https://x.com/FaytuksNetwork/status/2046696964113191198
https://x.com/yarotrof/status/2046657096096100597
The only thought which saves me from despair here is I honestly think this was inevitable.
Someone had to take Iran on at some point, Iran would always respond in this way.
1 Like
On the contrary, I think six months ago the end was in sight for the Iranian regime, be it by overthrow, or evolution. The fiasco in their strategy post-Gaza had the regime semi-paralyzed and perceived as weak.
That regime is far more entrenched now, any moderates are thoroughly discredited - particularly those within the military. I suspect even the Iranian population has been re-radicalized to a degree it has not been in a generation or more.
6 Likes
If Regime Change was the goal, there could be no worse way to go about it. If Regime Change is the goal winning the hearts and minds of the Iranian civilian population inside Iran would have been key, as would arming those who could replace the current security apparatus. If Regime Change was the goal, you would also credibly threaten invasion so that it gave The Islamic Republic incentives to surrender. If Regime Change was the goal, you would also need support from the existing security apparatus inside Iran, and would need to attempt to split the IRGC from Artesh and etc.
None of this has happened, indeed aspects of the opposite took place through tweets and statements as well as bombs, so there was never any chance of Regime Change from this operation.
I am not as positive as Arminius regarding organic regime change since the “Revolution” (IRGC and clerics aka regime) controls all the weapons and ideology is a powerful drug. But it would have been a better shot than this, which has cemented the regime. It can even say it stands victorious. On a mountain of the rubble of their military hardware and the ruin of their economy, sure, but Iran was never a powerful convential military anyway.
Because this war has been starkly different from specific, understandable, logical goals; such as specifically bombing the nuclear program heavily, as well as ballistic missile production. That would have been specific, it could also have used United Nations Resolutions as legal cover. This isn’t that. It’s a complete botch job of a Regime Change War, launched ad-hoc without any plan what so ever to carry it to a positive conclusion.
3 Likes
I just dont see regime change ever being a possibility here. I mean, as a de facto state, I cant think of many more repressive. Nah not for me 
I cant comment on the intricate strategy, but it’s also obvious, I dont think there has ever been a war quite like this one, and the scope for battle plans seem definitionally scarce. This is an epoch shifting event, and in such, there is always craziness.
Mate, when strategy is obvious, it is not so intricate. There are many ways to attack Iran and win, but also many where you lose, particularly when you don’t care about intricacies or plan for Black and White Swans.
ABC is, from the onset, setting War Goals that you think is achievable. You may have other opportunistic ones is all goes very smoothly, but those you don’t communicate for obvious reasons. That is Step 1 by any competent actor. Step 2 is getting support from allies and partners, ideally also the UN track. But allies and partners must be consulted and prepared, or you are on your own. Step 3 is setting conditions for Iran that seems not completely unreasonable in the eyes of the rest of the world, and conditions that is not as punitive that Iran will close the Straits of Hormuz. It closed the Straits of Hormuz because the US declared a Regime Change war, please note that (by doing this, Iran had 0 incentives to not use their weapons of mass destruction aka economic choke on the global economy, because US declared Day 1 that this was Regime Change and only Unconditional Surrender would do).
One does not need to be a general or share Sun Tzu’s name to dechiper that, mate. They couldn’t have gone about this in a more incompetent way if they truly tried. The closure of the straitz of Hormuz was a shock to the US admin, but expected by everyone else. US was in no position to contest it, having not planned for it, but launching the war even so.
As for the result of the war, we don’t know. we have no political solution yet. We can only hope for a JPOAC, but this is not clear. Worst Case, the result will be an Iranian nuclear bomb and an Iranian Revolutionary Guard operating in the middle east under a nuclear umbrella. That is the very Worst Case.
It’s also rather terrible that the despotic Islamic Republic, and as you say, there are few states worse than it, wins a political victory over the US through American incompetance. Yes, I don’t mind seeing Trump humiliated, but I certainly for one do not want to see a victorious Islamic Republic, and that seems more and more likely that I will see (as long as they can successfully spin it as a victory, that is Spiritual Truth and facts don’t matter, as long as the masses believes the Spiritual Truth; as we know from the history of propaganda and how that works psychologically in authoritarian states). If the Iranian economy is a wreck and Iran loses militarily, it does not really matter as long as a critical mass of people view it as a victory, which again greatly improves the legitimacy of the despotic regime in question.
7 Likes
My point was waiting for Trump to tell the truth, in my humble view he is incapable of telling the truth.If he has I missed it!
1 Like
I don’t think he even knows what the facts are in this war tbh. He knows some of them, but he doesn’t have the dicipline to listen to advisors or carefully read his briefings so while he may understand words, I doubt he understands the content.
I think his staff knows more than he does about this war.
I sometime wonder if Trump really remembers why the US is involved, because Netanyahu,who has clearly something on Trump,led him there.
Which in turn gives Trump no way out unless he grows a set and tells Israel,they are on their own.Israel wouldn’t be happy and Trump wont do it,so where to next?
Let’s not lose sight of who attacked who, here.
2 Likes
I would never.
“Additionally, Ukraine and the United States, among others, have stated that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has had a presence in Russian-occupied Crimea for the purpose of operating Shahed drones in attacks against Ukrainian cities. Some of these IRGC personnel have reportedly been killed by Ukrainian military strikes against Russian-occupied territory; the Iranian involvement in the war has negatively impacted Iran–Ukraine relations while intensifying existing tensions between Iran and the United States.”
1 Like
Let me be clear, as long as the human suffering is low enough to justify it, I would hardly mind combat operations against Iran with the expressed purpose of making sure that they will never break out in regards to nuclear weapons (though I would far rather have a JPOA active) and I hardly mind the Islamic Republic taking a massive battering when it comes to their military industry. They deserve that and much, much more.
However, this war is just wrong, as it is clearly illegal and launched with the wrong and illegal War Goals. It is also strategically idiotic, not planned and counter productive. I will never support an illegal war, even against such fiends.
But the cruel Islamic Republic is no innocent random victim in any form or way and it’s death ought to be celebrated by each and everyone. Not that it’s likely to happen after this counter productive travesty, which seemingly only strenghten it ideologically.
5 Likes
And that’s the greatest tragedy of Trump’s latest misadventure. It may not have been imminent but the trajectory was definitely heading away from the Islamic regime. Unless by some miracle an overthrow is orchestrated now by foreign armies then it will take another generation at least until the political situation in Iran will be comparable to what it was before this folly began.
5 Likes
Question.
Has Netanyahu’s aims been met with this?
Of course, the war has also been profitable for someone close to Trump. I doubt they want it to end in a hurry.
Will be interesting to see if the ship was attacked in Omani waters.
1 Like
Beg to disagree. None had to take Iran on. Obama struck deal and it worked for three years unit Netanyahu and Trump torpedoed it. Another deal was close in Muscat until, guess what, Netanyahu and Trump torpedoed it.
1 Like
2 Likes
Yeah, yeah, more sanction is the best way to discipline a regime that has learned not just to cope, but to thrive under sanctions since 1979. What do EU expect? It would be the straw that finally breaks the camel’s back?