tactical victory and strategic failure

[Jon Freise]

It was said about the Vietnam war that the US won every battle and yet lost the war.  A similar pattern is shaping up with Iran with the media reporting how many people and things have been blown up via air power, yet Iran has not surrendered and the US is now talking about sending in Marines.

This email is meant to explain how you can both win and lose at the same time.  It is also a recap of what some military / political strategists are saying about the Iran conflict that I think might be helpful to you.

Here is a quick overview from the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. of where things stand at this moment in time and what is an Escalation Trap.

Mar 15, 2026
Chief political correspondent Rosemary Barton speaks with American political scientist and former Obama advisor Robert Pape about the latest in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, and how the conflict risks spreading wider.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0DQXnErlCk

Tactical Victory and Strategic Failure

Tactical victory is when your forces are able to defeat other forces in a specific battle.  The US Navy destroying the Iranian Navy, for example.  The White House has shared footage of a US submarine sinking an Iranian destroyer.

A strategic failure is when you cannot achieve a political or economic goal.  The US could not achieve Regime Change in Vietnam or end the insurgency in Iraq or Afghanistan despite years of military occupation.  This typically happens because either the type of tactical success cannot achieve the strategic objective, or because a side effect of the tactical success actually prevents achieving that strategic objective.

Strong powers tend to think that a show of military force will cause a weaker power to surrender and let the strong power take over.  Instead, the killing of a nation's citizens and leaders typically leads to a desire for revenge.  Just look at Pearl Harbor or the Boston Massacre for US examples.

What seems to have been the Strategic Objectives of the attacks on Iran?

1. Stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.  That failed because air power cannot secure the enriched uranium.  That can only be done with ground forces.  Bombing just scattered the material into hiding.

2. Regime Change to a pro US pro Israel government.  Again, this is something air power has never been able to do.  The Germans tried this in WWII against Britain.  The US tried it against Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Libya, etc.  It does not work.

3. Protect our Gulf Allies from retaliation.  Iran planned for this attack for a long time and has built a lot of hidden stocks of ballistic missiles and drones.  They can hit a lot of oil infrastructure.  They can be launched from mobile launchers from anywhere in Iran.  The US cannot find and kill all of them.  Thus all the burning tankers, oil fields, and hotels.  The US is almost out of interceptor missiles.  We burned through 3 years of manufacturing supply in 3 weeks.

4. Prevent Iran from controlling the Strait of Hormuz.  Iran can mine the strait using speed boats and strike slow moving tankers using inexpensive drones.  Iran high speed anti ship missiles can sink any US navy ship moving into the Strait.  Those weapons can reach the Strait from anywhere in Iran.  And Iran has said that if the US does seize the Strait, it will blow up all the oil export terminals using ballistic missiles.

5. Protect the global economy.  Cannot be done without control of the Strait of Hormuz.  Iran now gets to pick and choose which ships are allowed in and out.  And they are choosing to allow ships going to China and India to transit.

6. Protect the US administration.  Cannot be done without control of the oil prices.  And that requires the control of the Strait of Hormuz.  

This scenario has been explored and no military solution exists.  Thus why the Obama administration made a nuclear treaty with Iran.

Trump is stuck and is now facing losing this war.  He is looking at a global recession if the war drags on, the political blowback from walking away and letting Iran win, or doubling down (again) and doing a ground invasion.  But it takes 6 to 9 months to gather enough US forces to invade.  Well past the midterms.  Ending the war before a ground invasion is the lesser evil by far.

A more detailed discussion of the strategic issues involved and why blowing things up with smart bombs does not achieve strategic victory.

https://escalationtrap.substack.com/p/four-strategic-patterns-now-visible

Economic Consequences

The longer the strait is closed and the more oil infrastructure destroyed, the greater the economic damage will be.

Because oil is used to transport every item, the price of oil moves quickly through the economy to cause inflation to every item.

Ray Dalio does a good job describing how we are likely looking at the US hegemony breaking (with links to his books).

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-comes-down-who-controls-strait-hormuz-final-battle-ray-dalio-ienne/

Overall, this will likely tip the US into economic decline and intensify the fight over control of the US government.

If the people can gain control, then there is a change of rationing and other wealth equalizing strategies that could unify the country.  Or if the elite maintain control, then the poor and middle class will be squeezed harder and the chance of civil war will increase.

Either way the US will be forced to become more economically self reliant.

We have likely lived through Peak US prosperity.  What we have ahead of us is managed decline.