If this ceasefire holds (which it may not), it is pretty clear the US failed to do anything other than embarrassing itself. Trump laid out 5 goals for the war and it appears none of them have been achieved.  

The ceasefire is only temporary at this point. I wouldn’t write off international access to the Strait of Hormuz yet. And we’ve eliminated more than a few of the regime’s leaders. My advice, now is not a time to be looking at the glass as half empty.

It’s only been five weeks, and there is still no verifiable information on the current status of Iran’s enriched uranium. It could remain largely intact, or it could have been damaged and/or deeply buried. If that specific situation is more favorable than feared, wouldn’t that single factor alone merit a reassessmennt of your opinion?
.
And remember, this situation has never been solely about Iran itself. Its proxies in Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis have faced numerous, serious setbacks. Their ability to create terrorism, and/or attack Israel and US interests, has been largely constrained, albeit not fully eliminated.  
.
Lets also be honest about Iranian missteps. They undermined their own position by attacking neighboring Muslim states which has been an unintended consequence of joint Israeli/U.S. operations. How stupid was that??
.
I do agree that expectations or predictions of regime change were always folly. Achieving that would require boots on the ground, or a significant internal uprising, both of which appear highly unlikely at present.
.
At this stage, there are no clear “winners.” The situation morre resembles a stalemate, but the damage inflicted on the regime and its proxies is significant and extensive. Ultimately, the key questions that remain are the resiliency and sustainability of Iran’s nuke program, and whether Iran can reconstitute its terrorism platform and missile capability.  
.
Those are the real questions and we just dont have those answer as of now.

RespectfulRobert: "Way too early to tell."

...despite his 33 years in the military, he's a lefty so his opinion doesn't count.

You’re scraping the bottom of the barrel if you’ve got to rely on Nick Fuentes to bolster your point.

Numerous military men, baffled by Trumps action here, have said this as well on both left and right. It was a desperate act from a desperate actor. You dont antagonize fellow Muslims in the midst of a battle with the Great Satan. You would want their sympathy and what they got is their scorn and fury. First strikes on innocent nations is bad unless Iran does it? Thats the logic you want to go with here?
.
You are correct that at first, Iran mainly attacked U.S. military bases in the region, like those in Iraq and Bahrain, which would be fair game of course. But as things escalated, the attacks spread to civilian targets such as airports, energy facilities, hotels, urban population centers, etc. These targets were in both Shia and Sunni majority countries, so it really wasn’t just about religion as it was about strategy.  
.
Those attacks forced those countries into working more closely with the US and more hostile to Iran. To that point, most observers are saying that the Saudis will certainly enter into the Abraham accords with the Israelis at some point soon and they will point to Irans recent hostility to its regional neighbors as a key reason. Qatar and Oman may not join the Saudis in the accords, but they will certainly view Iran with more of a cynical eye than before and most likely share intel with the US about Iran.  
.
You have painted this entire conflict as Iran won, US lost, and there is so much gray you are ignoring for some reason I cant understand. Militarily, at least, Iran has been severely hurt and as yet, you haven't even conceded that obvious fact. They are MUCH less the military power they were than just a month or so ago and all their main leadership is dead or hiding. With all that said, notice I am NOT saying the US has won. Right now, it is a volatile and sticky situation and the best and least partisan view is that it is a stale mate.
.
Again, its ony five weeks and you completely skipped over my main point where I state are WAY too many unknowns at this stage to declare any winners and losers. Your retort did nothing to prove I am wrong about that key assertion nor did you comment on it at all.

By any conventional measure Iran has lost, and big time. But this fails to account for its continued ability to control the Strait of Hormuz and thus the entire world's oil supply. And there is no way for the US to reduce that control without boots on the ground. Which Trump desperately does not want to do. Hence, a stalemate.

The Iranians played the “ Strait of Hormuz” game and showed the world what they’re capable of.  
The dumb part is… everyone knew this was an option or wild card that the Iranians could play.,, except our idiot in charge.

I’m not buying it. I think you miss a lot of nuance when you say “You don't antagonize fellow Muslims in the midst of a battle with the Great Satan.” Those Muslim countries are already allied with the Great Satan. Hell, Saudi Arabia urged the US to attack Iran. These countries aren’t exactly “innocent” when they host the US bases being used to strike Iran and are also urging the US to start a war. Not to mention you are ignoring the sectarian and ethnic conflicts. It’s not just the Sunni vs. Shia conflict. Persians and Arabs kind of hate each other. I don’t think this really reorders international relations in the Middle East in any significant way.
.
I’m saying Iran won because it is fairly black and white. They won because they survived without having to make any concessions or cede any territory. The US was seeking regime change and the regime is still in place and there is nothing stopping that regime from rebuilding or restarting their nuclear program. In the process the US upset allies, embarrassed themselves and have nothing concrete to show for it. Despite your insistence I don’t really see any shades of grey.

And that is a perfectly legitimate argument to make… against HIM. But I never bought into the idea of regime change bc Trump wasn’t going to put boots on the ground, so that was never realistic. I also never expected Iran to cede territory, but that wasn’t even part of Trump’s rationale for war, so I’m not sure why you’re bringing it up. That line of thinking is more akin to Russia’s objectives in Ukraine.
.
With regards to attacking its neighbors, you are really in the minority opinion of the intelligence of that move. They didnt JUST hit US military bases, as that action would have been justifiable. You conveniently glossed over the civilian infrastructure they targeted. Those are the innocents I was referring too and what ever those populations thought of teh Iranian regime before all this, they certainly think less of them as of today.  
.
Furthermore, how can you speak definitively about the lack of Iranian concessions when they are still in the midst of negotiations? You're basing your opinion solely on the ten point list of Iranian demands? That doesnt seem wise or likely that Trump will capitulate to those conditions without imposing manh of his own.  
.
Personally, I see a huge difference between “surviving” and “winning.” You seem to treat those as synonymous, but I fail to see that logic. Iran has been significantly degraded across multiple fronts. I doubt many in their military leadership, privately at least, would describe their position as a "victory" as many are dead, wounded or in hiding and in fear. That sounds like "winning" to you? They alos are aware that their ability to wage war and defend themslves has been greatly curtailed.  
.
And of course, there’s something preventing the Iranians from reconstituting their nuclear program...it’s called Israeli and American military and power. In addition to that, the Mossad and the CIA are most likely the #1 and #2 ranking intelligence organizations in the world. Do you really think if the Iranians attempt to rebuild Fordow or Natanz we wont know about it and that Trump and the Israelis wouldn’t strike again? Recent history, from last year’s bombing to this year’s attacks, suggests otherwise.
.
A fair reading of the situation is that both sides suffered losses, and neither is getting everything it wants. To me, that is the textbook definition of a stalemate.
.
Good debate! You and I are now at a stalemate. lol.

I’m using Trump’s reasons for war because he was the one who started it and these were his stated objectives for starting the war. I think they are reasonable measuring stick to gauge success. Were his goals unrealistic? Yes that’s why I opposed the war in the first place. But it also doesn’t give him a pass when he failed to achieve most of his goals after starting the war. In the end it seems like we failed to achieve anything at all.
.
Meanwhile Iran had one objective, survive the war. They did because they survived and the US backed down. It reminds me of the Vietnam War. The US killed way more Vietnamese, bombed cities into rubble and destroyed their equipment. However the US bailed and the US puppet state of South Vietnam fell. So clearly the US lost and Vietnam won. It is very similar here. The US backed down and the regime is still intact. That’s a win. It might be a costly victory, but it’s still a victory.

If iran can still control that Strait then this admin fucked up.  

Iran and the US are fighting different wars. In a conventional sense, the US is destroying Iran. However, Iran is not fighting a conventional war. They’re engaged in an asymmetric war. They’re not trying to fight against the US directly. They’re just trying to survive and fight the war on their terms until the US gives up. That’s exactly what is happening now. The simple fact is that their mere survival is a victory condition. It’s like the Vietnam War. The US won every major battle in Vietnam. In the end it was irrelevant. The US quit and went home. The puppet state in South Vietnam capitulated and the Communists have controlled Vietnam since. This is why the US lost and Vietnam won, even though the kill ratio was like 20-1.

this was all totally foreseeable. ALL of Trump's advisors should have been able to see that only with a massive ground invasion could Iran be stopped from closing the straits. Personally, I think Trump was told this but made the insane gamble that decapitating Iran's government would cause it to collapse. And that is policy by wish. The consequences are on him.

First of all, the fact that a rabid racist/Trump supporter is calling him out is significant because it's emblematic of a large group on the right who believed Trump's pledge about no more regime change and foreign wars. It's true he's "the bottom of the barrel," but that barrel also includes influential scum like Alex Jones as well as righty weirdos like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. Not to mention Megan Kelly. Taken together that's a powerful opposition that used to be friendly.

Count them into the con’d group who feel betrayed by trumps “No more Wars”.
Off topic….I wonder how many of the under 25 bros know that they’ll be automatically registered with the Selective Service now? Bet most didn’t even know that they have to registered  when they turned 18.

His latest Truth Social post goes after all of them.

Users post is ignored

Sorry to tell you I busted a nut today.
But by all means continue to believe lies. Just like you suck up Trump's lies.
Now go suck a bag of dicks.

IRGC and all the savage leaders in Iran must be thanking and very grateful to you and all your leftist comrades for your loyalty support and for spreading and promoting their message of lies.

He’s not seeing your replies.

Gobbling up Trump's lies and vomiting them back up.
Has Felcher ever told the truth about anything?
There is no evidence of that.

Users post is ignored

Everyone else is seeing my replies. I also think he is, despite his claims.
After all, he continues to respond to me. How is it possible to not see a post if you must open it in order to reply?
All in all, an extremely weak performance.

Please oh please ignore me too. Now go suck a bag of dicks.

Also, he just replied to me on the GD Board. So when is an "Ignore" not an "Ignore?"
The answer is clear.

But how can that be? Ignore is not an ambiguous word. Maybe all his intelligence is in his shit.

Lol you arent getting off that easy.  

Well, you're the one who claims to have intelligent shit. I guess that means you have shit for brains.

No dummy. I said i take shits more intelligent than you. So...said shits dont really have to neccessarily be that smart.  

This looks like a good place to post some numbers.  
.
http://asmr.education/faq/strait-of-hormuz/average-oil-tankers-strait-of-hormuz-daily
"According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration and shipping data from organizations like Lloyd's List, an average of 20 to 25 oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz every day. These figures fluctuate depending on seasonal demand, OPEC production decisions, and broader market conditions, but the range has remained remarkably consistent over the past decade. Each tanker may carry anywhere from one million to over two million barrels of crude, and the fleet includes Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCCs) that rank among the biggest movable objects humans have ever constructed."
.
At $1M to $2 M per vessel, let's say that the Iran toll is $1 per gallon. There are 42 GALLONS of crude oil per BARREL of crude. The commodity markets, news stories, etc., quote prices for a BARREL of oil, currently around $95-$125 per barrel.  http://oilprice.com/oil-price-charts/  
.
For convenience using round numbers, can we just agree that the proposed Iran toll will add $40 per barrel to the price of oil? (That doesn't include increases in other associated costs: insurance, etc.. The numbers for LNG and other products will also vary.)  
.
If today's $100 bbl of oil goes up to $140, will the oil companies cut their margins to keep consumer prices down? (Not cut the whole $40; maybe a few dollars per barrel.) Of course not.
.
Instead of a flat rate of $1 per gallon moved through the Strait, should it be based on the price of the oil, like a sales tax, say 10%?  When oil is $42 /bbl, that's $1/gallon of crude. Plus the Strait tax, the price is $1.10 / gallon = $46.20 / bbl. At $120/bbl = $2.85/gallon, plus tax = $132/bbl = $3.14/gallon.
.
The day before the attack on Iran, oil was ~$60/bbl. At a flat rate ($1/gallon), the pre-war, err, per-conflict price becomes $100/bbl. At a percentage rate (say, 10%), the pre-war price would be $66/bbl.
.
Trump doesn't care which method is used as long as he gets a piece of the action.

No, readyforcock aka shitforbrains. I post what I choose to post. I don't need to back up my posts. I'm not here to debate you or educate you or convince you of the errors of your ways. No amount of didactic posting would ever change the mind of a MAGA minion like yourself.  You are insignificant and boring.

What they have in common is a conviction that you MUST answer any lame question they have. Like you, I refuse to play their stupid game. Then it's just hilarious to watch them strut around and declare victory.
Funny how Randy simply believes anything about us a fellow righty makes up, no matter how obviously untrue, eh?

My bad.., carry on..😆

Wrong. You post what you are capable of posting.  

It appears you have anointed yourself the Arbiter of what is posted on this board. All that does is to show you as a petulant, childish fool when someone won't acquiesce to your demands. Fuck that shit. Nobody answers to you on this board. This board has had other right-wing MAGA extremists try to do the same thing in the past. Where are they now, you ask? All gone. All have self-imploded.

No one said you had to answer. I said you cant answer. There is a difference, you seem confused...which im learning is par for the course with you.  

My posts are clear, concise, and unequivocal. If you are too dumb to understand my point, or too lazy to do your own background work, admit it or move on because I don't provide additional information to MAGA morons. Face it. You can't accept what's being posted because it's antithetical to your cult-like beliefs. You are not interested in further information. You just want to waste my time. On that you have succeeded because you are a colossal waste of time.   So, make another insulting post to prove how childish you are, but I'm finished with this aimless exchange.

Lmao. Now your trolling lol