Opening the Strait was not a goal of this action; the Strait was open before this war started. They are trying to sell as a win a return to the status quo ante.

I dismissed them because the president and the Pentagon could not seem to articulate the objectives of the war in a way that was cohesive with one another.

Also,the Strait was open before the war.

> Opening the Strait

So the US started a war with an objective to open the Strait which only closed due to the war they started.

Can you explain what you mean here mate?

How on Earth was opening the straight an objective of this war, when the straight was open before the war.

It's like Russia declaring that Russian control of Moscow is an objective of the war with Ukraine.

> renouncing nuclear program,

If that was the objective, the US should be declaring war on the guy who scrapped the Iran nuclear deal, because it was accomplishing just that.

> This war was unavoidable btw, it was going to happen sometime this year or next.

Iran was, as per the latest reports I've read, complying with terms and not enriching uranium to weapons-grade or close to weapons-grade. Are there credible reports suggesting otherwise?

What do you make of Netanyahu claiming that Iran was weeks from a nuclear bomb, 20-30 years ago?

What do you make of US/Israel assassinating the supreme leader that had declared a fatwa against nuclear weapons?

> This war was unavoidable btw

Wars of choice, thousands of miles away from the nearest US city, are extremely avoidable, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Although it might reflect actual considerations of Israel and, by extension, the US, that's ultimately a very unreasonable take. Iran might not have been trying to build nuclear weapons in the past, as they claimed. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. In contrast, Iran will try to build nuclear weapons in the future with certainty. They'd be insane not to try now, after having been bombed for weeks in an illegal war of aggression against them and having been threatened with massive war crimes and genocide.

This sounds like goalpost moving. Like if you fail to acheive regime change, just say whateber the consequences of your failure were had been your objectives from the start. According to "some" who might "say"

And that benefits them… how?