top | item 47192827

(no title)

apexalpha | 3 days ago

While I have no love for the Iranian regime I fear this will end up like the 'liberation' of Iraq: A massive power vacuum in an unstable Islamic regime.

What even is the plan here if the air assault fails? Boots on the ground? In Iran?

discuss

order

Dig1t|3 days ago

Your description of what happened in Iraq was exactly the point of why we invaded. Iraq and Iran were the two biggest threats to Israel, we got rid of Iraq and now we are removing the only other rival to Israel remaining in the Middle East.

After this, Israel, being the only nuclear power in the region and having massive funding from the American taxpayer, will dominate the entire region. This has always been the goal.

hjkl0|3 days ago

After this, Israel, being the most dangerous rogue state in the world and extremely divided internally, will likely devolve into civil war.

One hopes, anyway. That’s the best chance we have to remove the Nazis currently in power here.

nerdyadventurer|3 days ago

> While I have no love for the Iranian regime

Who say US is not regime? It is the world largest regime in the world, with bidders in every country to do their bidding, mass surveillance including their own country men. People blame only Russia, China, Iran etc when US have been doing the same for years.

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/w6_2Ul3Ght8

kgwxd|2 days ago

> Who say US is not regime?

Unless they edited, not GP. 2 things can be a regime at the same time.

apexalpha|3 days ago

I generally use 'regime' for autocratic governments.

Trump is democratically elected, for now.

I'm not actually sure if this is correct, English is not my native language.

Bender|3 days ago

What even is the plan here if the air assault fails? Boots on the ground? In Iran?

Other than nukes that would be the only option if they can blast the doors to the underground military cities. They will have to do it fast as the ships will not sustain combat for more than 5 days with their current ammo per the pentagon.

bakies|2 days ago

Why would warships only have ammo for 5 days??

citrin_ru|3 days ago

I don’t think it’s possible to change regime without boots on the ground which is not currently considered. So there will be no power vacuum, at most Iran military will be weaken. It’s not a big win for the US but would allow Trump to safe face after his demands were essentially rejected.

esseph|3 days ago

I imagine CIA political officers are on the ground right now.

graemep|3 days ago

Iraq was not an Islamic regime in the same sense. It was not a theocracy. There were non Muslims in senior political positions.

The Iraqi government was a lot more stable.

What exactly do you imagine will replace the Iranian government that is worse?

Matl|3 days ago

Iraq was attacking its neighbors every couple of years, Iran is not.

Iran has shown that it is remarkably sane actually, given the aggression shown towards it by Israel and the US and has made a lot of efforts to reach a deal.

Remember, it was the US that exited the JCPOA and now it wants Iran to give up all its misses so that they would be defenseless.

I have no love for theocracies, but I do think the Iranian system is a lot better than the likes of Saudi Arabia, which we're buddy buddy with.

Oh and I guess the founder of Syrian branch of AQ and deputy head of ISIS running Syria is better that what was before too, in your book?

bojan|3 days ago

That all being said, we are talking about different cultures. Iranians are on average more educated than Iraqis were/are, and the country is ethnically more homogeneous.

So I have hope that they'll find a way to organize when the current regime falls.

apexalpha|3 days ago

>What exactly do you imagine will replace the Iranian government that is worse?

A regime that only controls the capital, leaving the rest of the country in a power vacuum leading to internal conflicts and sectarian violence that will eventually spill over the borders into Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iraq etc...

kqr|3 days ago

Nothing at all could be worse!

One of the issues with Iraq was that Rumsfeld didn't want to acknowledge that it takes more personnel post-toppling (to rebuild infrastructure and institutions) than during invasion. It seems like the current government could be prone to make the same mistake.

I recommend anyone interested in this to read Cobra II. It's an excellent book.

riffraff|3 days ago

Was ISIS better or worse than Iran's government is now?

bhouston|3 days ago

“ There were non Muslims in senior political positions.”

What are you talking about?

Iraq is >95% Muslim, but there are a few different sub groups. With those numbers there were few in government then and now who are not Muslim.

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

justin66|3 days ago

Iraq’s Ba’ath party were secularists.

RobertoG|3 days ago

what are you talking about? Iran is a sophisticated country with a parliament and elections, with a powerful civil society. It has 90 million inhabitants. They graduated more women in STEM disciplines than the USA. Yes, it's a theocracy, but it's more free than Saudi Arabia for instance.

Are the Americans going to bomb the Saudis next? or only if Israel ask for it?

blks|3 days ago

No government and another perpetual war zone.

altern8|3 days ago

What does it mean "fail"?

What is the goal, to overthrow the regime, so success would mean a change of government?

(sorry, I haven't followed)

seydor|3 days ago

The plan is a show of power. Trump will leave in 2 years, leaving much of the world in disarray because he had no plan whatsoever, and his staff is literally out of the movie Idiocracy. Nothing of lasting value will come out of the horrors that happened in the past 3 years, and in 10 years we (the world) will look back into the present with disbelief.

tasuki|3 days ago

> in 10 years we will look back into the present with disbelief.

You mean in 10 years, when the US is a stable and high-functioning democracy with independent media, a universally liked, charming, and polite president, supported by both the right and the left, who finally manage to overcome their minor differences? Is... is this the direction this is all heading?

baubino|3 days ago

> in 10 years we (the world) will look back into the present with disbelief.

This is a very optimistic outlook, to the point of naivete, though I really hope you are right. In reality, neither Trump nor his cronies are acting like people who imagine they will be out of power anytime soon. In 10 years the world will likely still be dealing with the fallout of this administration, if not still dealing with the administration itself.

viking123|3 days ago

The place has 90 million people, how do you even deal with this without throwing the whole place into chaos?

Besides, after this the collective west has no moral high-ground anymore, the global south will resent us more than ever. If other countries go to aggressive wars, our condemnation is worthless.

Trump is completely compromised and it was probably the powers that be who told them that this is how it is going to be.

nerdyadventurer|3 days ago

> Besides, after this the collective west has no moral high-ground anymore

They never had any morals, all for their business gains look at Middle East, Africa and Asian countries where they were involved. Europe always looked other way when US does something and vise versa.

intalentive|2 days ago

Chaos could be the point. That is the Libya model.

graemep|3 days ago

There is no such thing as the "global south" other than in the minds of westerners and westernised elites (and elites are getting less westernised). From a western viewpoint you can lump the rest of the world together, but it makes no sense from any other view point.

As for moral high ground. Compared to whom? China? Russia? Myanmar?

Rover222|3 days ago

This shows a real ignorance about the true culture of Iran. It is not a Muslim culture. They want to install the son of the shah, and get back to pre-revolution culture.

But liberals will be quick to tell them they don't know best, better to just keep the oppressive ayatollah in power.

techblueberry|3 days ago

Maybe this is correct? I want this to be correct. But American entanglements in the Middle East have often overestimated the size of the “they” you’re referring to. There are many “they’s” in Iran, some of whom have been trained over time to hate the US.

So like, I think this is the right choice, but Trump was elected by MAGA to avoid these kind of entanglements even when it was the right thing to do. In fact, I think “liberals” (not progressive) support this action more than many on the right.

Traditional left/right is not useful to understanding people’s support of our foreign policy in 2026 America. Tucker Carlson will hate this way more than Chuck Schumer.

KaiserPro|3 days ago

> Boots on the ground? In Iran?

Trump is a coward. He knows that boots on the ground will mean massive losses.

The only way he does that is if someone convinces him that they can go in and out very quickly.

Unlike Venezuela I doubt there are people in the right place to oust Khamenei.

KaiserPro|3 days ago

Update

Turns out they bombed him

halflife|3 days ago

So replacing a fascist with western antagonism and constant threat on American allies, with a somewhat democratic, weak, and western aligned government?

Sounds like a good idea

seydor|3 days ago

It sounds like you believe that the people of Iran don't support the regime and are secretly loving america.