6 ms·

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 e

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?

deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
viking123 8mo 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.
- graemep 8mo 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?
  - seydor 8mo ago
    China
- nerdyadventurer 8mo 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.
  - samrus 8mo ago
    The moral peak of the west was siding with egypt against uk/france in the suez canal dispute. Its been downhill since then. Especially nam
- intalentive 7mo ago
  Chaos could be the point. That is the Libya model.
altern8 8mo 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)
halflife 8mo 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 8mo ago
  It sounds like you believe that the people of Iran don't support the regime and are secretly loving america.
  - halflife 8mo ago
    You can say the same thing for Iraq, but here we are.
citrin_ru 8mo 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 8mo ago
  I imagine CIA political officers are on the ground right now.
graemep 8mo 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?
- riffraff 8mo ago
  Was ISIS better or worse than Iran's government is now?
- bojan 8mo 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.
  - dastuer 8mo ago
    And we’re mostly not religious at all. We have Ramadan here now. No one cares. Arab influencer come and make videos and are shocked Everyone eats and drinks during the days we don’t care
    - rwyinuse 8mo ago
      Yeah this is what lots of Western people don't get. The cultural / ideological gap between rulers and those being ruled appears much larger in Iran than in most other Muslim countries. Many countries have hardcore conservative rulers AND population, but in Iran the problem is mostly just the rulers. With better government, Iran would have so much potential.
    - Al-Khwarizmi 8mo ago
      I know that, but what I don't get is with a society like that, how can a theocratic government last for so long? Maybe I'm being naive, but authoritarian governments tend to fall when an educated population is against them. Iran looks like a weird case to me in this respect in that the population seems to be against (and honestly, seems to be quite brave) and still the theocracy goes on and on. Anyway, best of luck in this. Your people deserve better.
Dig1t 8mo 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.
- throwaway637372 8mo ago
  After Iran falls - Turkey is next.
- hjkl0 8mo 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.
  - Dig1t 7mo ago
    There is virtually no chance they will start a civil war, they are an ethnostate and the majority of their citizens are wholly in favor of continuing to expand. >In August 2025, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview with i24NEWS that he was on a "historic and spiritual mission" and that he is "very" attached to the vision of Greater Israel, which includes Palestinian areas and possibly also places that are part of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon. >Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has suggested that Israel is destined to expand to include Jordan, and even beyond, to parts of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and even Iraq. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel It is absolutely not a coincidence that most of the places mentioned in that list are also places that the US has been waging war for the past generation: Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq. >Hillel Weiss, a professor at Bar-Ilan University, has promoted the "necessity" of rebuilding the Temple and of Jewish rule over Greater Israel.[44][45][46] Francesca Albanese and Amos Goldberg have said that an aim towards a Greater Israel is a factor during the Gaza genocide.[47][48] According to Yoav Di-Capua, one of the beliefs of the Hardal movement is "the obligation to retrieve the biblical land of Israel in its entirety as a pre-requisite for collective redemption which heralds the arrival of the Messiah" They are driven to continue taking land in the middle east because they have a religious belief that their Messiah will arrive when they fulfill the prophecy.
seydor 8mo 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 8mo 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?
  - tdeck 8mo ago
    Maybe the feeling will be "I can't believe I didn't get out of there while I still could".
- baubino 8mo 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.
  - thechao 8mo ago
    Hot take: Trump's denialism of 2020 and the use of '3rd term' is so that they can make a case that he can have a '4th term' -- that the will of the people to elect him overrides the constitutional limits of Presidency.
  - autoexec 8mo ago
    I think both will be true. We'll be dealing with the fallout of this administration and dealing with his goons and cronies for decades while still looking back at this time in disbelief and wondering how we ever let it happen and what needs to change to prevent it in the future.
nerdyadventurer 8mo 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 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/w6_2Ul3Ght8
- apexalpha 8mo 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.
  - nerdyadventurer 8mo ago
    Iran also had elections, were they manipulated? I do not know. Were US people were manipulated using social media for elections. I do not know either. > Trump is democratically elected, for now. He was convicted felon before the election, I cannot believe that he won.
    - abhinavk 8mo ago
      The elected president of Iran is more like a Chief of Staff to the actual leader.
  - ajb 8mo ago
    There is no precise definition. English has many synonyms where the formal meaning is the same, but one is used pejoratively because it's acquired a bad association. Regime is like that, formally it just means the rule of a particular party or system. It can still be used neutrally if not denoting a government.
  - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
    > I generally use 'regime' for autocratic governments Which is fine. "In theory, the term need not imply anything about the particular government to which it relates, and most social scientists use it in a normative and neutral manner. The term, though, can be used in a political context. It is used colloquially by some, such as government officials, media journalists, and policy makers, when referring to governments that they believe are repressive, undemocratic, or illegitimate or simply do not square with the person’s own view of the world. Used in this context, the concept of regime communicates a sense of ideological or moral disapproval or political opposition" [1]. [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/regime https://www.britannica.com/topic/regime
KaiserPro 8mo 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 8mo ago
  Update Turns out they bombed him
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
Bender 8mo 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 7mo ago
  Why would warships only have ammo for 5 days??
  - Bender 7mo ago
    Well in my opinion I would call that piss poor planning but I am just repeating what the pentagon said. For all I know this could be misdirection.
    - bakies 7mo ago
      Right, now Trump says combat may last 4 weeks
      - Bender 7mo ago
        That means refueling somehow and getting massive amounts of heavy munitions delivered. Meanwhile congress are trying to have an emergency war powers meeting to shut all this down. Whatever they have planned they better step it up.
Rover222 8mo 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 8mo 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.

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

viking123 8mo 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.

graemep 8mo 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?
- seydor 8mo ago
  China
nerdyadventurer 8mo 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.
- samrus 8mo ago
  The moral peak of the west was siding with egypt against uk/france in the suez canal dispute. Its been downhill since then. Especially nam
intalentive 7mo ago
Chaos could be the point. That is the Libya model.

altern8 8mo 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)

halflife 8mo 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 8mo ago
It sounds like you believe that the people of Iran don't support the regime and are secretly loving america.
- halflife 8mo ago
  You can say the same thing for Iraq, but here we are.

citrin_ru 8mo 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 8mo ago
I imagine CIA political officers are on the ground right now.

graemep 8mo 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?

riffraff 8mo ago
Was ISIS better or worse than Iran's government is now?
bojan 8mo 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.
- dastuer 8mo ago
  And we’re mostly not religious at all. We have Ramadan here now. No one cares. Arab influencer come and make videos and are shocked Everyone eats and drinks during the days we don’t care
  - rwyinuse 8mo ago
    Yeah this is what lots of Western people don't get. The cultural / ideological gap between rulers and those being ruled appears much larger in Iran than in most other Muslim countries. Many countries have hardcore conservative rulers AND population, but in Iran the problem is mostly just the rulers. With better government, Iran would have so much potential.
  - Al-Khwarizmi 8mo ago
    I know that, but what I don't get is with a society like that, how can a theocratic government last for so long? Maybe I'm being naive, but authoritarian governments tend to fall when an educated population is against them. Iran looks like a weird case to me in this respect in that the population seems to be against (and honestly, seems to be quite brave) and still the theocracy goes on and on. Anyway, best of luck in this. Your people deserve better.

Dig1t 8mo 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.

throwaway637372 8mo ago
After Iran falls - Turkey is next.
hjkl0 8mo 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.
- Dig1t 7mo ago
  There is virtually no chance they will start a civil war, they are an ethnostate and the majority of their citizens are wholly in favor of continuing to expand. >In August 2025, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview with i24NEWS that he was on a "historic and spiritual mission" and that he is "very" attached to the vision of Greater Israel, which includes Palestinian areas and possibly also places that are part of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon. >Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has suggested that Israel is destined to expand to include Jordan, and even beyond, to parts of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and even Iraq. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel It is absolutely not a coincidence that most of the places mentioned in that list are also places that the US has been waging war for the past generation: Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq. >Hillel Weiss, a professor at Bar-Ilan University, has promoted the "necessity" of rebuilding the Temple and of Jewish rule over Greater Israel.[44][45][46] Francesca Albanese and Amos Goldberg have said that an aim towards a Greater Israel is a factor during the Gaza genocide.[47][48] According to Yoav Di-Capua, one of the beliefs of the Hardal movement is "the obligation to retrieve the biblical land of Israel in its entirety as a pre-requisite for collective redemption which heralds the arrival of the Messiah" They are driven to continue taking land in the middle east because they have a religious belief that their Messiah will arrive when they fulfill the prophecy.

seydor 8mo 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 8mo 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?
- tdeck 8mo ago
  Maybe the feeling will be "I can't believe I didn't get out of there while I still could".
baubino 8mo 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.
- thechao 8mo ago
  Hot take: Trump's denialism of 2020 and the use of '3rd term' is so that they can make a case that he can have a '4th term' -- that the will of the people to elect him overrides the constitutional limits of Presidency.
- autoexec 8mo ago
  I think both will be true. We'll be dealing with the fallout of this administration and dealing with his goons and cronies for decades while still looking back at this time in disbelief and wondering how we ever let it happen and what needs to change to prevent it in the future.

nerdyadventurer 8mo 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 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/w6_2Ul3Ght8

apexalpha 8mo 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.
- nerdyadventurer 8mo ago
  Iran also had elections, were they manipulated? I do not know. Were US people were manipulated using social media for elections. I do not know either. > Trump is democratically elected, for now. He was convicted felon before the election, I cannot believe that he won.
  - abhinavk 8mo ago
    The elected president of Iran is more like a Chief of Staff to the actual leader.
- ajb 8mo ago
  There is no precise definition. English has many synonyms where the formal meaning is the same, but one is used pejoratively because it's acquired a bad association. Regime is like that, formally it just means the rule of a particular party or system. It can still be used neutrally if not denoting a government.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
  > I generally use 'regime' for autocratic governments Which is fine. "In theory, the term need not imply anything about the particular government to which it relates, and most social scientists use it in a normative and neutral manner. The term, though, can be used in a political context. It is used colloquially by some, such as government officials, media journalists, and policy makers, when referring to governments that they believe are repressive, undemocratic, or illegitimate or simply do not square with the person’s own view of the world. Used in this context, the concept of regime communicates a sense of ideological or moral disapproval or political opposition" [1]. [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/regime https://www.britannica.com/topic/regime

KaiserPro 8mo 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 8mo ago
Update Turns out they bombed him

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

Bender 8mo 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 7mo ago
Why would warships only have ammo for 5 days??
- Bender 7mo ago
  Well in my opinion I would call that piss poor planning but I am just repeating what the pentagon said. For all I know this could be misdirection.
  - bakies 7mo ago
    Right, now Trump says combat may last 4 weeks
    - Bender 7mo ago
      That means refueling somehow and getting massive amounts of heavy munitions delivered. Meanwhile congress are trying to have an emergency war powers meeting to shut all this down. Whatever they have planned they better step it up.

Rover222 8mo 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 8mo 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.