Juneteenth Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Thursday, June 19, 2025
·
69 comments
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a retired Professor of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter and/or
BlueSky.
The headline of the day- Elderly couple at Redlands nudist resort were killed over a hot dog
Four scenarios, from bad to worst plus the neocon fantasy outcome:
1) If Israel can, by itself, genuinely set back Iran’s nuclear program by a decade or more, that would be the good outcome. Likelihood: 30%.
2) If the US limits itself to dropping bunker busters on a handful of nuclear sites, and if the Iranians decide to let that go, we may be OK. So the second best case scenario requires American and Iranian restraint. 20%.
3) If we drop our MOPs and Iran decides to go all-in on war with the Great Satan, this is going to be a mess, because they still have means to hit American bases in the Middle East. To which the US would overreact, as it tends to do. 50%
4) The worst outcome would be that the Iranians retain the means to build nukes and, given the shit-hammering they’re taking, it’s a pretty good bet they’d race to get usable nukes. Which would be very bad, not just for Israel, but for the entire ME. 30%
Extra: The neocon fantasy is that either the Israelis, or the Israelis and the Americans destroy Iran’s nukes, its weapons storage and factories, and enough of its economy that the Iranian people will rise up, overthrow the theocracy and install a democratically-elected, pluralistic and competent government. (I feel like we’ve seen this movie somewhere else.) 2%
Do you have different scenarios? Different odds? Anyone can play.
@Michael Reynolds: “Extra: The neocon fantasy is that either the Israelis, or the Israelis and the Americans destroy Iran’s nukes, its weapons storage and factories, and enough of its economy that the Iranian people will rise up, overthrow the theocracy and install a democratically-elected, pluralistic and competent government.”
Hey, it worked in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why not Iran?
@Bill Jempty: Here’s a headline of the day:
EU weighs sperm donor cap to curb risk of accidental incest
@wr:
No doubt Trump sees this as an opurtunity to prove he’s the big dog and finally win in the ME. No doubt Netanyahoo is putting that shit in his ear. Let’s see Baron sign up for the military.
It’s too bad that Trump believes the president’s job is to undo everything his predecessor did and to use the office to enrich himself. Iran’s nuke program WAS under control until Trump 1.0 blew up the international inspection agreement for no reason other than because it had Obama’s fingerprints on it. We’d all be better off if Trump concentrated on the grifting and left policy to experienced professionals. (Oops, forgot, such professionals have all been fired.)
@Michael Reynolds:
There’s some speculation bunker busters won’t be able to damage the Fordow site enough, and/or it might take a tactical nuke to take it out.
Of course, reality is not that simple. It may actually take boots on the ground to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program, even if it means only to get the Mullah’s to negotiate about it.
On the lighter side of the news, the nazi in chief is getting more efficient. Now he can blow up rockets without launching them.
The clip of the Ted Cruz/Tucker Carlson interview that’s getting the most play is the one where Cruz doesn’t know the population of Iran. But the far more frightening section includes Cruz’s “Biblical” justification for supporting the Netanyahu government and its war with Iran. It’s apocalyptic accelerationism coming out of the mouth of a US Senator.
https://forward.com/fast-forward/730222/tucker-carlson-ted-cruz-interview-biblical-israel/
@Kingdaddy:
It’s almost as if basing one’s political worldview on a book from an era and a culture so far removed from our experience that every word can be interpreted and re-interpreted at will is bad process.
Who would have figured that?
American philosemitism is creepy and weird, even if it doesn’t come from the mouth of Ted Cruz. All of these Gentiles who don’t seem to have any connection to Jewish life aside from cheering on Israel as it massacres starving Palestinians are basically Rachel Dolezal.
@Michael Reynolds: I place a very high percentage on all of this leading to more destabilization of the region and increased motivation and funding for terrorism.
All this focus on hypothetical scenarios about nukes, where the reality has always been that the odds of Iran nuking Israel have been quite small, ignores that all of this likely increases the odds of some new 10/7 happening or slightly less dramatic, but still awful things across the globe.
Put another way, it just increases the incentives for asymmetrical responses.
It also shows, yet again (see, e.g., Iraq) that having a nuke is imperative for regimes like the one in Iran beacuse if they had a nuke, they would currently not be under attack.
@Kurtz and @Modulo Myself: Yup. I almost made a quip about Sunday School before I clicked the link and saw this:
There are a LOT of people who think this way and for this exact reason.
@Steven L. Taylor: Let me add: a near-certainty that things will not go to plan and substantial unintended consequences will follow.
Pretending like this is just about Iran’s nuclear program and measuring results by that yardstick alone is the kind of thinking that got us the Iraq debacle (including ISIS) and the two-decade mess in Afghanistan.
Trump claims that “MAGA hates Fox news” because their polling is “crooked.”
Some TV recommendations:
Mo. On Netflix. Comedy (with some drama) about a Palestinian refugee trying to make it in Houston. Stars Mohammed Amer, a Palestinian stand up comedian. Funny and yet emotional.
Hitler and the Nazis: Evil on Trial. A Netflix documentary. Episode 2: The Third Reich Rises. Has all the echoes for current events.
Your Friend and Neighbors (Apple): Dark satire about awful wealthy people in suburban New York. No sympathy for any of them. Yet we compulsively consumed it. Jon Hamm, Amanda Peet
@Steven L. Taylor:
I’m trying not to comment overall, because what’s the point, but just reading comments here–the majority of people who think that America should be involved also believe that Israel lives in a state of exception. I.e, it’s different when Israel is an extremist fundamentalist state devoted to expansion. I think this view is held by everyone in both parties who has power in this country. The idea that this view is amenable to caution or pragmatism seems doubtful.
To be honest, I doubt anyone who wants to do just x or just y cares if if just x or y transforms into greater involvement. People are lying through their teeth, basically. It’s like saying it’s a tragedy that Israel massacred however many starving Palestinians today. It’s just a lie and nothing more.
And just to go off on the lying thing–I’m waiting for those who spent the last week explaining why violence in protests causes blowback so be non-violent are going to start attacking the completely non-violent trans movement for causing reactionary bigots to ban trans care for minors.
@Michael Reynolds: The other dimension to weigh these options is, “Which is most likely to lead to a substantive, lasting agreement to halt Iran’s nuclear program?”
I’m not sure how direct military action by the US raises the probability of that outcome. And the “shit hammering” to date is going to be a factor in all scenarios.
Also, I don’t see a “Halt further attacks” option on your list. Unless that’s implicitly your #4, in which case, that’s a straw man argument.
666
About two weeks ago I noticed that, for some unknown reason, my calendar for June 19th was just devoid of any meetings. So I filled it up with all these donor meetings I had been trying to get scheduled: a breakfast, a mid morning coffee, a lunch, and an evening dinner.
Ah yes, Juneteenth. The day every one of my colleagues across the nation has off. One meeting down, three to go.
I will be belatedly celebrating Juneteenth on June 27th, during which I’ll be watching the famed Savannah Bananas.
@Scott:
I’ve been considering whether I should devote limited tv watching time to “Your Friends and Neighbors.” I only have two more episodes of Andor left to watch at which point there will be a new opening. I’ll give it a shot.
(Thanks to whomever it was that encouraged me to go back and finish “Dark Winds.” I stayed up late a couple weekend nights in a row binge watching it. Great time.)
June 19th is also my fathers birthday that would some years also be Father’s Day.
When that happened we would get him two ties instead of one.
Wilmer Albert Brown
1916-2001
RIP
@Scott:
We just watched the first ep last night!
@Neil Hudelson: Tom and I just finished recording three episodes about Andor (what a great show!). The first of our eps will drop a week from Monday (Monday is Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan).
@Steven L. Taylor:
I find it odd that Cruz’s devout supporters don’t look at that quote with suspicion. Isn’t Cruz admitting that he is following Pascal?
Perhaps I am in the minority, but it seems to me that faith and hedging one’s bets are two very different things under tension—seems like a corollary of Paul’s definition of faith. Throw the imperfect vessel argument in and you have a nice kiwi milkshake of contradiction that these people swear tastes divine.
It would be one thing if Evangelicals embraced letting God judge (pretty sure that’s in The Bible), but so many seem to believe in literal demons.
Right in front of [their] noses, indeed.
@Scott:
I thought Elena was practical and courageous, and she made a good point in using Cooper.
@Neil Hudelson:
Watch Severance first. They’re not related, but it’s a great show.
Reason 1237th why you have to love Filipinas.
Dear Wife went out shortly before ten to do an errand then go to a jeweler to get a watch battery replaced and then go get her hair cut.
She texted me about 10:15. ‘I got mail out of the PO Box but the jeweler and hair salon don’t open till 11. So I’m killing time at Ross.
I texted back- Poor baby.
You have to love Filipinas.
@Mister Bluster:
I used to play in these tournaments many years ago. At the 2001 March Orlando, which I won, I had two relief pitchers Jason Christiansen, who another player referred to as J Christ, plus Dan Miceli. Some players, myself included, used a computer program to draft our players. Players had a 3 digit code to help enter them into the draft. Miceli’s #? 666. So I had Christ and the Anti-Christ on the same team. I guess they balanced out because I did win* the tournament.
*- Only one of two times I ever did.
@Kathy: I also liked Lu as a character but the fabulously wealthy? No. The show definitely had echoes of The Great Gatsby.
How things never change.
You know, if the administration were to send in a few B-52’s unannounced and bust those bunkers, announcing it afterward, and walk away, it would be one thing. Not the path I was looking for, but understandable.
That is not what’s happening. Trump and MAGA are looking for someone to bully, to push around and beat down, since they aren’t being all that successful with that at home.
Trust me, I have no particular love for Khamenei or his regime. I expect it will probably topple of its own weight at some point. The people of Iran know what the rest of the world is like, and maybe aren’t so thrilled with the state of affairs. Maybe a little help at the right moment might be well received. But that’s not what we’re going to see, is it?
Organizers are now saying that 13 million people participated in No Kings last Saturday. That crosses an important threshold – 3 percent of the US population.
We need to keep this up. Keep doing it. Keep the spirit of the thing going.
@Jay L Gischer:
I’m sure there were many, many others who’d have liked to take part as well, but couldn’t, for health concerns, lack of transport, or other good reasons.
@Scott: “EU weighs sperm donor cap to curb risk of accidental incest”
What can I say? The ladies love me!
This is the kind of direct point-out-the-insanity advertising we need more of:
https://bsky.app/profile/cardonebrian.bsky.social/post/3lrvssrmork2v
Although I’d say it’s a little ham-fisted closing the deal, it fits in my desire for 10-second ads that are aggressively honest.
@Kurtz:
The same could be said of “originalism”. It’s Calvinball.
@Jay L Gischer: “Organizers” have been banging that drum since the start. The most realistic estimates I’ve seen suggest somewhere in the 4-6M range. Which is still a ton of people. It’s hard to verify though, because there were so many impromptu protests that happened in small towns with like 20 people on a street corner. (Even if you add these to the tally, you won’t get another 6M people.)
Anyway, the corporate-sponsored Tea Party protests that infected our political discourse for a decade had – even by the extremely generous estimates of the organizers – 15% that number. In 2009 the “Tea Party” was one of the only things anyone talked about – just a ginned-up nonsense movement whose idea of coherent policy just morphed straight into the DOGE “waste and fraud” fiction.
If 5M people can’t sway media to stop treating Trump like just a politician doing politician things, we’re absolutely screwed.
@Kurtz: Even I know that the Bible is a document about how individuals can live lives pleasing to the deity described in it* and not a document outlining how foreign policy should be conducted.**
*Should they so choose. The Bible is also pretty clear on individuals having autonomy and moral agency.
**Unless one wants to go muy draconian on foreign policy issues. No one wants to know my foreign policy approach based on the Bible. (And I’m certainly never going to support… Ted Cruz’s, for example.)
@Kurtz:
Seems like a non-sequetor to me. I embrace letting God judge (at levels contrary to how I was taught in the evangelical community, in fact) and also believe in literal demons–spiritual entities aligned with Satan/evil. So what?
On the other hand, this observation seems spot on to me. And yes, we are in the minority. Faith cannot be gamed in the way Pascal describes, but I suspect he also realized that and was constructing a hypothetical.
@just nutha:
I see your point about the non-sequitur.
I should have added that they identify specific people as demonic. Which, to me, is the height of unbiblical judgment. But that’s just me.
Does that fix it?
@Bill Jempty:
Couple of points:
(1) of course he had a bunker beneath his trailer
(2) Carl Hiassen could have written this story. I can’t believe this wasn’t in Florida, although I’m not sure you could safely build a bunker beneath your trailer anywhere in Florida.
@ptfe: Several unrelated points:
* Mainstream media is not very consequential. Social media is where it is happening. Republicans know this and are way ahead in this arena. No Kings can provide catchup.
* There’s some pretty solid data on this. We always knew that the Tea Party was astroturf. They had money behind them, that’s why they had impact. The only reason DOGE happened was because of Musks 250 million bucks donated to the Trump campaign. It wasn’t the Tea Party.
* It takes about 3 percent of a nations population to be involved in a protest movement to ensure change. So we are either there, or close. In either case, anybody who can get out there should do it. I want to rain on more of Trump’s parades. Since it is peaceful, we aren’t going to attract cameras of big media outlets. We can attract the attention of people on the street though. And in social media.
* If you can’t make it because of issues, bless you. Some events, such as the Santa Clara County event, were not marches but stationary, along El Camino Real. People hung out along this main thoroughfare in shaded, and seated if needed. The crowd tended older. But old people vote. One friend who thought she couldn’t participate because of her bad back changed her mind at the last moment, seeing how it was laid out. Anyway, if you can’t make it, bless you.
@al Ameda:
Every now and again I’m reminded of the movie REDS and John Malkovich’s bunker, in a swamp.
@Kurtz: Identifying specific people as demonic is simply wrong headed. Identifying specific types to ascribe horrible actions to seems simply wrong headed, too, but ymmv. To visit the depths of what human cruelty can accomplish, one need only tour their own thoughts and soul.
@Michael Reynolds:
I think that’s a pretty good list. I have no idea on the percentages though, and the longer-term effects of each are more uncertain IMO.
@Steven L. Taylor:
The reason Iran is getting attacked is that many people and countries (not just Israel) believe Iran wants nukes. The argument that Iran’s program is purely for civilian purposes is not something anyone who has looked at it closely believes. If Iran were a normal country that didn’t have this foreign policy centered around destroying Israel along with this desire to at least be a nuclear break-out state, there would not be any incentive for Israel or US to attack Iran, and therefore no incentive for Iran to pursue nukes.
IOW, Iran’s situation is of its own making.
It’s not just about Iran’s nuclear program obviously. Japan, for example, has a much more advanced program than Iran does and could build a bomb quickly if it wanted to, but no one is worried about Japan because unlike Iran they are actually using their program for civilian purposes, and they are fully cooperative with the IAEA.
And critically, Japan doesn’t have a foreign policy that is centered on destroying another country. This conflict is primarily about Iran’s foreign policy and its obsession with Israel and the desire to have some kind of nuclear capability that makes no sense except for military use, just makes that foreign policy worse.
I am seriously behind on my podcasts. I’m only commenting a lot this week as a result of procrastination. I will definitely be listening to the Khan and Andor episodes, though not exactly sure when.
@gVOR10:
Thanks for that!
Damn, I forgot about that cheesebag movie.
@Andy:
Honest question: Do you really think I am unaware of this?
Am I being that unclear?
@Andy: To try and set aside my frustration, let me note.
1. Yes, I understand that Israel wants to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. I understand why they would be opposed to them having such. They see it as a threat, and I get that.
2. I understand the difference between an ally (Japan, etc) getting such a weapon v. adversaries.
3. I understand why Iran wants a nuke, which I think is more because they know having one makes attacks like this one less likely to happen (see, e.g., North Korea).
4. I also think that Iran would not nuke Israel because they know if they did, the US would almost certainly retaliate. There are reasons why the last nuclear deployment on the battlefield was in the 1940s.
5. I get why Israel doesn’t want to bet on the power of deterrence, but I also understand why Iran would want a deterrent.
6. I also think that Israel’s attack creates a greater incentive for Iran to use proxies for asymmetrical warfare (i.e., terrorism) for the foreseeable future in a way that is likely to cause more death and destruction than is likely from a still hypothetical Iranian nuke.
@Andy: Note I never said anything about civilian nuclear power. I accept that Iran wants a weapon. I just think that these attacks will increase that desire, not diminish it.
@Steven L. Taylor: Correction.
Next Monday (6/23) is Star Trek: TMP
Monday the 30th is TWOK
And then Andor for the next three weeks.
In 1992, Netanyahu was claiming that Iran was 3-5 years away from having a bomb. Since 2012, it’s been 1 year.
Possible scenarios:
1. We have been lied to time and time again
2. Israeli intelligence is making good faith errors
3. Israel has done an amazing job of containment and doesn’t need our help
4. Iranians are unprecedentedly dumb, and simply cannot get the work done
5. Iran really isn’t pursuing a bomb
6. Time moves slower in Iran than the rest of the world
In each of these cases, I see no reason why we would need to be involved.
I expect it’s a mixture of 1 and 3.
I think Israel has had a long running policy of claiming Iran is a lot more aggressively pursuing nuclear weapons than it is, in hopes of getting the US to help with regime change, to take care of the terrorist problem than Iran represents. And previous actions have set back Iran’s abilities.
I don’t see why this needs us to get involved. We’ve already spent 20 years in a war in the Middle East because of lies about someone’s WMD programs. It wasn’t awesome.
And, yes, Israel is somewhere between lying and coloring the truth. They have a history of having done so, and every incentive to do it now.
Maybe —maybe— give Israel a couple of the big beautiful bunker busting bombs and tell them to figure it out. I’m sure they can work out a delivery mechanism before Iran has a nuclear bomb.
@Steven L. Taylor:
If you ever need a break, you can do an blank ep on ST V: Please Make It Stop 😀
On other things, I’m working up towards making a pan pizza. For toppings I’ve this idea to place a layer of caramelized onions between the sauce and cheese. On top of the cheese will go pepperoni and mushrooms.
@Kathy:
I’ll be right down.
@Kathy:
Or there’s this:
https://youtu.be/w1gO-Pf18Yg?si=2vnrpZ_S-03jvaoD
@Kingdaddy:
“Again with the Kilngons” 😀
@gVOR10: “Every now and again I’m reminded of the movie REDS and John Malkovich’s bunker, in a swamp.”
It was making me crazy trying to figure out why John Malkovich was in a swamp bunker in a movie about a journalist documenting the Russian revolution until I finally realized you’d added the “s” to the title of the one you were actually talking about…
@Michael Reynolds:
Sometimes…
@Steven L. Taylor:
and
I’m guessing you’re taking my comments as combative. I apologize if they come across that way, it’s not intentional. I think we agree on a lot, and I’m not trying to tell you things or lecture you about stuff that I think you’re unaware of. I’m just trying to share my opinion and analysis, and a lot of it requires a setting up foundation for those arguments that may include some things that seem obvious.
So let me try again.
and
Part of what I was trying to point out (an obviously failing) is the circular nature of the argument that Iran primarily wants a nuke to defend itself from the kind of attacks it’s now suffering from. Rhetorical questions:
– Why does Israel want to attack Iran and why is it attacking Iran? Because it is hostile and wants nukes
– Why does Iran want nukes? Because it supposedly wants to prevent Israel (and probably the US) from attacking it.
Which came first in a chicken-egg sense? (another rhetorical question) – Was it Iran’s nuclear ambitions that caused Israel to become so concerned that it has wanted to attack Iran or have the US do it to stop the nuclear program? Or was Israel and the US always seeking to attack Iran, and Iran wants nukes to prevent that threat?
My view is that it’s the former. IOW, another way for Iran to make attacks less likely to happen is to not play footsie with the idea of getting nukes.
I won’t point out the differences between Iraq, Afghanistan, and this conflict, but I’ll just say I think the differences are material. It is about Iran’s nuclear program, but also combined with its active hostility. I think if Iran didn’t have a nuclear program, then this war wouldn’t have happened.
I agree with that, but Iran’s millenarian rhetoric and attitude isn’t exactly helpful in calming fears. But the argument against Iranian nukes is not just a fear of “mad mullahs” committing mutual nuclear suicide, but the other benefits and destabilizing consequences of a nuclear Iran.
That’s one possible outcome, but I’m not sure how the incentives for Iran to create anti-Israeli proxies could be greater than what we’ve seen in the past several decades. Iran may learn a lesson here after seeing proxies it spent decades and hundreds of billions developing demolished in a few weeks, and then its own forces totally dominated by Israel. As an alternative, they could conclude that spending billions on proxies is less important than increasing Iran’s own capabilities (which could included nukes). Especially since rebuilding proxies will be substantially more difficult with Syria’s Assad gone.
https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social/post/3lry4j4xaoc23
Teve was good people. I assume this phrasing is likely coincidence, as there are only so many ways to say this point.
@Andy:
Consider the possibility Iran is not a nation solely bent on the destruction of Israel. What evidence of that is there? A few comments of questionable translation from some angry politicians more than a decade ago doesn’t make a very compelling case. Signing on to the JCPOA is not consistent with being hell-bent on wanton destruction.
It’s plausible they’ve felt they needed a nuke for defense.
Just an aside: There are a couple B2 pilots right now just looooving their mission being telegraphed for two weeks of Iranian preparation.
About that trillion to one bet on the Taco phone, it’s made in China.
@Kathy: I always put cheese on top, but that’s just my style.
ETA: I like the meats and veggies to get the sauce flavor and don’t want the mushrooms and peppers to burn.
@dazedandconfused: Nah …
Too easy.
@just nutha:
I’m thinking of that for the mushrooms. The pepperoni might benefit from more direct heat.
Right now, though, I’m working out the sauce. I’m using canned tomatoes (a first).
@dazedandconfused:
It’s been a, if not the, core part of their foreign policy for decades. They built proxies up and armed them with capabilities designed explicitly for attacking Israel. Then there are the ballistic missiles, which Iran has bragged about being able to hit Israel for well over a decade. Here’s a random example I pulled up from 2014 – right in the middle of the JPCOA negotiations.
Iran has been very clear for a very long time about what its intentions are for Israel, and it’s not just talk because they invested many tens of billions into the effort.
@Andy: ” I think if Iran didn’t have a nuclear program, then this war wouldn’t have happened.”
I seem to recall we absolutely had to invade Iraq right away because of the vast danger from their weapons programs — programs that turned out not to exist, which inspectors had told us didn’t exist.
Of course Iran is entirely different. The new war is always entirely different, and only after twenty years of disaster will anyone admit it was exactly the same as all the others.
@Andy:
I mean, your example is that they were building weapons rather than unilaterally disarming. What does that prove? They’re a country with a modern military in a volatile region. Should they have been introducing a new series of catapults?
I think the disconnect is that Obama, who was not pro-Iran, was not writing Israel the blank check for paranoia they need. He basically went out and said the Iranian nuclear weapons program was not some aspirational murder-suicide act by the Mullahs. Instead, it was the natural outgrowth of military conflict and could be managed like any other thing, because believing otherwise involves Iran destroying itself, and why would they do that? That freaked Israel out, because Americans aren’t supposed to say that at a policy level to the Israelis.
9th Circuit rules for Trump on national guard.
@ptfe: I think 5M is a realistic estimate, but I’ve read sources that suggest that, for every person who attended a protest, there were 2 or 3 who wanted to, but didn’t. You’re right, though – that ought to be enough to get the attention of solons who are up for re-election next year.
@wr:
First of all, I’ve been clear for decades that I oppose attacking Iran, so you are barking up the wrong tree here.
Second of all, facts matter. Yes, Iran is entirely different – it’s even a different country with different politics, a different strategic situation, a different culture, etc. Among those differences is that, unlike Iraq, Iran does have a nuclear program, one that has no credible civilian use, and one the IAEA (those inspectors you mentioned) has censured Iran for due to a lack of compliance and not explaining the existence of uranium where it shouldn’t be – among other failures.
@Modulo Myself:
The point of my comment was to answer this:
I was providing some evidence. The implication that my response suggests that Iran doesn’t need a military or need any capabilities to defend itself is not accurate. As a matter of analysis, it seems clear that Iran’s investment in its proxy war effort against Israel was a miserable failure, and that it probably should have invested in defensive capabilities, such as competent air and air defense forces such that a tiny and distant country didn’t gain air supremacy in two days.
@Andy:
I don’t see how the Hezzies with some missiles could ever pose an existential threat to the IDF and what would surely be a full-throttle response from the US in a war to end the existence of Israel, so the objective can easily be containment. A credible threat against further Israeli invasions of Lebanon. The Lebanese can certainly harbor a rational fear of becoming the next West Bank.
The question of what weapons are defensive and offensive isn’t plain even with the very recent massive improvements in anti-missile defense systems. Can’t assert our nukes are for conquering other countries, for instance. Iran has had several countries around them invaded in recent times, been invaded by Iran not all that long ago.