IT systems around the country say that they have no access to your personal data and there they can only block access to Intune apps.

But the linked reddit thread[1] in this article notes personal devices getting wiped and locked out.

[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/cybersecurity/comments/1rqopq0/stry...

iOS at least displays a very clear warning when you import the profile telling you exactly what it can do.

Not that this isn't awful, but it's good to be clear on what this can do when used within normal expectations.

If a wiper actually hit internal systems, the bigger concern isn’t consumer data but disruption to manufacturing, logistics, and hospital support. That kind of outage could ripple through a lot of hospitals pretty quickly.

So the options here are MDM or no MDM and that’s a hard choice. No MDM means that you have to trust all people to get things as basic as FDE or a sane password policy right. No option to wipe or lock lost devices. No option to unlock devices where people forgot their password. Using an MDM means having a privileged attack vector into all machines.

Do not use global admin or admin account as daily driver for one. Dont save it in browser etc either.

Limit roles, even within the application, here Intune.

Office 365 also has conditional access and many policy leavers to tweak, many cases of people locking themselves OUT of 365. So the gates work but you need to configure them.

"Break glass" global admin accounts now also require MFA. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/entra/identity/authenticat...

For Stryker specifically? We don't and probably won't know details.

For companies in general? Background checks, security clearance etc are done if the company determines this necessary and are willing to pay for the process and higher salary.

Previous place had a corporate controlled windows laptop that made a very poor thin client for accessing dev machines. One before that had a somewhat centrally managed macbook that made a very poor thin client for accessing dev machines.

You don't have to soul bond to Microsoft to get things done.

- Ensure the Linux machines are up-to-date and users are not just indefinitely postponing OS updates?

- Same as above but with programs/software

- How do you ensure correct settings configuration in terms of security? Say default browser, extensions, program access etc?

- Re-image or reinstall the OS when there are issues or PC handover to another employee? Manually with a USB stick?

This kind of control exists and is needed for Linux and MacOS too. RMM is not a Windows only thing...

The critics here see Intune but what if they used another RMM and they compromised another cloud RMM account? Same issue.

A lot of corporate stuff seems to be much worse than even a random vibe coded web app. I have to book holiday through something called "HR Connect", watching pages load laboriously and redirect every login through several very long URLs. Slowly.

Yes, many corporate websites are bad. Like ERP or HR systems. None of that has to do with device management, RMMs/MDMs or Intune.

In that world, there is no central IT team pushing changes to machines and arguing with developers about whether they really need to be able to run a debugger.

I don't know how to keep windows machines alive. It's probably harder.

Because in the end, it’s not IT on the line for their odious policies causing late delivery, it was us.

Also, if the company is certified in some way there are audits for these things, you understand? Such as updates, backups, security, PAM, antivirus etc :)

Subvert these controls intentionally, especially security ones = bye bye. Logs don't lie. We see you.

And to be clear, SCCM and Intune is a gun.

MS will not stop you from blowing your foot off with the gun.

Remember https://www.itprotoday.com/windows-7/aggressive-configmgr-ba... ?

>During TechEd 2014, Emory University's IT department prepared and deployed Windows 7 upgrades to the campuses computers. If you've worked with ConfigMgr at all, you know that there are checks-and-balances that can be employed to ensure that only specifically targeted systems will receive an OS upgrade. In Emory University's case, the check-and-balance method failed and instead of delivering the upgrade to applicable computers, delivered Windows 7 to ALL computers including laptops, desktops, and even servers.

Things are just getting started.

An important book to read.

So many people think this started with the islamic revolution of the 70s. The meddling goes further in time.

I guess they have some sensitive data on our emergency services organizations and their headquarters addresses and accounts payable people, maybe PII on signatories (officers, board members & “important people”) and whatnot.

Anyone know if it would be worse?

they have a tremendous catalog[0].

spend time in a hospital, dental office, rehab, etc and you'll see the logo plastered across everything.

[0]: https://www.stryker.com/us/en/portfolios/medical-surgical-eq...

heart rate monitors that go down and no one can get support for, cannot get replacement CAT scan equipment, etc.

Wipe all data kind of seems like the best kind of cyberattack if you have backups. No data falling into wrong hands, no left behind rootkits, no ransome threats etc

You won't necessarily be able to know that the data hasn't already been exfiltrated and that the backups aren't post-compromise. Or that by restoring the backup you won't get back to the state that allowed them to get in in the first place.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/account-billing/download...

MFA in general had to be forced on companies, and then it is most often in software on a phone.

Here are some rough numbers.

  google_workspace:
    total_active_users: "3 billion (includes free/consumer Gmail)"
    paid_business_customers: "11 million companies (2024)"
    paid_customer_growth: "+1 million companies in under 1 year (2023-2024)"
    global_business_market_share: "~50%"
    fortune_500_presence: "minority share, weaker than Microsoft in enterprise"
    mfa_with_yubikeys:
      internal_google_employees: "100% use hardware keys (Yubikey/Titan) — since 2017"
      fido_u2f_origin: "Google co-created U2F standard with Yubico post-Operation Aurora"
      estimated_user_adoption_pct: "~1-3% of all Workspace users (inference, not published)"
      concentration: "Highest in finance, government, tech/security-conscious orgs"
      typical_majority_mfa_method: "TOTP apps (Google Authenticator) or SMS"
      enterprise_passkey_deployment_2025: "87% of US/UK enterprises deploying or have deployed passkeys (FIDO Alliance — includes all hardware key types, not Yubikey-specific)"

  microsoft_365:
    total_active_users: "~270 million (commercial)"
    paid_business_customers_us: "~1 million active US business customers"
    us_company_penetration: "~3% of all US companies"
    global_business_market_share: "~45%"
    fortune_500_presence: "~75% of Fortune 500"
    mfa_with_yubikeys:
      exact_stat_available: false
      note: "Same data gap as Workspace — no published breakdown"

  caveats:
    - "Google's 3B user figure conflates consumer and business — not comparable to Microsoft's 270M commercial figure"
    - "Market share figures vary by methodology (seats vs revenue vs orgs)"
    - "Yubikey adoption % is an industry inference; treat as directional only"
    - "Passkey != Yubikey — FIDO Alliance 87% figure covers all FIDO2/passkey methods"

Does anyone know if this is correct?

[0] https://www.android.com/enterprise/work-profile/

We do know that Russia et al sow division online as part of their anti western efforts, a strategy detailed in their "Foundations of Geopolitics" manual.

Only in Argentina you get such an attack with no group taking responsibility. Justice system in Argentina is corrupt as hell.

Hypothetically, imagine if it ever comes out that one of our greatest allies was involved? I wonder what the reaction will be from Americans? The craziest is thing is that nothing would happen even if it were true

I'm not sure if this is any better.

But the internet in general is very leftist so they are all ok with giving Iran, Russia and China a free pass to do anything they want.

They are all oppressed by the evil west, you see. Read Marx or something they will say.

To be clear, I am Swedish. Yes we should have joined NATO sooner. We have helped USA with signalling spying since the 1950s, lookup the Catalina affair. As we should, by the way. Soviet and now Russia, is clearly our enemy. Russia aligns with China and Iran.

Yes, yes orange man bad.

there is one already, and you would know if you weren't a new account complaining about "What happened to this site" after a comment from a 20yo account.

Human Rights Watch, MSF, UNICEF? Woke grievance factories, the lot of them /s . World Health Organization? US just left it. It's slim pickings out there.

>The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency reported Tuesday that at least 6,126 people have been killed, including 5,777 protesters, 214 government-affiliated forces, 86 children and 49 civilians, based on verified reports from its network of activists inside Iran.

>Iranian state television reported last week that 3,117 people were killed during the demonstrations, with the Martyrs Foundation stating that 2,427 were civilians and security forces. Authorities have labelled remaining casualties as "terrorists".

>However, Time magazine on Sunday cited two senior Iranian health ministry officials saying at least 30,000 people had been killed in street clashes across Iranian cities. The Guardian reported a similar figure of 30,000 deaths on 7 January, citing its sources, and added that a large number of people had disappeared.

https://www.euronews.com/2026/01/27/iran-protests-death-toll...

So just say you are full throated on the side of Iran.

I for one, am on the side of the West.

It seems a really weird target for Iran otherwise.

Makes sense given that US citizens tend not to be too supportive of american wars, but tolerate them because it doesnt really affect them. So iran can get this to affect them then people might come out to the streets. Which would be especially effective in a midterms year like now.

Man itll be ironic as fuck if iran manages to enact regime change in the us before the us does in iran

This could make americans hate iran and demand retribution, but i think its more likely to make americans made at israel and their own governmnet for dragging them into it for no reason

Yes, in the year before Oct 7. alone Israel army had only killed about 40 Palestinian children (34 alone between Jan and Nov 2022).

Not to mention Iran has been a target since 2001: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNt7s_Wed_4 - if not since 1953 (their 1979 changes being a response to the 1950s western invervention that installed a dictatorship), if not since forever:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Game

These are reversed

Israel even killed Irans negotiators last year when they were getting close to a deal. This situation is engineered, Netanyahu has wanted this for decades.

I've often struggled to find a concise way to say "control public narrative by crowding out other headlines". Thank you for sharing the popular term for this [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_the_zone

This is only true if you completely ignore the Sunni Shia split and our relationship with literally every other country in the Middle East excluding Israel.

Edit: This is evidenced by the fact that when Iran was attacked by The US and Israel, they bombed a bunch of neighboring countries with US bases. None of those countries have alliances with Israel. (Although they are certainly less hostile than other countries in the region)

They are strengthening the regime (US intelligence services were aware of that before the attack and had informed the president), they are destabilizing all their oil producers, they are risking great economic cost..

It only makes sense if indeed they either extorted him, or if he is indeed demented / deranged.

This is true, but only for a certain percentage of the US population. Large swaths of this country think that picking on our weaker neighbors evidence of our strength

Indeed every negative repercussion you have mentioned has already been previously inflicted on us without any extortion required.

> They are strengthening the regime

Us action in Venezuela has only strengthened the PSUV's grip on the country.

> they are destabilizing all their oil producers, they are risking great economic cost.

Liberation day. Need I say more?

This administration is quite willing to risk stability and the economy to assuage Trump's ego.

I mean he campaigned on stuff like "the so-called enemy doesn’t respect our country any longer." Blaming "Kamala Harris’ weakness" for this loss of respect. What else shows strength like literally blowing up your adversary?

I belive that US tech firms have increasingly become valid military targets. There was a post about this yesterday [1]. BUT I don't think that extends to hospitals and medical supplies, regardless of who owns them or if they treat soldiers or not.

But, as best as I can tell, the company has been inconvenienced, possibly massively. Let's put this in context. The US launched a Tomahawk missile at a school and killed 160 school girls.

And I bet that if you look into pretty much any company hit by a hack, you'll find cost-cutting on IT to increase executive pay and bonuses.

Between the Iran-Iraq war, which the US was responsible for, and decades of sanctions, the US has by this point killed millions of Iranians. The real problem here is the general ignorance of the average American of America's 70+ years of war crimes against Iran [2].

I mean this as analysis, not justification. But at some point the incredulity at blowback rings hollow.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47341007

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47342791

But given the growth in destructive power, particularly with the advent of the nuclear age, it became necessary to establish some rules or norms for war and I'm referring specifically to the Geneva Conventions [1]. Conventions here cover that wounded people and civilians aren't military targets. So it's not my opinion or Iran's opinion that matters.

The question then is do we live in an interntional rules-based order or not? The US and Israel have ignored the rules-based order in favor of "might is right" politics.

As for tech firms, I'm sorry but a company like Palantir has made itself a valid military target [2][3]. And if you work there, you are really no different from the Reaper Drone pilot who fires Hellfire missiles at, say, a wedding procession [4].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

[2]: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

[3]: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/palantir...

[4]: https://aoav.org.uk/2014/drone-strike-yemen/

Are you suggesting that's an inside job and/or false flag attack? If it's not a false flag attack, why imply that the reporting must be to "manufacture consent"? Shouldn't you expect major hacks to be reported?

I'm saying that the media suddenly covering stories like this isn't a coincidence. The media is a tool of the state to manufacture consent. Media literacy goes beyond just looking at the facts in a story. It's also what's not mentioned, how is it presented, what stories are written, what stories aren't and, most importantly, why.

All social media companies manufacture consent for American foreign policy. Pretty much all American media does the same.

I find all this particularly funny because our media does the exact thing we accuse the likes of Chinese media doing it. We just pretend it doesn't happen here or are oblivious to it.

What do you mean "suddenly"? Per the reddit thread, they just got hacked yesterday. It's not like they were sitting on the story until the war broke out. Moreover I see hacks covered in the media all the time, even if there's no obvious russia/iran/north korea "manufacture consent" angle.

>Media literacy goes beyond just looking at the facts in a story. It's also what's not mentioned, how is it presented, what stories are written, what stories aren't and, most importantly, why.

There's a huge gulf between "taking every story at face value" and what you're doing which is seemingly assuming every story must be part of some sinister conspiracy to "manufacture consent".

There are constant hacks of companies. Most of them don't get covered. So there's that. But it's also how it's framed. It's an "Iranian cyberattack". Interesting.

Couldn't an equally valid headline be "Lax security results in Stryker getting hacked"? Probably (just guessing).

It's a bit like all the stories about the Chinese stealing IP and jobs. Ok, let's assume those claims are true and have been for decades. So why do companies keep offshoring there knowing this will happen? At what point do you blame short-term cost-cutting by bonus-hunting executives?

My point is that the media is playing along and you're going to get a lot of "Iran = bad" stories because of it.

Source? You can't just be like "some hacks don't get covered, this hack got covered, therefore there must be some ulterior motive behind this". If the baseline rate for reporting hacks is like 50% (random number), then the fact that it got reported doesn't tell us much. Moreover Stryker Corporation is a S&P 500 company, and this hack had major impact on their business. It's not just some data that got leaked, all their laptops/phones got wiped. It's exactly the type of hack that I'd expect to not get swept under the rug.

>It's an "Iranian cyberattack". Interesting.

Again, unless you're going for the false flag or inside job excuse, the hacker's note makes it pretty clear that it's Iranian backed, or at least by Iranian sympathizers.

>Couldn't an equally valid headline be "Lax security results in Stryker getting hacked"? Probably (just guessing).

>It's a bit like all the stories about the Chinese stealing IP and jobs. Ok, let's assume those claims are true and have been for decades. So why do companies keep offshoring there knowing this will happen? At what point do you blame short-term cost-cutting by bonus-hunting executives?

Same reason we don't put out headlines saying "women going to seedy club results in rape".

Iran executed 1500 people in 2025, and usually execute between 50 and 500 every year. They arrested 50 000 protesters, a huge part of which will be put to death. You can say a lot against the Mollahs, and you'd be right , they're horrible but please don't lie, it makes the argument weaker, and seems like slopaganda.

Still, Saddam Hussein chemical bombs donated by the US killed way more Iranians than the regime killed over 50 years, so I think the 'just war' propaganda need to stop. Saudis killed at least 53k slaves over the past 10 years, and ordered some of those executed by their police, I don't see anybody in the US taking down the regime.

If Trump said that, it is propaganda aimed at the amazingly ignorant; Tomahawks are US-made and only used by the US, UK, and Australia, with the Netherlands and Japan having recently entered into agreements to deploy them.

https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/authorities-warn-of-p...

Fox News drone expert:

https://nypost.com/2026/03/11/us-news/iran-could-use-drones-...

It's not in the strategic interest of Iran to do that, and they have been very strategic and rational. It's the Americans who have abandoned rationality. The Iranian goal is very clear: they don't want to sign an agreement and be attacked again in three months or one year.

In order to get that, they want a new security framework in its part of the world. They want Israel to suffer so its population think two times before doing this again. And they want to create enough economic pain to punish the current USA administration, again to teach a lesson.

Go beyond CNN or Fox News, listen to what the Iranians are saying (1).

1- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNZ_nta8NRM

Yes, of course they want to continue to do what they've been doing and not be attacked for that. Yet it is just not possible. Iran's current regime overall main goal is the spread of Islamic Revolution. Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis - these are typical metastasis of that spread. Terrorist acts, highly visible ones, is one of the effective tools of such a spread, and that way the terrorist acts are rational in the minds of Iran's regime and their above mentioned metastatic followers. There is no security framework possible which would still allow such a spread.

Anyway, it's kind of funny that the USA have military posts more than 7000 miles away from its borders, but the danger of 'expansionism' is from Iran.

We are in a fantasy propaganda land where Iran is attacked in the middle of negotiations and is Iran the guilty party. How many people have to die in those USA wars? I mean, enough is enough.

if you aren't familiar with Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis - i highly recommend reading on it, even if just in Wikipedia.

>How many people have to die in those USA wars? I mean, enough is enough.

I think most important isn'h how many, the most important is who. Iran's regime has just indiscriminately killed 20-30K innocent civilians and uncountable many have been tortured. That is a crime against humanity. So, the top of Iran's regime and its IRGC has to be punished. I'm fine with that punishment being US and Israel's missiles.

Why was Hamas created? From wikipedia: "was founded by Palestinian Islamic scholar Ahmed Yassin in 1987 after the outbreak of the First Intifada against the Israeli occupation"

What about the Houthis? From wikipedia: "The formation of the Houthi organisations has been described by Adam Baron of the European Council on Foreign Relations as a reaction to foreign intervention."

But sure, the problem is Iran.

There is not evidence about that 20-30k civilians dead. I could say it was 3 and I would have the same proof that you have.

This rationale of 'Iran is not democratic enough' (despise they have a constitution, a parliament and elections) but I will support Saudi Arabia (that light of human rights in the middle east) is nonsense.

All this is done for the geopolitical interest of USA, the oil and Israel. Anyone that say otherwise is taking us for idiots.

Israel's regime has killed twice that many in Gaza. Shouldn't they be prioritized for "punishment"?

Buncha drones in shipping containers that popped open once deep in-country

surely a New York Post article quoting a Fox News "expert" will be factual, unbiased and not at all an attempt to pour more oil into the fire and manufacture consent to bomb a couple more girl's schools.

I don't even think they'd launch drones to DC either, they seem to be all in on attacking oil infrastructure as well as us bases & defense systems in the Middle East, rather than America.

Because they allegedly have a ship already in the Pacific loaded with drones.

DC and NY are way too far from Iran to launch any kind of attack; the only attack they can possibly do is from a ship, and ships can be anyplace where there's deep enough water.

BBC: Mystery New Jersey drones not from Iranian 'mothership' - Pentagon

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crrwz91wqd9o

It's certainly a theory / narrative that keeps appearing in the media.

Maybe the US reacts differently, but in Europe most military bases have been scouted by Russian drones, and afaik none were shot down.

That does not make any sense to me. Does Iran have a bunch of ships in the Pacific? Why? How would they even got close enough to the US coast without being noticed at this point?

I'm not saying it's not true, I just don't understand.

However if they were going/able to do it, they probably wouldn't warn everyone and ruin the element of surprise, they would just do it.

Seems like a really dumb idea right now, unless maybe as a last resort if Trump decides to drop tactical nukes or something

Are you referring to a paradigm where people make their systems less secure in the effort to make them more secure?

This kind of aggression, however, does seem to make their value as a deterrent clear.

Observe how nobody is fucking with North Korea like they did with Iraq or Venezuela.

Also in a "if I'm going down, everyone else is going down with me", which is Ian's strategy in this war (for good reasons). If the IRGC had nukes, and was severely threatened (like, killing the Supreme Leader and threatening to kill all of the replacements until they bend to the US/Israel will), they might have decided to go out "with style".

To be clear I don't like the idea of MAD one bit. But this is indeed how it's meant to work.

They want Islam to dominate the world, that can't happen if there isn't a world left to dominate.

But the coalition (is two nations really a coalition?) hasn't state regime change is the purpose of the war. Well, they did, and then changed their minds. Several times.

And, as I'm sure you're aware, knocking off the head of state in Iran doesn't necessarily move the needle on regime change. Dismantling the IRGC and removing the hardliners will be a long, dangerous operation and I doubt the US has the stomach for that. And Israel has already moved on to bombing Lebanon again.

While the Bush-era invasion of Iraq was indefensible (if it was defensible they wouldn't have needed to push the WMD lie to justify it) and their initial projections were as ridiculously optimistic as the Trump government's, the Bush crew were clearly ideologically committed to the project and willing to see it through to the end.

Trump's people are not. This is "move fast and break things" and "strong opinions weakly held" in geopolitical form.

More importantly, was having civil infrastructure destroyed ever, in any place in history, a catalyst for a "regime change"?

I really don't think Israel and the US care much about your people. Be careful with what you wish for. You just might get it.

While I'm sure that it did happen, it certainly wasn't 30k people. There's tons of videos of provocateurs shooting shotguns at police... What happens anywhere in the world when you start shooting at police?

But in the case of Israel, land of the religious ethno-state that has been literally committing acts of terror for 3 years straight in 4k, on video.. they were allowed continue governing themselves after killing or wounding 30k innocent children...

So you tell me what happens?

Plus 11k unconfirmed dead, according to HRANA, so at most 18k dead during the Iranian protests. They also jailed 50k people, and before the war, it seemed a third of those were destined to be executed if the trend continued.

Iran also execute between 50 and 500 people a year, every year, and in the last 5, it was closer to 500, culminating in 2025 where 1500 person got the death penalty.

A regime that has to kill that much is weak, and would probably have fallen on itself if the US hadn't launched any strikes.

What I find bizarre, is that China and Russia do this daily, and "oh well". If such states sent over people to, you know, do damage using a bomb instead of a hack, there'd be trouble. As in, two towers were damaged, and it set off 20 years of war ... mostly against the wrong states.

Yet if you cause death via subtle means, such as reducing hospital infra, or attack and destroy infra via hacking, meh. Oh well!

This sort of falls inline with all other compute issues that appear before all elected bodies on the planet. An immense lack of understanding and comprehension, coupled with an inability to act.

It's like how every country knows embassies are full of spies but they let them operate as diplomats anyway because they do the same thing.

Or in Iran’s case, they don’t.

Like children, at school

https://www.npr.org/2026/03/11/nx-s1-5744981/pentagon-iran-m...

Not to mention its own citizens, Iranian death squads, killing of women, there is literally no comparison between the purposeful, lack of any care or concern for life exhibited by Iran, and a literal accident with a missile.

To highlight that point, the US cares enough to investigate and discover just how such an unfortunate act happened.

See the accidental death section. Generally not considered a crime on its own.

There absolutely is a comparison. Both acts are evil. Just because Iran's regime has a history of even more heinous evil acts doesn't absolve the United States and Israel of their own evil acts.

I trust the US as much as Iran or North Korea to investigate themselves and find no fault.

And it's not a war started, its a "war" responding to decades of heinous, vicious, deadly funding of terrorist organizations, and bombing of innocent civilians.

Defending Iran is akin to defending a serial murderer. Or complaining that the serial murdered got shot while resisting arrest. Ridiculous.

I sincerely hope the decent people of Iran do get rid of this ridiculous, religiously ran and controlled state.

Assuming the killings weren't instigated by American or Israeli operatives

> And it's not a war started, its a "war" responding to decades of heinous, vicious, deadly funding of terrorist organizations, and bombing of innocent civilians.

As if the US hadn't been antagonizing Iran for decades. Trump broke the nuclear agreements (which Iran had been following), then refused to negotiate new ones, then joined Israel in their bloodlust for muslim blood. This war is aimless, and only serves to radicalize the Iranian people against Israel and the US. Which will inevitably result in even more bloodshed down the line.

This is the most head-slapping part of this whole situation. We had a nuclear deal and he pulled the US out of it for no good reason (my read: because he just hates Obama that much that anything he did he wanted to undo). This situation is 100% on this president.

If you can find evidence the United States directly targeted a school with the intent of killing children and not just due to outdated intel (and somebody setting up a school in what was once part of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval base), maybe I'd change my mind.

There seem to be actual people getting killed, in an actual war (by another name, but we all know it's a war, with missiles and airplanes and bombs).

Russia have been running assassinations and sabotage programme using poison, bombs, small arms and radioactive material in the West for years with no real repercussions.

What ramifications you think is going to happen? They already have their country being bombed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stryker

Unlike Ukraine, it does not, so it seems to be focusing on cyber vandalism and blowing up oil infrastructure in US vassal states, and other low-cost, high-ROI activities.

Their goal is to make it too troublesome for the US/Israel to continue attacking them, like a swarm of bees attacking a bear to keep it away from their honey.

Iran is in it to win it and the US is so very obviously not.

The question is if the pressure that Israel can put on the current administration greater than the pressure that Iran can put on America as a whole.

Time will tell.

> closing the iranian borders from the outside indefinitely

Are you proposing to disrupt China-Iran shipping? Intercept even Chinese-flagged oil vessels? (not that there are many, most are still under flags of convenience)

Shoot down China-Iran civilian airliners? (again)

Do you think Trump's going to lose interest and declare victory while bombs are still flying over Bibi's head?

I suppose that just claiming victory doesn't mean the US stops fighting