Iran Super Thread- Merged

[Czech_pivo]

It's awfully early to be criticizing the US on this don't you think? They decapitated the regime on day 1. That's a win in of itself.

'They' decapitated the regime or 'the 'Israeli's' decapitated the regime on day 1?

 

[QV]

Plenty of time for criticism when it's over. But for now, while the battle is on, I'll at least grant some professional courtesy to the people prosecuting this.

At least Israel and the USA are actually capable of and willing to counter evil in the world. And the recently deleted Iranian regime was pure evil.

 

[HavokFour]

It sounds like the US might be running straight into the same wall as the one effecting the war in Ukraine. Big, flashy, and expensive isn't going to work well over the long term compared to the cheaper options now available on the modern battlefield.

Iran's Missile Math: $20,000 Drones Take on $4 Million Patriots​

Archive

A reminder from not all that long ago, July 2025.

US only has 25% of all Patriot missile interceptors needed for Pentagon’s military plans

Exclusive: Low stockpiles for the crucial Patriot missile interceptors led to Trump administration pausing transfers to Ukraine

www.theguardian.com

 

[Brad Sallows]

I really enjoy the microscopic scrutiny of the US in the first few days after it starts a new round of hostilities. Always a litany of failures.

Regime removal is easy; replacement is hard. Iran did have a bit of democratic tradition decades ago, but not enough to shake revert-to-authoritarian mode when things got tough. It was certainly politically stunted by the Allied meddling in the '40s and the colonial meddling before that, but I also haven't seen evidence of any credible long-term Iranian-government-in-exile projects/think tanks, let alone one that has a well-developed plan for everything that has to happen to get from occupying the institutions to holding the first elections and initiating a project to write a new constitution. That's the greatest weakness.

There are always competing governing wannabe factions waiting for opportunity. Some are not necessarily domestic. A period of civil war is certainly on the table.

Nothing done by western countries has ever been acceptable to the extreme political left (the ones who are always out there with the signs deploring attacks against reprehensible regimes); presumably they want all non-marxist governments to fail and become some flavour of marxist. Ignore them. What does that leave? Maybe just allowing countries to repeatedly try and fail until they get to some kind of non-authoritarian government.

Iran is a special case. Repeat "Death to Israel/America" often enough and work obviously and credibly at developing nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, and Israel and America are not bound to ignore the threat indefinitely.

 

[Quirky]

Plenty of time for criticism when it's over. But for now, while the battle is on, I'll at least grant some professional courtesy to the people prosecuting this.

At least Israel and the USA are actually capable of and willing to counter evil in the world. And the recently deleted Iranian regime was pure evil.

If this was 1944, people would be critizing the Allies before they hit the beaches in northern France.

 

[OldSolduer]

I really enjoy the microscopic scrutiny of the US in the first few days after it starts a new round of hostilities. Always a litany of failures.

Regime removal is easy; replacement is hard.

So correct. Well said.

Time will tell.

 

[daftandbarmy]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[brihard]

I really enjoy the microscopic scrutiny of the US in the first few days after it starts a new round of hostilities. Always a litany of failures.

Regime removal is easy; replacement is hard. Iran did have a bit of democratic tradition decades ago, but not enough to shake revert-to-authoritarian mode when things got tough. It was certainly politically stunted by the Allied meddling in the '40s and the colonial meddling before that, but I also haven't seen evidence of any credible long-term Iranian-government-in-exile projects/think tanks, let alone one that has a well-developed plan for everything that has to happen to get from occupying the institutions to holding the first elections and initiating a project to write a new constitution. That's the greatest weakness.

There are always competing governing wannabe factions waiting for opportunity. Some are not necessarily domestic. A period of civil war is certainly on the table.

Nothing done by western countries has ever been acceptable to the extreme political left (the ones who are always out there with the signs deploring attacks against reprehensible regimes); presumably they want all non-marxist governments to fail and become some flavour of marxist. Ignore them. What does that leave? Maybe just allowing countries to repeatedly try and fail until they get to some kind of non-authoritarian government.

Iran is a special case. Repeat "Death to Israel/America" often enough and work obviously and credibly at developing nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, and Israel and America are not bound to ignore the threat indefinitely.

Unilaterally attacking a country and attempting to wipe out its government is and should always be subject to immediate scrutiny, particularly when multiple other uninvolved nations are immediately drawn in with property destroyed and people killed. I imagine you would have equally scorned immediate criticism or scrutiny of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. We all know how that played out. Some flaws or errors can be very, very quickly apparent, and pointing them out and discussing them is fair game.

The U.S. government is not entitled to a presumption of good faith, and we’re under no obligation to credit them with a master strategy that isn’t particularly evident and where significant counterfactuals are already apparent.

Killing figures in a government is not necessarily the same as ‘removing the regime’. If the change in who is presently alive in a position doesn’t hinge the mechanics of governance or the policies pursued, that’s not a regime change. Clearly Israel is seeking to destroy the underlying constitutional order in Iran to create the vacuum necessary for true regime change; whether they succeed, and to what extend the U.S. endeavours for the same objective, only time will tell. Right now it almost feels like Israel and the U.S. are warring in paralleled and with overlap, but not the same strategic objectives.

The Iranian regime is reprehensible. That does not make an attack to dismantle it inherently moral or good; there needs to be a reasonable and viable plan for an alternative that isn’t worse either in the outcome or in the destruction to reach one. Again, see Iraq 2003.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I really enjoy the microscopic scrutiny of the US in the first few days after it starts a new round of hostilities. Always a litany of failures.

Regime removal is easy; replacement is hard. Iran did have a bit of democratic tradition decades ago, but not enough to shake revert-to-authoritarian mode when things got tough. It was certainly politically stunted by the Allied meddling in the '40s and the colonial meddling before that, but I also haven't seen evidence of any credible long-term Iranian-government-in-exile projects/think tanks, let alone one that has a well-developed plan for everything that has to happen to get from occupying the institutions to holding the first elections and initiating a project to write a new constitution. That's the greatest weakness.

There are always competing governing wannabe factions waiting for opportunity. Some are not necessarily domestic. A period of civil war is certainly on the table.

Nothing done by western countries has ever been acceptable to the extreme political left (the ones who are always out there with the signs deploring attacks against reprehensible regimes); presumably they want all non-marxist governments to fail and become some flavour of marxist. Ignore them. What does that leave? Maybe just allowing countries to repeatedly try and fail until they get to some kind of non-authoritarian government.

Iran is a special case. Repeat "Death to Israel/America" often enough and work obviously and credibly at developing nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, and Israel and America are not bound to ignore the threat indefinitely.

There is a voting system and voting rolls in Iran for as far as I can tell for, municipal, state and federal. The problem with it is the candidates were all vetted and selected by the Clerics/IRGC. So voters could choose between Wanker A or Wanker B. The Shah has made it clear that his job is to lead a transitionary government who maintains stability and services and hold a referendum unto what type of government the people want. While he hopes for a constitutional monarchy, somewhat modelled on British/Canadian system, He did say he will respect the peoples wishes if they choose a pure constitutional republic. He did say that his role is to prevent Islamists and communists (MEK) from attempting to hijack the process.