2 ms·

> Perhaps. We won't be able to say definitively until after the dust settles. We've been targeting IRGC heavy equipment and industry, specifically, which means

> Perhaps. We won't be able to say definitively until after the dust settles. We've been targeting IRGC heavy equipment and industry, specifically, which means their wealth may have plummeted precipitously, even if they've consolidated power. Well, I do agree. But I also think that to get to the point where the IRGC doesn't ultimately benefit will mean a very large amount of bloodshed and investment. And by that, I mean the equivalent of dropping nukes on Tehran worth of damage. Ultimately anything short of that will give them a lot of opportunity to rebuild. I don't think the US can topple them simply be continually bombing. They'd need a pretty massive amount of ground troops deployed or inhumane destruction. I guess I still hold out hope that Trump pulls out before we get to either point. If it does go to either point, the world will be royally screwed in terms of oil. Iran isn't going to go down without a massive amount of destruction of oil production throughout the region which is going to wreck the world.

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
> by that, I mean the equivalent of dropping nukes on Tehran worth of damage As I've argued, I think we've already left the IRGC weaker–if more consolidated–than it was a few months ago. But levelling it further would just require what Trump has said he wants to do: destroy the local power and water infrastructure.
- cogman10 7mo ago
  I don't think that destroys the IRGC, it destroys the civilian population. They might be weaker in the sense that they'll have less soldiers, but as far as a government goes, it will empower them like we've never seen. It will cement their power as the entire population is going to completely support them. Much like how Hamas still exists even though Gaza has been leveled.
  - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
    > don't think that destroys the IRGC, it destroys the civilian population The IRGC controls vast swaths of Iran's economy. They absolutely hurt when e.g. their cement plants are bombed. And the region's nuclear option, strikes on water infrastructure, looks like it's nearing the table. At which point we're potentially looking at multiple borders shifting in the long run. > It will cement their power as the entire population is going to completely support them Doubtful once the rally-around-the-flag effect has dissipated. But a lot can be done in a short amount of time, granted. > Much like how Hamas still exists even though Gaza has been leveled Well, yes. But it's a shadow of its former self. Poorer. More vulnerable. Less powerful in all material respects. More consolidated over a smaller area, though with less-tenuous grip even there. Irrelevant on the international geopolitical field. If you're saying Hamas is today more powerful than it was before October 7, sure, IRGC will be "more powerful" in the same way.
    - cogman10 7mo ago
      > Doubtful once the rally-around-the-flag effect has dissipated. That's what people said with the 79 revolution. It took up till 2026 before there was even a modicum of a risk of the government being dismantlement. > If you're saying Hamas is today more powerful than it was before October 7, sure, IRGC will be "more powerful" in the same way. I'm saying Hamas is more popular with the remaining Gaza citizens than it was in the past and it wasn't destroyed. Now, it is definitely weak enough that Israel can pretty easily just take land. But it took the destruction of about 80% of the buildings to get to that point. That's what I meant when I talked about needing to drop the equivalent of a nuke in Tehran in order to actually get the IRGC into a state where it's not so much of a threat. Iran has 90M people living there and if half the population is killed by destroying civilian infrastructure, there are still 45M people there who are also now all completely pissed, not at the IRGC, but at Israel and the US. The IRGC will ultimately be the force that gets priority on food, water, and shelter. That alone is going to give them a much easier time finding recruits. A lot of the IRGCs critical military manufacturing and infrastructure is underground. Taking that out is going to be just monstrously hard. That's why the US and Israel have already started to resort to punishing civilians (war crimes, but I guess those no longer matter) rather than the military. They don't have enough intel to find and destroy Iran's manufacturing. To contrast that with Hamas, they were a much smaller force that relied heavily on getting weapons from the outside. They didn't have weapons manufacturing capabilities and they were completely surrounded by israel which makes it extra hard for them to do anything militarily. Including getting general supplies into the country. And why I brought them up is even with all those disadvantages and the complete destruction of all infrastructure, they were not eliminated. Iran does not have any of the limitations of Gaza. It's easy for them to smuggle in supplies. They have manufacturing capabilities. They have friendly states at most of their borders.

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago

> by that, I mean the equivalent of dropping nukes on Tehran worth of damage As I've argued, I think we've already left the IRGC weaker–if more consolidated–than it was a few months ago. But levelling it further would just require what Trump has said he wants to do: destroy the local power and water infrastructure.

cogman10 7mo ago
I don't think that destroys the IRGC, it destroys the civilian population. They might be weaker in the sense that they'll have less soldiers, but as far as a government goes, it will empower them like we've never seen. It will cement their power as the entire population is going to completely support them. Much like how Hamas still exists even though Gaza has been leveled.
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
  > don't think that destroys the IRGC, it destroys the civilian population The IRGC controls vast swaths of Iran's economy. They absolutely hurt when e.g. their cement plants are bombed. And the region's nuclear option, strikes on water infrastructure, looks like it's nearing the table. At which point we're potentially looking at multiple borders shifting in the long run. > It will cement their power as the entire population is going to completely support them Doubtful once the rally-around-the-flag effect has dissipated. But a lot can be done in a short amount of time, granted. > Much like how Hamas still exists even though Gaza has been leveled Well, yes. But it's a shadow of its former self. Poorer. More vulnerable. Less powerful in all material respects. More consolidated over a smaller area, though with less-tenuous grip even there. Irrelevant on the international geopolitical field. If you're saying Hamas is today more powerful than it was before October 7, sure, IRGC will be "more powerful" in the same way.
  - cogman10 7mo ago
    > Doubtful once the rally-around-the-flag effect has dissipated. That's what people said with the 79 revolution. It took up till 2026 before there was even a modicum of a risk of the government being dismantlement. > If you're saying Hamas is today more powerful than it was before October 7, sure, IRGC will be "more powerful" in the same way. I'm saying Hamas is more popular with the remaining Gaza citizens than it was in the past and it wasn't destroyed. Now, it is definitely weak enough that Israel can pretty easily just take land. But it took the destruction of about 80% of the buildings to get to that point. That's what I meant when I talked about needing to drop the equivalent of a nuke in Tehran in order to actually get the IRGC into a state where it's not so much of a threat. Iran has 90M people living there and if half the population is killed by destroying civilian infrastructure, there are still 45M people there who are also now all completely pissed, not at the IRGC, but at Israel and the US. The IRGC will ultimately be the force that gets priority on food, water, and shelter. That alone is going to give them a much easier time finding recruits. A lot of the IRGCs critical military manufacturing and infrastructure is underground. Taking that out is going to be just monstrously hard. That's why the US and Israel have already started to resort to punishing civilians (war crimes, but I guess those no longer matter) rather than the military. They don't have enough intel to find and destroy Iran's manufacturing. To contrast that with Hamas, they were a much smaller force that relied heavily on getting weapons from the outside. They didn't have weapons manufacturing capabilities and they were completely surrounded by israel which makes it extra hard for them to do anything militarily. Including getting general supplies into the country. And why I brought them up is even with all those disadvantages and the complete destruction of all infrastructure, they were not eliminated. Iran does not have any of the limitations of Gaza. It's easy for them to smuggle in supplies. They have manufacturing capabilities. They have friendly states at most of their borders.