Quote (ofthevoid @ 8 Jan 2020 02:43)
This is me just thinking out loud without a shred of proof but imagine this scenario.
Neither side wants war. Neither side wants to appear weak or yielding. Is it too much of a reach to think that some compromise can be reached through back channels, so the situation deescalates?
The US lets Iran bomb some predetermined base while the Iranians can spam footage of this 'victory' both sides can frame what they did as a victory, lines in the sands are drawn and we go back to a sort of frozen conflict? They tested each other's boundaries and now both sides know.
Honestly if i was Potus or the CIA chief that's something i'd be willing to negotiate.
under a halfway sane administration i think this would be a somewhat realistic option. trump, however, defied the adults in the room multiple times by unilaterally breaking the iran deal, and also by choosing the most extreme option and assassinating soleimani. he clearly does not believe in diplomacy or deals, he wants to appear 'strong' and force iran into sumbission.
our best hope is that iranian leadership is aware of that, chose some something that would look 'good' on their propaganda channels but not really hurt the US, pretend they avenged the loss of their most important general, and save face that way without creating a reason to further escalate.
how likely that is, however, i don't know. they aren't exactly perfectly rational actors either, even though their behaviour regarding the nuclear deal illustrated that they are not exclusively driven by religious fanaticism, as some on the right would have us believe...