• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Middle Eastern Regional War | March 27th/April 4th | Analysis

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gaijin said:
Shooting down a plane is not a 'major escalation'.
Click to expand...
I agree with that. You fly over enemy territory, you're going to get shot at. One one day the enemy is going to get lucky.

However, how the US interprets one of theirs getting shot down could certainly cause a reaction.
 
If we want the regime gone, there will most likely need to be an escalation of some type involving boots on the ground. The current course of action may have changed the leadership in Iran, but it does not seem to have changed the nature of the regime for the better.
  • By "we", I mean members of this forum , or individuals. I'm not speaking on behalf of the Trump administration as it not entirely clear what it wants.
  • The current bombardment of Iran actually seems to have made the regime more repressive and driven them underground.
Isn't there some saying about stupidity and doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result?

The US and Israel started this campaign. They must now fully invest and finish the job (topple the regime) or Iran will become Western North Korea.
 
teekay99 said:
If we want the regime gone, there will most likely need to be an escalation of some type involving boots on the ground. The current course of action may have changed the leadership in Iran, but it does not seem to have changed the nature of the regime for the better.
  • By "we", I mean members of this forum , or individuals. I'm not speaking on behalf of the Trump administration as it not entirely clear what it wants.
  • The current bombardment of Iran actually seems to have made the regime more repressive and driven them underground.
Isn't there some saying about stupidity and doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result?

The US and Israel started this campaign. They must now fully invest and finish the job (topple the regime) or Iran will become Western North Korea.
Click to expand...
While I agree overall it seems like the plan of action is to leave the regime in place once the war ends but heavily on the regime collapsing because essentially the war collapsed the state the state will no longer be able to function after the bombs stop falling. And therefore Iran regime won't be able to keep a lid on dissidence let alone dissidence who are starving and thirsty.

In my opinion the writing is on the wall. The goal is to collapse the state itself and once the bombs stop falling people will rise up because there will be no goods to keep them content in a dictatorship.

Typically dictatorships collapse because they can't keep the people at least even mildly content. If the people have no power or food or running water, short of killing literally everybody the regime won't be able to keep control.
 
Last edited:
NuclearID said:
In my opinion the writing is on the wall. The goal is to collapse the state itself and once the bomb stopped falling people will rise up because there will be no goods to keep them contempt in a dictatorship.
Click to expand...
It certainly seems that way. But this relies on a lot of hope and wishful thinking, neither of which constitute a good plan. I don't remember General Patton saying "Hope and wishful thinking expressed today is better than a perfect plan executed tomorrow." (Apologies I couldn't resist a bit of snark.)

NuclearID said:
Typically dictatorships collapse because they can't keep the people at least even mildly content. If the people have no power or food or running water, short of killing literally everybody the regime won't be able to keep control.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but those tend to be weak dictatorships (Cuba under Batista (the 2nd time) comes to mind). Strong dictatorships that systematically stomp out any opposition seem to endure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DEFCON Warning System said:
You can't leave the IRGC in charge. You'll never see peace with them. Too hardline.
Click to expand...
Is there a way to cancel the IRGC but leave the rest of the regime alone? That might be an approach that brings about the collapse @NuclearID refers to.

(Rhetorical question....)
 
teekay99 said:
It certainly seems that way. But this relies on a lot of hope and wishful thinking, neither of which constitute a good plan. I don't remember General Patton saying "Hope and wishful thinking expressed today is better than a perfect plan executed tomorrow." (Apologies I couldn't resist a bit of snark.)
Click to expand...
I never said it was a good plan. I said it appears to be the plan, which is a different argument entirely.

What seems to be emerging is a strategy aimed at breaking the state badly enough that, once the war stops, the regime can no longer hold the country together. That does not mean I think it is wise. It means that is what the writing on the wall appears to suggest.
teekay99 said:
Agreed, but those tend to be weak dictatorships (Cuba under Batista (the 2nd time) comes to mind). Strong dictatorship that systematically stomp out any opposition seem to endure.
Click to expand...
Again, I did not say this was a good plan. I can see the logic behind it, but that is not the same as endorsing it. And to be clear, there is absolutely no guarantee the Iranian regime collapses once the bombing stops just because its food, water, and electrical capacity has been severely damaged.
 
NuclearID said:
I never said it was a good plan. I said it appears to be the plan, which is a different argument entirely.

What seems to be emerging is a strategy aimed at breaking the state badly enough that, once the war stops, the regime can no longer hold the country together. That does not mean I think it is wise. It means that is what the writing on the wall appears to suggest.

Again, I did not say this was a good plan. I can see the logic behind it, but that is not the same as endorsing it. And to be clear, there is absolutely no guarantee the Iranian regime collapses once the bombing stops just because its food, water, and electrical capacity has been severely damaged.
Click to expand...
You're right. You did not label it a good plan nor did you seem to express support for that approach. Good call-out.
 
NuclearID said:
I never said it was a good plan. I said it appears to be the plan, which is a different argument entirely.

What seems to be emerging is a strategy aimed at breaking the state badly enough that, once the war stops, the regime can no longer hold the country together. That does not mean I think it is wise. It means that is what the writing on the wall appears to suggest.

Again, I did not say this was a good plan. I can see the logic behind it, but that is not the same as endorsing it. And to be clear, there is absolutely no guarantee the Iranian regime collapses once the bombing stops just because its food, water, and electrical capacity has been severely damaged.
Click to expand...
To be fair, if reports are accurate that 12-year-olds are manning military checkpoints across Iran to contain protests and riots during wartime, then that is already a sign of serious regime strain. A state that is confident in its control does not lean on children to help police unrest across major urban areas.

That does not mean collapse is guaranteed. It does mean the regime may already be operating from a position of weakness beneath the surface. If they are this stretched while bombs are still falling, then the bigger question is what happens afterward if civilian life is further degraded and the state can no longer maintain food distribution, water access, transportation, and basic order.

At that point, I do not see how the Iranian system keeps a firm lid on the country indefinitely short of mass killing, and that is not a real long-term answer. So again, I am not calling this a good plan, and I am not saying it is guaranteed to work. I am saying I can understand the logic behind why some would believe that enough cumulative strain could eventually crack the regime’s ability to govern.
 
NuclearID said:
To be fair, if reports are accurate that 12-year-olds are manning military checkpoints across Iran to contain protests and riots during wartime, then that is already a sign of serious regime strain. A state that is confident in its control does not lean on children to help police unrest across major urban areas.

That does not mean collapse is guaranteed. It does mean the regime may already be operating from a position of weakness beneath the surface. If they are this stretched while bombs are still falling, then the bigger question is what happens afterward if civilian life is further degraded and the state can no longer maintain food distribution, water access, transportation, and basic order.

At that point, I do not see how the Iranian system keeps a firm lid on the country indefinitely short of mass killing, and that is not a real long-term answer. So again, I am not calling this a good plan, and I am not saying it is guaranteed to work. I am saying I can understand the logic behind why some would believe that enough cumulative strain could eventually crack the regime’s ability to govern.
Click to expand...
Some food for thought:
  • 12 year olds may be more likely to believe the regime's martyrdom death cult approach
  • 12 year olds have no memory or understanding of life in Iran before the regime
  • 12 year olds may be more fanatical in their defense of certain regime standards because they lack the moral guardrails and critical thinking of adults.
  • Cambodia under Pol Pot used children to help keep people in line (and thus help keep the Killing Fields full)
This does illustrate the evil nature of the Iranian regime, and I do not support nor condone such acts. It does seem like an act of desperation. But it may serve the regime.
 
Do we know for a fact that the F15 was shot down?
I have been seeing quite a few reports of aircraft experiencing mechanical trouble lately. They are pushing these airframes hard.
 
Whatever happens with the pilot in Iran, you can bet your ass Iran is using drones to look for them. Hope they have good concealment tools available for that.
 
william said:
Do we know for a fact that the F15 was shot down?
I have been seeing quite a few reports of aircraft experiencing mechanical trouble lately. They are pushing these airframes hard.
Click to expand...
Unless i'm wrong, it was confirm by USA that it was shot down by iranian military (and not crashed due to a mecanical failure or accident)
 
NuclearID said:
🇺🇸🗣️
Trump says downed US jet won't affect any negotiations with Iran.

🔗⤵️
Click to expand...
Why would it? It’s apparent even to Iran they are getting pounded. Yet they set the bountys for alive only.

They specifically said alive. That means that they have a negotiating piece and since we may or may not invade, footage of the Military or militia draging their bodies through the streets or worse beheading them will likely cause them to be invaded.
 
GBS61 said:
Iran claimed to have shot down a second fighter jet that crashed in the Gulf late in the day.

(according to the New York Times (NYT))
Click to expand...
The New York Times (NYT) is a paid site in Canada, I don't know about the USA, no more information, there seems to be confusion about the pilot who was saved, it would be in the 2nd plane shot down, subject to all confirmation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom