SThe New York Times is reporting tonight that U.S. and Israeli militaries have drawn up actual plans to hit Iran again.
ENot 'considering options.' Not 'monitoring the situation.' Plans on paper. Targets picked.
SAnd the timing is the story: the operation would come after the November third midterms, not before.
EBecause the president says the two sides are in, quote, productive discussions. So he doesn't want any explosions before people vote.
SThat's the reporting from NPR too. Anonymous person briefed on the planning says the U.S. could be ready to strike by early November.
EEarly November. Coincidentally right after the election. I'm sure that's just how the calendar worked out.
SThe targets are what you'd expect: nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure, missile and drone arsenals. Short, intensive operation.
EAnd here's the part that gets my attention. Flights over Iraq — not just preparation, they're using them as leverage. Like, 'we're practicing, so let's get a better deal at the table.'
SThat's the thing, Eric. Is this a real military plan or a negotiating tactic dressed up like one?
EBoth. They're not mutually exclusive. The credible threat of force is supposed to make diplomacy move faster. What do you think?
SI think the moment you have actual target lists and a date range, it stops being just tension. The momentum matters. People start treating the war as inevitable.
EBut that's exactly the point! Iran's foreign minister said today they're 'just as prepared for diplomacy as we are for war.' That's not a coincidence. The seriousness of the planning got their attention. Sometimes you need the stick on the table.
SOr the stick makes them dig in, because backing down in public looks like surrender. I don't think Tehran folds because Washington has a flight schedule.
ENobody said they'd fold. But you don't get a negotiated settlement from a position of obvious weakness. That's not how any of this has ever worked.
SHere's my real worry: Netanyahu. He's campaigning for reelection right now. And he's running on the threat of toppling that regime.
EAnd you think the Pentagon is doing all this planning because Netanyahu wants votes in Jerusalem?
SI think a foreign leader's election calendar should not be anyone's war planning input. And the Jerusalem Post is already disputing part of this — saying Israel wasn't about to strike and the president didn't 'block' anything.
EFair. The Post says the whole premise is off, that there was no imminent Israeli attack. So which is it? Real planning, or a story that makes everyone look strong?
SThat's why I keep coming back to this: no one's approved anything. The president hasn't signed off. So tonight we're talking about a plan that may never happen, but is suddenly public enough to move oil prices and scare people.
EAnd that's worth remembering hour by hour. This is the most concrete thing we've heard since June. And it's not coming from some Telegram channel. This is The New York Times, NPR, multiple outlets.
SIf you're just joining us: the report says any operation would be short and intensive, focused on three things — nuclear sites, energy, and Iran's drone and missile stockpiles.
SWe'll watch for any official response from Washington tonight. Now, completely different world out of Los Angeles: Puka Nacua.
ENo, no. We are not doing this again. That man has been on and off the Rams injury report since he got drafted.
SRight? The account says he left practice early today with a calf issue. Citing Adam Schefter.
EAnd that's the thing — one account citing Schefter. No confirmation anywhere else yet. The guy's been a fantasy football pain for years. Calf this week, hamstring next. You can't trust it.
SIf he's hurt again, that Rams offense looks different. Seattle's coming up, divisional game. I need a status update.
EYou need him to stay healthy because your whole viewer-league team is built on him. Don't pretend otherwise.
SI never pretend with you. But hold on, there's something else from that side of the feed. An account called Jools News is reporting one dead in a police investigation across Arcadia and Pasadena.
ERight. Two separate posts, same claim. Nothing confirmed by newsrooms yet. Local police haven't said anything official.
SWe'll keep an eye on that. If it's real, the local stations will pick it up fast.
ESpeaking of local stations: we have something from the AI world that deserves a real argument. Dean Baker, the economist, shared a Gary Marcus piece with a jab.
SAnother entry in a long-running series. The AI boys don't know what they're doing.
EThat's the title. And look, I get the joke. Marcus has been beating this drum for years. But at some point, you're just a guy screaming 'bubble' while the companies ship product every week.
SWait. Wait. He's not saying there's no product. He's saying the product is being sold as something it isn't. The Large Language Model crowd claims general intelligence and then Claude transcribes a meeting and calls it magic.
EOh, come on. Every week there's a new benchmark and every week the snark account picks one thing it got wrong. That's a rigged game.
SNo, the rigged game is pretending a 75 on a test is the same as understanding. And Marcus has been specific about where the models fall apart. He's not just posting 'ha ha.'
ESpecific, sure. Also tedious. I've seen the Substack. It's like reading a very smart lawyer argue with a very confident magician.
SThat might be the fairest description of this whole debate I've ever heard.
EThe serious point is what Dean's doing by sharing it. He's an economist. He watches markets. If he's poking fun at the AI lab leaders, it's because he's worried about the money behind the hype.
SWhich is legitimate. Look at last week alone — Nasdaq down four and a half percent, credit spreads widening on names like CoreWeave. The market is starting to ask the same questions Gary Marcus has been asking for three years.
EAnd that's exactly the point where I rope it back. The market's nervous, but the companies are still booking real revenue. Real customers. Not just vibes.
SToday. The question is what happens when the repeat purchase data comes back bad. Let's see who's laughing then.
EIt'll be Dean, one more post in the series. Fine.
SThat one might be about you.
EWouldn't be the first time. But let me leave you with something that sums up tonight. On Bluesky, Greg Greene posted a sarcastic take on some breaking news out of CBS — 'We love a weaponized government, don't we folks?'
SThe dry part is, he had to check which outlet it came from before mocking. That's not his point losing force — it's that we now have to check who reported what before we react.
EAnd that's the environment. It's not just what's reported. It's who reported it, when, and how it lands before anyone verifies a word. We're all walking through fog.
SSo while Washington and Tehran trade signals, and while a former economist quotes a former professor to score points in a war over AI, the actual maps are being drawn somewhere we can't see.
ENow there's a truth that should make everyone a little uncomfortable. We'll keep watching.