|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
I am skeptical that the United States will actually do anything directly in Iran. If it does, it’s going to be limited to using some bombers to drop heavy ordnance on an underground nuclear reactor.
Some people are getting very enthusiastic about the prospect of regime change in Iran, but I think it’s a long shot and (despite claims otherwise from the Left and the Right), Israel isn’t really trying for it (despite Netanyahu’s speeches) and doesn’t really have the capabilities for it. Israel would be happy if the Jihadist regime fell, but it’s focused on taking out nukes, ballistic missiles and terrorist elements.
We’re also unlikely to go down that road. This is not a nation-building administration.
Still some people are choosing to sell a misleading narrative. So let’s break down a few things.
Regime change is not necessarily the same thing as nation-building. Post WWII we tend to tie the two together, but it’s not necessarily the case. For example, we maintained sufficient pressure on the USSR for the regime to implode. Regime change happened, but we didn’t then determine the outcome. We made it very clear that we wanted regme change in the USSR and across the ex-Soviet republics. But we didn’t do much in the way of nation-building.
Our failed efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan were very much nation building. And they were disastrous for that reason.
It is possible to topple a government, directly or indirectly, without nation building. It goes without saying that we should not pursue nation building in Iran or any other Muslim country.
Would regime change really be a good idea in Iran considering our past experiences? Wouldn’t we risk unleashing worse problems?
In the Middle East, things can generally always get worse, but it’s hard to see what can really be any worse than an Islamic terrorist state with nukes that intends to pass them on to other terrorist groups. Especially if that regime’s motto is “Death to America”.
I have trouble coming up with any scenarios worse than the current one.
Ordinary Iranians are NOT worse than the mullah monkeys.
President Trump has been talking about “bunker buster” bombs. I hope he uses one.
I’ve known a lot of former Iranians and very few of them were particularly Moslem, much less fanatics. And the chicks are hot. Orange County CA has lots of them. There are even Iranian markets there. The food isn’t so bad if you’re in the mood for something different than the usual. No latkes or cheesburgers, though. Their variety of rice sucks but so does Indian basmati and I eat that too. I don’t know what it is with Near Easterners and the Middle ones and their rice fetish but different people eat different things
I hope Trump bombs those crusty “bunkers” into radioactive dust and then pisses on them from Air force One. Or that Camel Jockey Jet, whichever one he’s flying in now. I wouldn’t put it past him. That guy is completely predictable and unpredictable at the same time. He likes to “float” ideas and get people thinking. He’s so cool.
Agree about Iranians, and I would also base my foreign policy decisions on how hot the chicks are.
We don’t want violent mobs Looting and Burning the Riots are turning many Americas against the Invasion s from South of the Border
The war with Iran is Israel’s fight, not our fight. We, America, have no reason to start a war with Iran until and unless they act directly against us. If the war mongers here want a war then they themselves should arm themselves and go start a war and fight it themselves and leave America out of it.
It’s not in America’s best interests to continue to act as the world’s police and get involved in wars we shouldn’t get involved in or lack the will to win (e.g., Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) decisively.
Iran has been at war with us since the beginning and still is.
We can deal with that reality in different ways, but the reality ain’t going away.
No shit. I’m old enough to remember that shit.
Thanks for pointing out the important distinction between regime change and nations-building. We should certainly not engage in the latter.
As for regime change, it still appears that the IRGC is in firm control. I’d love to be wrong, however.