hoping the Iranian people eventually benefit. At this point, it doesn’t look good, but I don’t think this project is over. Trump typically talks like an idiot, but if one watches him long term, it’s obvious he thinks three or four moves ahead. What he says at any given moment is borderline meaningless for understanding what he’s doing. This latter drives normies insane. They don't get it.
I think you're mostly right, but it was not appropriate for Vance to look like he's pulling a ham-fisted power-play over Israel. Israel has been doing the dirty work for the US for decades, and even more-so since 10/7. Vance needed to be more diplomatic in this instance, especially because Israel has every right to take Hezbolla out. The US chose not to make Israel a part of its negotiations with Iran, so legally and morally Israel can take whatever actions it feels appropriate against Hezbolla.
Now, the big question is the 4 dimension chess question. Did Trump leave Israel out of the Iran negotiations on purpose so that Israel could take whatever actions against Hezbolla that need to taken while the US appears to have clean hands? And if so, it would make sense to make Vance issue the "stern warning" that everyone knows really is meaningless. I don't know, but is that scenario so far-fetched?
The circumstances mentioned in the previous dozen or so comments in this thread, hoping it’s strategy, not a betrayal of Israel, former promises and the Iranian people.
I don’t think the scenario is far-fetched. I actually suspect the “peace deal” is theater. It’s rather a “breather deal.” Exactly what’s intended, the expected timeline and such, I don’t know, but the Trump Team needs to address the oil shock. Vance’s rhetorical barbs are likely mainly intended to keep the Arabs on our side against Iran. Iran will break any deal, and then the next stage will begin.
These are guesses based on what I see of the whole scenario.
Batya, I’m a huge fan. I agree with everything you’re saying and your plain-speak articulation is, as always, brilliant and incisive. Thank you, really. But I must add that it is hard not to be astonished by your outrage and consternation with JD’s “content creator” and “shitposter” approach. Have you met his boss?? That is, quite literally, the calling card of this president, and administration, and you have been heaping praise on precisely this kind of leadership since Inauguration Day.
In any case, please keep speaking truth, it is so important and you’re far better at it than most.
THIS! I’m noticing a very bizarre thing happening…all the people who put a great deal of faith in Trump are never willing to actually criticize HIM for HIS decisions. Instead, they lash out at those close to him when decisions don’t go their way. For example, Batya could have easily pulled several clips from Trump’s presser at the G7, and she would have found comments equally as hostile as what Vance had to offer. I’m seeing this from the hawks at the moment, but the Natcons have largely taken a similar path when things don’t go their way- blame everyone but Trump. Such a weird thing. It’s as if after a decade they haven’t learned that Trump isn’t rooted in any particular ideology or greater cause. His interest lies solely in making sure he “looks good”. It’s laughable that the neocons, pro-lifers, natcons, evangelicals, etc all seem to think he gives a damn about their particular priorities. I guess people like Batya have spent so much time foolishly fawning over Trump that it would be be too big of a hit to her pride if she were to admit that she hitched her wagon to a narcissistic, self-dealing lunatic….much easier to save face by going after anyone in MAGA, so long as the leader is spared.
It’s not our military’s job to be at the service of every diaspora that has a score to settle. Not yours not Cuba not Venezuela not Germany. Just take a breath. Trump made a decision. Have faith.
"It’s not our military’s job to be at the service of every diaspora that has a score to settle."
That's true, but it's also completely irrelevant.
I'm pretty sure those 66 hostages that Iran took in 1979 were Americans, not Israelis. You can check me on that.
Would you like me to list the specific events in Iran's long history of state-sponsored terrorism, hostage-taking, maritime attacks, and proxy warfare against the USA?
Maybe in our lifetimes we will all see what happens to "the world economy" when Iran gets nukes and fulfills Twelver eschatology.
Most Americans have no clue how a radical Islamic ideologue looks at the world. It's a fundamentalism that is absurdly common in much of the non-Western world, and it makes your average bible-belt Bible-thumper look like a Richard Dawkins.
a) Pakistan is not run by the kind of Islamic hardliners that run Iran. Which isn't to say it can't happen. Many Muslim nations (Egypt comes to mind) are barely able to keep a lid on extremist entities like the Muslim Brotherhood.
b) Yes, Pakistan has nukes, and that is a very bad thing. So let's put another round in the chamber and keep playing Russian roulette.
You can’t keep waging wars against people you don’t like, especially not when you can’t afford them. When you’re $40 trillion in the whole (with no end in sight), it’s time to do something a little different.
This is what you get when the adults have bailed out, or been chased out, of the Trump Administration.
Vice President J.D. Vance is no Mike Pence, and the Trump Administration is the weaker for it as surely as the nation is the poorer and less secure for it.
Oh, really Batya? Reducing our articulate and principled VP to a shitposter? Connecting him to Tucker’s whackadoodle views even though Vance has NEVER endorsed those views?? Ridiculous. Until you abandon this hysteria and acknowledge the irrefutable truth—that there are legitimate BENEFITS in addition to the well-trampled risks to ending this war—you have lost all credibility. Or maybe just leave journalism to start the Rubio 2028 campaign: no doubt it will be well funded!
I think it might’ve been a bad idea to put someone in the White House whose only bar for giving people positions of power is ‘do you like me right now or not’
Vance's actions are unbecoming of the position of Vice President of the United States
Hard not to feel like we are all f**ked. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right…
Actually, Bridget Phetasy has the best version of this:”Commies to the left of me, Nazis to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with Jews!”
luv 'er she's a real hoot!
Yes—in less polite company my language would be significantly more colorful…
I won't ask you to define "colorful" 😂
“here i am stuck in the middle with you…”
Phetasy is the only thing keeping me sane these days
I've never liked Vance. I was annoyed beyond measure when he was selected for VP because I've never liked Tucker, and I heard that's who was pushing his nomination. I wanted Rubio for President in 2016 and wanted him for VP in 2024. It's time for Republicans to disassociate with freaks like Tucker. Megyn and Candace were never Republicans to begin with, but Tucker pretended to be. Now, I don't know what he is beyond an exceptionally toxic presence among Republicans.
This is incredibly, staggeringly bad 🤦♀️
Compare Vance's naive comments, delivered in that simple question/answer cadence, with the sophisticated analysis of an Islamic Republic "moderate" by an Iranian intellectual
https://nkowsar.substack.com/p/ali-larijani-was-smarter-than-most
JD Vance is far out of his depth, Yale Law notwithstanding.
Thank you. This guy’s political career is ending.
We hope.
Just heard him say he and Joy Behar are best friends.
Let’s hope the border tsarification of the veep works as well this time as it did the first time
Screaming into the void since his nomination…. Thanks Batya , for being so clear , and as angry as I feel
There's no parity between Tucker's blather and what Vance said. Hopefully he just wants to keep IRGC missiles in their bunker 'til after the midterms. He's a bit heavy-handed in nixing criticisms that Israel duped the US into fighting an unpopular war. The UAE is asking for a ceasefire so Iran will stop bombing their oil and water filtration facilities. They're also key in ending OPEC and forming a potential Arab alliance with Israel. Vance knows he's negotiating with ideological, historically untrustworthy people. For the sake of free Iranians, I pray the Trumpers are still committed to defanging the IRGC, but on a longer timeline. If things go against them politically, they're all screwed anyway.
You’re getting shrill, Batya. Vance did not “bring the US to its knees,” because the US is not on its knees. I’m not among those who claim Bibi seduced the US into this war, but at the same time I’m not among those who think US actions fail or succeed depending on whether Jerusalem approves.
VP Vance isn’t “shitposting.” He’s trying to balance difficult diplomatic demands. Can’t you see you’re feeding into precisely the narrative you don’t want?
It’s a bad look, and it doesn’t serve the US-Israeli relationship.
US actions fail or succeed depending on how American strength is viewed.
Right now the Middle East sees the United States accepting all of Iran's demands, including reparations, in exchange for a promise, made many times before, that it will not acquire nuclear weapons.
That looks like failure whether you view it from Jerusalem, Dubai, Berlin or New York.
First, this is all still in process. The MOU is not necessarily the endgame. For the US, it may well be a stalling mechanism, intended to at least ease the oil crisis for a time.
Second, as opposed to previous administrations, this one has actually acted. The Middle East sees a US at least serious about Iran’s rising capabilities. Serious enough to risk the global economy.
No question Trump has been stronger on Iran than any other US President.
But the past is behind us and the question is if the MOU is a ruse or a complete pivot.
One thing Iran already has under the belt: the MOU suspends oil sanctions for 60 days. That's roughly $5B / month into the IRGC coffers.
Yes. My take is that there was little choice. Trump can afford to stress the oil market, but not put it on hold. The war put the global economy at some risk, but didn’t push it over the edge. Another month of the Strait closed might have.
No Bibi did not "seduce us into this war". The Ayatollah and all the radical Islamists have been screaming --death to AMerica--death to the big Satan for 49 years ..all the while killing AMericans: the Marine Barracks etc.etc.
Agreed. The Trump administration had very good reasons to act. Those who say Israel dragged us in are simply wrong. And up to their usual.
The IRGC is weaker, China and Russia have lost prestige and access to cheap oil, the US is the number one exporter of oil, UAE has dropped out of OPEC and Iran has prompted gulf states to open diplomatic channels w/ Israel. These are arguably good news. Trump has a tendency to talk in terms of resource extraction, though. I’m hoping he won’t America First his way to a deal that excludes the Iranian people. Vance was rumored to be against the war from the start.
Yes, all very good points. I initially saw the decision for war as part of Trump’s efforts toward a global reset. The immediate cause was to stop Iran from crossing the nuclear line, but the larger goal was an obvious need to push back against our main rival. Which is what links the Iran war with Trump’s Venezuela move.
Me too I’m hoping the Iranian people eventually benefit. At this point, it doesn’t look good, but I don’t think this project is over. Trump typically talks like an idiot, but if one watches him long term, it’s obvious he thinks three or four moves ahead. What he says at any given moment is borderline meaningless for understanding what he’s doing. This latter drives normies insane. They don't get it.
I think you're mostly right, but it was not appropriate for Vance to look like he's pulling a ham-fisted power-play over Israel. Israel has been doing the dirty work for the US for decades, and even more-so since 10/7. Vance needed to be more diplomatic in this instance, especially because Israel has every right to take Hezbolla out. The US chose not to make Israel a part of its negotiations with Iran, so legally and morally Israel can take whatever actions it feels appropriate against Hezbolla.
Now, the big question is the 4 dimension chess question. Did Trump leave Israel out of the Iran negotiations on purpose so that Israel could take whatever actions against Hezbolla that need to taken while the US appears to have clean hands? And if so, it would make sense to make Vance issue the "stern warning" that everyone knows really is meaningless. I don't know, but is that scenario so far-fetched?
Publically acting like Netanyahu is a loose cannon seems semi-reasonable, under the circumstances.
What circumstances are those? A leader who will fire back when fired upon?
The circumstances mentioned in the previous dozen or so comments in this thread, hoping it’s strategy, not a betrayal of Israel, former promises and the Iranian people.
I don’t think the scenario is far-fetched. I actually suspect the “peace deal” is theater. It’s rather a “breather deal.” Exactly what’s intended, the expected timeline and such, I don’t know, but the Trump Team needs to address the oil shock. Vance’s rhetorical barbs are likely mainly intended to keep the Arabs on our side against Iran. Iran will break any deal, and then the next stage will begin.
These are guesses based on what I see of the whole scenario.
Batya, I’m a huge fan. I agree with everything you’re saying and your plain-speak articulation is, as always, brilliant and incisive. Thank you, really. But I must add that it is hard not to be astonished by your outrage and consternation with JD’s “content creator” and “shitposter” approach. Have you met his boss?? That is, quite literally, the calling card of this president, and administration, and you have been heaping praise on precisely this kind of leadership since Inauguration Day.
In any case, please keep speaking truth, it is so important and you’re far better at it than most.
THIS! I’m noticing a very bizarre thing happening…all the people who put a great deal of faith in Trump are never willing to actually criticize HIM for HIS decisions. Instead, they lash out at those close to him when decisions don’t go their way. For example, Batya could have easily pulled several clips from Trump’s presser at the G7, and she would have found comments equally as hostile as what Vance had to offer. I’m seeing this from the hawks at the moment, but the Natcons have largely taken a similar path when things don’t go their way- blame everyone but Trump. Such a weird thing. It’s as if after a decade they haven’t learned that Trump isn’t rooted in any particular ideology or greater cause. His interest lies solely in making sure he “looks good”. It’s laughable that the neocons, pro-lifers, natcons, evangelicals, etc all seem to think he gives a damn about their particular priorities. I guess people like Batya have spent so much time foolishly fawning over Trump that it would be be too big of a hit to her pride if she were to admit that she hitched her wagon to a narcissistic, self-dealing lunatic….much easier to save face by going after anyone in MAGA, so long as the leader is spared.
Please stop. You’re going in the wrong direction.
It’s not our military’s job to be at the service of every diaspora that has a score to settle. Not yours not Cuba not Venezuela not Germany. Just take a breath. Trump made a decision. Have faith.
"It’s not our military’s job to be at the service of every diaspora that has a score to settle."
That's true, but it's also completely irrelevant.
I'm pretty sure those 66 hostages that Iran took in 1979 were Americans, not Israelis. You can check me on that.
Would you like me to list the specific events in Iran's long history of state-sponsored terrorism, hostage-taking, maritime attacks, and proxy warfare against the USA?
Sure but we never claimed to be there to avenge the 1979 issue.
Look Iran sucks, but they aren’t worth destroying the world economy. The deal we got is the best we will get. No nukes!
Regime change is not our problem.
Maybe in our lifetimes we will all see what happens to "the world economy" when Iran gets nukes and fulfills Twelver eschatology.
Most Americans have no clue how a radical Islamic ideologue looks at the world. It's a fundamentalism that is absurdly common in much of the non-Western world, and it makes your average bible-belt Bible-thumper look like a Richard Dawkins.
Pakistan is run by Islamic ideologues, and they have nukes. The sun still rises and falls.
a) Pakistan is not run by the kind of Islamic hardliners that run Iran. Which isn't to say it can't happen. Many Muslim nations (Egypt comes to mind) are barely able to keep a lid on extremist entities like the Muslim Brotherhood.
b) Yes, Pakistan has nukes, and that is a very bad thing. So let's put another round in the chamber and keep playing Russian roulette.
You can’t keep waging wars against people you don’t like, especially not when you can’t afford them. When you’re $40 trillion in the whole (with no end in sight), it’s time to do something a little different.
HE WAS ALWAYS THIS PERSON, BATYA! WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?????
This is what you get when the adults have bailed out, or been chased out, of the Trump Administration.
Vice President J.D. Vance is no Mike Pence, and the Trump Administration is the weaker for it as surely as the nation is the poorer and less secure for it.
Oh, really Batya? Reducing our articulate and principled VP to a shitposter? Connecting him to Tucker’s whackadoodle views even though Vance has NEVER endorsed those views?? Ridiculous. Until you abandon this hysteria and acknowledge the irrefutable truth—that there are legitimate BENEFITS in addition to the well-trampled risks to ending this war—you have lost all credibility. Or maybe just leave journalism to start the Rubio 2028 campaign: no doubt it will be well funded!
"articulate and principled VP"
"Principled", at least, has just gone out the window.
Right. Just another shitposter.
If it walks & talks like a shitposter...It's a shitposter!!
If you say so! No need to argue on the merits of his points, just call him a shitposter and that’s that!
Yep. @Laura Loomer called it long ago.
I think it might’ve been a bad idea to put someone in the White House whose only bar for giving people positions of power is ‘do you like me right now or not’