[Goose]

A bit off topic, but I must admit I am very surprised to not hear some serious grousing about the Iran-Israel "12 day war" outcome. Obviously there is still no solid information on the damage to the Iranian nuclear program. That said, it appears Iran is still dead-set on continuing Uranium enrichment. We do see things like this:https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/07/07/donald-trump-us-officials-will-meet-with-iranians-after-bombing/84499425007/. However, there is no indication Iran actually intends to back away from their position on enrichment. We also see this: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iran-...ay-sources
 
It may be the public in Israel and the US is in a "wait and see" mode, but frankly I expected the Israeli public to want answers by now on the way ahead. So far it appears that for all the hoopla Iran is still going to behave as it always had. That should IMO call into question to what degree the Israeli military operation succeeded in its goals. It also raises questions about Israeli preparedness for Iranian tactical ballistic missile attacks. IOW, did Israeli quit fighting because it had to, not because it wanted to?

---

President Trump on sending more weapons to Ukraine: "We're gonna send some more weapons. We have to. They have to be able to defend themselves. They're getting hit very hard now."

https://x.com/Archer83Able/status/1942373320047092077

Very cool and normal that defense policy is being made by a DOD undersecretary and then within days changed during a press interview with the president. Of course let's see if/when Patriot missile shipments resume.

Isn’t defense policy normally formulated by undersecretaries and staffers and endorsed by the Secretary?

BC

After Goldwater-Nichols this indeed became somewhat "normal". Paul Wolfowitz comes to mind. However, there is another path that can be involved. The JCS advises the President. The President may re-direct the SecDef based on that advice or his own whim. It also usual for the SecDef and his underlings to clear major policy changes, such as cutting off aid to Ukraine, through the President. IMO the policy changing "administratively" and somewhat behind the scene is a bit "unusual". I would have expected a formal announcement from the SecDef at a minimum if not the President for such a policy change. It is even more unusual for the President to contradict such a policy change in such short order without a particular event driving the change.

[Goose]

A bit off topic, but I must admit I am very surprised to not hear some serious grousing about the Iran-Israel "12 day war" outcome. Obviously there is still no solid information on the damage to the Iranian nuclear program. That said, it appears Iran is still dead-set on continuing Uranium enrichment. We do see things like this:https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/07/07/donald-trump-us-officials-will-meet-with-iranians-after-bombing/84499425007/. However, there is no indication Iran actually intends to back away from their position on enrichment. We also see this: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iran-...ay-sources
 
It may be the public in Israel and the US is in a "wait and see" mode, but frankly I expected the Israeli public to want answers by now on the way ahead. So far it appears that for all the hoopla Iran is still going to behave as it always had. That should IMO call into question to what degree the Israeli military operation succeeded in its goals. It also raises questions about Israeli preparedness for Iranian tactical ballistic missile attacks. IOW, did Israeli quit fighting because it had to, not because it wanted to?

---

President Trump on sending more weapons to Ukraine: "We're gonna send some more weapons. We have to. They have to be able to defend themselves. They're getting hit very hard now."

https://x.com/Archer83Able/status/1942373320047092077

Very cool and normal that defense policy is being made by a DOD undersecretary and then within days changed during a press interview with the president. Of course let's see if/when Patriot missile shipments resume.

Isn’t defense policy normally formulated by undersecretaries and staffers and endorsed by the Secretary?

BC

After Goldwater-Nichols this indeed became somewhat "normal". Paul Wolfowitz comes to mind. However, there is another path that can be involved. The JCS advises the President. The President may re-direct the SecDef based on that advice or his own whim. It also usual for the SecDef and his underlings to clear major policy changes, such as cutting off aid to Ukraine, through the President. IMO the policy changing "administratively" and somewhat behind the scene is a bit "unusual". I would have expected a formal announcement from the SecDef at a minimum if not the President for such a policy change. It is even more unusual for the President to contradict such a policy change in such short order without a particular event driving the change.