"Iran?" Topic

Anybody else reading that the ABRAHAM LINCOLN has gone "dark"?

BREAKING: 🚨🇺🇸 USS Abraham Lincoln has gone dark, with no transponder or communication, signaling possible preparation for action against Iran.

Well it seems that the TF is within range or close to it. Probably there will be strikes on critical targets in Iran soon. To support the locals overthrowing the theocratic islamists gov't. The sooner the better … Iran has been a thorn to many in the West and in that region. Good riddance.

POTUS did the standard American tactic.
Encourage uprisings, and then let the demonstrators get slaughtered.
Iran in the 60s, Ukraine in the 50s, Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in the 70s, Guatemala and Nicaragua (too many times)…
Now he thinks that bombing Iran again will "encourage the demonstrators" again.
Yeah. Sure.

It's a long and dishonorable list.

There has been some concern about how well the US Navy will cope with a possible swarm of Shahed drones.

Is there even any resistance left. I have heard nothing about the uprising in Iran for over a week. Doesn't help much to attack Iran if the protesters have been put down.

"It's a long and dishonorable list."

True enough, John. You left out the Aftermath of The Bay of Pigs in 1961. And Afghanistan in the 1970s.

But in fairness to Americans, you're not the only ones.

I mention the Warsaw Uprising in 1944 where the Soviets sat back and let the Nazis exterminate the Poles. There are other examples in history – 1848 Revolutions in Europe encouraged by British liberals who then sat back & watched each one get crushed.

Power & morality don't often go hand in hand.

"US Navy will cope with a possible swarm of Shahed drones."

I think that statement could be used with the entirety of the Iranian Armed Forces. Theoretically, they have batteries of Chinese knock off SSMs lining the Gulf and the area near the Strait of Hormuz. They also have quite a few aircraft, drones, and ballistic missiles. However, none of their aircraft got off the ground to challenge the Israelis, their air defense systems are laughable, and to use the drones and SSMs, you need to have targeting info, which I don't think they have.

Their navy is also not a serious threat, so if you're Iran I'm not sure what you do. The USAF, USN, and IDF are going to be able to operate with impunity across the country. However, what do you do with that power and what is there to destroy? The US is really, really good at blowing up stuff, but not so good at regime change.

The US is really, really good at blowing up stuff, but not so good at regime change.

That's an afterthought which interferes with the war planning.
"Congress? Congress? Bueller? Bueller?"

It appears that the USN TF is in place. GEN Kean RET. outlined what many of us already thought. An attack could be imminent.

Why:

1) Iran is still wanting nukes

2) They are making threats to the US, etc.

3) They continue to kill 1000s

4) They most likely do have deployable ICBMs, etc. which could strike Israel, etc.

5) They still use and support their militant islamist terrorists proxies. E.g. Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi Shia militias, Houthis, etc., etc.

6) IRGC are considered terrorists

7) Iran's gov't is as weak as it ever has been. They can be considered on the on the brink …

8) Having Iran's gov't fall will be a positive thing for the entire region plus many in the world.

Doing what we can to assist in the fall of Iran's theocratic regime. Is the right move. Regardless of what some detractors, etc.

This op may upset of Iran's terrorist proxies. Again, the GWoT will continue regardless. Killing off any militant radical islamists terrorists has become SOP. It has to be … as long as they pose a threat. As they are now and have been in the past. They don't want to talk reasonably. Their peace plans don't exist. Short of destroying all infidels, that is their only objective.

As I have said – good riddance … paradise must be getting really crowded about now … Their rooms must be getting double booked …

aegiscg +1

aegiscg47 +1

Plenty out there think targeting is easy, when actually it is the hardest part of the equation. It is common sense to keep yourself hidden for as long as possible.

I had emergency orders to the USS Mississippi in the Aegean Sea, when I had negotiated orders to a Tico class. One of the biggest disappointments in my career. Then I got emergency orders to the SOCAR. As an OS I knew it was over.

Legion 4 +1

Iranian threats to the US have never stopped. I never could understand why some Presidents have never taken the threats seriously. This extreme religous regime says it is at war with the US since its formation.

Just recently Iran reported they are at war with the Israeli, US and Europe. The DD's in Rota and Patriot missile system are there to protect southern Europe from ballistic missile attacks. I hope the missile shield keeps them safe until this threat is over.

It is common sense to keep yourself hidden for as long as possible.

That is SOP of course … of should be …

FWIW – We do have some very high tech to assist/support targeting/engaging targets, etc. currently. However, as we see our enemies in that region … not so much. Plus the USA and the IDF have a good bit of experience operating in that area.

"Congress? Congress?

They are going to shut down the gov't for the weekend, etc. Again …

The US is really, really good at blowing up stuff,

Very much so … one of the best in the business …

but not so good at regime change.

Well we won't be doing any regime change per se. Destroy enough islamists and gov't assets. That could give the 80% who hate their islamists 15th century gov't. A real edge in cleaning house.

It is already messy, with thousands upon thousands of the anti-gov't elements already being killed. With more to follow if their islamists gov't isn't stopped. Plus, there are outside jihadi terrorists support who came to Iran to support their Ayatollah. They can be attrited as well …

A target rich environment … but the possibility of CD is a concern.

OSCS74 +1
Legion 4 +1

What is the goal? Helping the protestors overthrow the regime, or "encourage" the regime to stop doing what they've been doing? I don't think either outcome is realistic.
Or is it just a case of doing something to be seen to be doing something?

What is the goal?

Stop the regime from killing its own people.

Prevent them from getting deployable WMDs/nukes.

End them from being a terrorist threat to many in the region, the USA, etc.

That being said, if decapitating the regime leadership is necessary to mitigate the threat they pose. And have posed that threat for many years now. That kinetic action should take place.

I don't think either outcome is realistic.

With hitting specific targets, e.g. IRGC, C3, etc. That should give the anti-regime forces an advantage. And we need to continue those strikes until no longer needed.

We can't do nothing … that would mean the regime will claim victory, continue the slaughter, and remain a threat with terrorism and nukes …

"What is the goal?"

Monroe Doctrine by someone who can't read a compass?

Degrading an enemy's capability is always a good thing, right? Regime change is up to the Iranians, but weakening the nullahs makes it more feasible. AND reduces the threeat to us. What's not to like?

And yes, Congress is and will continue to be ineffective and therefore to an extent irrelevant. The president says I need this much money or the country is in danger. At some point the posturing and performances either end and he gets the funding, OR he doesn't, and if then something really bad does happen, maybe we get a new Congress. Maybe. But at the last oossible minute they fold and vote the appropriation.

[The Congress shall have Power …] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water …

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11

If kidnapping a rogue president (who it must be admitted, was a pain in the ass), and bombing another Sovereign State is not a proper reason for Congress to declare War, then the Constitution becomes pointless.
Why even bother to have a Congress? Just let POTUS do what he wants. Which he is.
At least Senator Rand Paul, a TRUE REPUBLICAN, seems to agree with me.

Not even a mamby pamby "authorization to use force".

"What is the goal?"

Monroe Doctrine by someone who can't read a compass?

In addition to ending a brutal regime, we could possibly remove one of Russia's and China's allies from the board before the next inevitable war…

"Two explosions struck southern Iran on Saturday, one in Bandar Abbas and the other in Ahvaz, killing several people. The Revolutionary Guard denied reports that its Navy chief was killed in the blasts, while Israel rejected any involvement.

Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian said recent developments showed Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu and European countries were seeking to provoke unrest and sow division.

The Kayhan newspaper, overseen by a representative of Supreme Leader, called for the expulsion of European Union ambassadors from Iran in response to the EU's decision to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization.

Iran's top security official Ali Larijani contacted officials in regional countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE, last week and warned that Tehran would target US embassies in those countries if the United States attacks Iran, an Iranian government source told Iran International.

US President Donald Trump said on Friday that he had directly communicated a deadline to Iran for reaching a deal with the United States.

Decision-making circles in the United States and Israel have moved past diplomacy with Iran, viewing military action as effectively decided, with only the timing still under debate, a Western source familiar with coordination talks told Iran International"

I had to think which "brutal regime" you were talking about, SBM.
Is Iran simply an attempt to distract from the events in Mineappolis?

Simply, American escalation Without Clear Strategic Goals is a recipe for disaster.

Trump's kind of military posturing is self-serving because although it plays well with certain hard-line domestic political audiences it will not actually improve regional stability or U.S. security.

Threatening "major destruction" while branding oneself a peacemaker is messaging aimed at domestic audiences, not a coherent diplomatic approach. Real peace presidents lower tensions rather than repeatedly test red lines.

What a pity the US doesn't have a genuine "Peace President" in order to avoid "the next inevitable war" the current Washington regime looks like provoking.

Unlike Australia, the US is in a position to win it when it comes.

Win what? See, vague.

doc +1

SMb +1

OVI +1

Again – What is the goal?

Stop the regime from killing its own people.

Prevent them from getting deployable WMDs/nukes.

End them from being a terrorist threat to many in the region, the USA, etc.

At this point … do we wait until Iran has deployable Nukes ? Or until there is another 7 Oct, somewhere again?

We see two past POTUSs remedy was to give them billions of $. USD Which did 0 but help Iran's theocratic leadership. Which in turned some of that $ was used to kill non-combatants, etc.

Who is more responsible for 7 Oct ? The Biden Admin et al. ? Or the Ayatollah and his proxies, lackies, minions ?

What did giving all that $ to Iran do to stop Iran obtaining their objectives ? 0 … again 0 … It pretty much helped fund Iran's militant islamist goals. Which killed many Israelis and Americans.

Does Rand Paul know how to stop Iran's plans from killing more of not only their own people, but Jews, Americans, etc. ?

Does anyone in Congress who holds disdain for the POTUS, his admin, his party, etc. know how to stop the islamists of Iran, and their proxies ?

What I do know about the Constitution … Is in many cases for almost every measure there is a counter measure that can be interpreted opposite of what one paragraph, etc. said …

Reality, pragmatism, logic, reason etc. has to guide our actions. In almost every situation.

I've often seen in the media, one Constitutional scholar says one thing that is Constitution states. While another says, the opposite or at least something different. In many cases these interpretations come from a narrative/agenda. That differs between "experts".

Are some in Congress fiddling while many places in the world burns ? While islamists get nukes? Kill more noncombatants? Etc.

Some in DC, in state and local gov'ts better get their collective heads out of their , get their 💩
wired tight … And see the reality of this current multi-level crisis … Before it's too late …

I had to think which "brutal regime" you were talking about, SBM.
Is Iran simply an attempt to distract from the events in Mineappolis?

What's happening in Minnesota isn't tyranny — it's institutional self-defense.

The reaction to immigration enforcement and welfare-fraud investigations looks extreme because those actions threaten the political machine that now anchors modern Democratic power. That machine isn't unions or ward bosses anymore — it's a vast network of publicly funded nonprofits and "community" organizations that employ, mobilize, and deliver turnout. In Minnesota the fraud now exceeds an estimated $18 USD BILLION. In California it's at least $100 USD BILLION and whistleblowers indicate it could be as high as a HALF TRILLION DOLLARS. Stolen. Gone. Never going to be recovered,

So when federal enforcement shows up, it doesn't just enforce the law — it disrupts funding flows, patronage jobs, activist capacity, and political leverage. That's why audits are called "attacks," enforcement is labeled "violence," and federal authority is framed as illegitimate. Moral panic becomes a shield to stop scrutiny before facts matter.

This isn't new. Tammany Hall did it with city jobs. Daley did it with contracts. Mexico's PRI did it with social programs. Today it's nonprofits, protests, and moral urgency — same machine, new language.

The scope and pace of the chaos are managed, not spontaneous. When deflection is needed, outrage is amplified. When pressure eases, it cools. This isn't resistance — it's a political machine using street disorder to shield itself from scrutiny. According to recent news reports the Lt Governor of Minnesota has been helping coordinate street action against ICE -- think about it…the second most power politician in the state deliberately stoking the violence…

If this were about human rights, you'd see it everywhere. You don't. You only see it where one-party rule, sanctuary policy, and corruption overlap. And the real danger isn't Federal enforcement. It's normalizing the idea that Federal law only applies when local power approves. History shows exactly where that leads, and it's not good.

There is no way in Hell that the Gov and mayor are not guilty … As well as one of their members of Congress. At least … And she should be deported ASAP !

But most of these criminals will get away with it …

SB and Legion +1

I am SO HAPPY that none of the people on this thread have any power. Reading them is frightening.

Why is it any of our business what goes on in Iran?
Oh, right. "When you break it, you own it."
We broke Persia/Iran way back when we overthrew a legitimate leftist government and installed the Shah.
Why did we do that? Oh, right. Our God given duty to overthrow "leftist@ governments globally.
So, since we broke it, we now own Iran. And the brightest lightbulbs here wish to replace a horrible government with… wait for it …. the son of the Shah. That would be funny, if it were so obviously not. Have you learned anything???

The problem with having the best military in the world is that you feel the need to use it. Everywhere. Any time. All at once.
Isolationism doesn't look all that bad. Look at all the money we could save! Probably spend it on useless things, though. Like grand ballrooms ant the White Hiuse, and 250' triumphal arches. Like someone else in the past, whose name is not raised in polite society.

SB and Legion +1

When looking at a video, you can see what's is happening in a clear and unstressed way. It is not that way on the streets if your are in a situation like what happened. The Ice Agents objective is to get the violent illegal in custody. The crowd is there to harass and impede Ice to allow the perp to escape.

The Ice Agents are focused and stressed before getting out of their vehicles. A leftist crowd forms blowing whistles and try to physically impede. The Ice Agents senses are now being overloaded and adrenaline is kicking in. Now they are yelling at the crowd to stay back the crowd refuses so physical force and non lethal measures are employed. Some clown now wants to interfere and has a gun. Some of the agents are focus on subduing clown and hear "gun" and a gunshot, not knowing the clown has been disarmed. The result is predictable.

The violent illegal escapes. The leftist crowd wins. Leftist do not mind a death, it is part of the cause and they will make good use of it via the press and congress.

Iran's regime is conducting wholesale slaughter of protesters while the anti-ICE people cosplay revolution against "facist Trump."

This is what a real brutal fascistic regime looks like -- not mean tweets, hurt feelz and due process of law. A warehouse full of corpses with grief-shocked loved ones searching for the bodies of their dead. The potential death toll is as high a 35,000 now.

link

link

Hey John,

Remember not all that long ago that some of the same people demanding military action in Iran were the same ones demanding American First and isolationism. Course, that was when Trump was all for that too. Times have changed.

am SO HAPPY that none of the people on this thread have any power. Reading them is frightening.

No … we are happy you are NOT in any position of power, etc. … save for your one vote … Thank the gods !

Again do we wait until Iran has deployable Nukes ? Or until there is another 7 Oct …

Deployable nukes can go everywhere … even to the USA. Does anyone want to die from an islamists nuke attack ?

DO YOU ?

Does anyone want to see the medieval butchery of another 7 Oct ?

DO YOU ?

The problem with having the best military in the world is that you feel the need to use it. Everywhere. Any time. All at once.

NO once again … you don't get it …

A strong military acts as a deterrent. What is there not to understand ?

Islamists like Iran's gov't and their proxies will push the envelope until they can't …

They saw we were not going to use our firepower to max effect. As it could be. Because they can hope some of the useful dupes in the US population will vote in another 4 years, weak, ineffective, etc. leaders like Obama and Biden. They paid these islamist fanatics to pay ball … HOW DID THAT WORKOUT ?

In case you're not keeping up with current events … IT DIDN'T …

Isolationism doesn't look all that bad. Look at all the money we could save!

You say you study history ? Better read some more updated books. Isolationism doesn't work … at best it delays the inevitable. And allows your enemies to continue to build up their arsenals, planning, training, etc. Our enemies, e.g. the CCP, Russia, Cuba, North Korea, islamic fanatics see that as weakness … All our enemies have and will take advantage of that. They only respect strength and power …

I am totally amazed by someone who claims to understand history would come up with some of the most absurd, silly, even foolish comments. In light of someone who says they know history(?) …

. Look at all the money we could save! Probably spend it on useless things, though. Like grand ballrooms ant the White Hiuse, and 250' triumphal arches.

Are you purposely trying to be provocative, contrary, goading, etc. with comments like you have posted here ?

Probably spend it on useless things …

Really … you are using that as your logic or lack thereof?

You mean like illegally opening the borders to criminals of all levels. From crossing the border illegally to drug runners, human traffickers, gang members, murders, rapist, etc., etc.

How much $ was spent on those 10-15-20-25 million criminals who were allowed, invited, sanctioned, etc. to come here. Many with ill intent. And almost all taking US tax payer $ … billions of it. With little to no ROI.

Or pushing the Green New Deal which spent billions on an unrealistic, ungainly, impossible, tech, rules, laws, dogma, etc. that did 0 for the great masses of Americans.

Or again giving billions to Iran. The #1 supporter of worldwide islamic terrorism. A fanatical theocracy who wants nuclear weapons. Those billions went to supporting islamic terrorism and producing Nukes. Yeah that was a good expenditure of taxpayer money, huh?

I could go on but it is clear the last admin wasted such huge, massive amounts of taxpayer $. USD Almost 100% did not to make the US economic, lifestyle, culture, etc. any better.

Are you kidding me and the others here ? I can't believe some of the ridiculous comments you posted.

I know your response as almost always will be convoluted, ill conceived, skewed, illogical etc. As anyone with any common sense, the understanding of reality, and history.
Would not make such claims.

Actually I think you like making comments like these to pull our chains, get a rise out of the TMP denizens, etc., etc.

To what end ?

Be annoying e.g. like to claim the moon is made of green cheese. The world is flat and only 6000 years old. Dinosaur bones are a trick of the devil. Etc., etc., etc.

Or do you just like to get attention ? By being "cutting edge", display a wisdom so very of far ahead of the Riffraff, the great unwashed masses, etc. That we are all so dumb we can't understand your sublime exalted knowledge that is so far above our troglodyte brains …

Just say'n

🥱

Yeah … I expected as much … 😏

Trump promised help for protesters in Iran — it never came

link

Armand

@Tango

There's a broader issue here that's worth acknowledging.

Whether fairly or not, the U.S. has developed a reputation for encouraging local actors to challenge hostile regimes — and then calibrating its involvement once escalation costs rise. Sometimes that's prudence. Sometimes it looks like abandonment.

The Bay of Pigs, certain Syrian opposition elements, Afghan interpreters, Kurdish forces. Different contexts, different details — but the perception persists.

That doesn't mean Washington shouldn't pressure Tehran but it does mean that signaling matters. If you encourage people to stick their necks out, credibility attaches.

Great powers ultimately act on interests, not sentiment. The question isn't whether the U.S. can strike Iran. It's whether it's willing to own the downstream consequences.

Add to your list Dulles and Ike's encouragement to east Europe to challenge the Soviets, yet when Hungary revolted the US stood back.

Maybe the President should learn from Barracks shining example in Libya. 🤔

"The Obama administration officially supported the 2011 uprising against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, with President Obama declaring in March 2011 that "it is in the national interest of the United States to prevent a catastrophe," while calling for Gaddafi to step down.

Key details regarding the U.S. role include:
Political and Military Support: The Obama administration actively supported the rebels by authorizing intelligence gathering,, and later, NATO-led military action to enforce a no-fly zone to protect civilians.

Covert Aid: Reports indicated that President Obama signed a secret "finding" allowing for covert support to the rebels.

"Leading from Behind": The U.S. strategy was described by aides as "leading from behind," relying on a coalition of NATO and Arab partners to take the lead in the military intervention.

Ultimate Goal: The administration's policy was to encourage Gaddafi to step down, with Obama stating in March 2011 that Gaddafi needed to stop his troops from advancing on rebel-held towns or face "consequences".

Regret and Aftermath: President Obama later described the failure to plan for the aftermath of Gaddafi's ouster as the "worst mistake" of his presidency, noting that it led to Libya spiraling into chaos."

Yes, a shining example to follow. He could even desert US individuals on the ground, using the stellar example of Benghazi. 😏

Although Mogadishu under Clinton might be a better example of doing that.

Grattan is right, Hungary '56 is actually the cleaner example.

Radio Free Europe rhetoric suggested solidarity. The revolt happened. The Soviets crushed it. The U.S. did not intervene because nuclear escalation was not an acceptable cost. That wasn't hypocrisy — it was hierarchy of interests.

Libya is different. There, we intervened kinetically — and then failed to define or secure the political end-state. That wasn't abandonment in the Hungary sense. It was incomplete strategy.

Mogadishu? That was casualty sensitivity resetting policy overnight.

Different presidents. Different decades. Same structural constraint: The USA sometimes signals more broadly than it is willing to enforce.

That's the real lesson.

If you encourage an uprising but won't absorb escalation risk, credibility takes a dent.

If you topple a regime but don't own the aftermath, stability takes the dent.

The Iran question isn't whether this administration is Obama, Ike, or Clinton. It's whether Washington is prepared to match rhetoric with sustained political commitment — or whether this is another case of pressure without a defined end-state.

History doesn't punish intervention or restraint by default. It punishes ambiguity.; which seems to be the current admin's weakness.

And since administrative learning curves were raised — it's worth noting that every modern president has had one. Some steeper than others.

Ike learned after Hungary.
Kennedy learned after the Bay of Pigs.
Obama learned after Libya.
Clinton learned after Mogadishu.

Foreign policy is rarely mastered in campaign season.

If 47 is learning in real time, that wouldn't be unusual. The question is whether the lesson absorbed is about deterrence discipline or more about domestic optics.

I'll take one.

Kennedy learned nothing.

"1961–1963: President John F. Kennedy increased the number of U.S. military advisers from around 900 to over 16,000,, as the "domino theory" began driving increased involvement."

His VP then went full throttle.

Thanks Incavart77 …

Armand

JFK did escalate the number of advisers to over 16,000.

But advisers aren't combat divisions and he stopped short of committing large-scale U.S. ground forces.

After the Bay of Pigs, he was notably more cautious about overt war — the Missile Crisis being the clearest example.

Vietnam under JFK was incremental containment. Under LBJ, it became open-ended ground war.

You can argue JFK set the table. It's harder to argue he made the full meal.

The real lesson isn't "learned nothing." It's how gradual escalation can become momentum.

Actually we will never know what he had planned to do.

That's fair, we don't know what Kennedy would have done post-1964.

The record shows he authorized incremental escalation and also signed a conditional withdrawal plan tied to ARVN performance. Whether that would have survived events is unknowable.

Presidents often hold competing tracks such as pressure and exit; until circumstances force clarity.

What we can say is this: once U.S. ground combat divisions were committed in strength, the character of the war fundamentally changed.

Counterfactuals are interesting. The documentary record is thinner than people on either side like to pretend.

Back to Iran.

Ultimately who placed the current type of government in Iran in charge?

Answer: the people of Iran.

"The current type of government in Iran, an Islamic Republic based on the principle of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist), was established following the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The primary individual responsible for designing and implementing this system was Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who served as the first Supreme Leader from 1979 until his death in 1989. "
….
"1979 Revolution Supporters: A broad coalition—including secularists, leftists, and Islamists—united to overthrow Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. Khomeini and his allies, through organized media campaigns and grassroots religious networks, successfully positioned the clerical establishment as the only alternative to the monarchy."

So who should be responsible for overthrowing the current government?

Australia? Germany? Japan? Brazil? So why the U.S.?

No! The same people who put them into power.

🤔 Unless of course, it is advantageous for us in the long term.

I think that is why negotiations are going on. Useless? I think so, but I'm not in charge.

So when and if they fail, what is the advantage to the U.S. to intervene on the behalf of those protesting?

A new government? Possibly. But friendly to us or as bad or worse? We just don't know. 0

The acclaim of other countries in the world and their praise for bringing the fundamentalist Muslims down? 🤣😂. RIGHT!! That's going to happen!! -1

Destruction of more nuclear and missile production? Probably. +1

Stopping Iranian support for radical Islamic terrorism world wide? In the short term yes. Longterm? Who knows. Also, this only happens if the government falls. So 0

So advantage to the U.S…. A big 0.

The results are really unknown.

We don't owe it to the people of Iran. They brought their situation on themselves… just like soooo many elsewhere in the world.

Besides, what have they ever done for us??

Now Israel may take it all out of hands.

The fact that the 1979 system emerged from a revolution doesn't grant it permanent insulation from external consequences.

If regime origin were the standard, no state would ever concern itself with another's behavior unless it had personally installed the government. That's not how international politics works.

The relevant issue isn't who supported whom in 1979. It's whether current policies — enrichment levels, missile proliferation, proxy activity — materially alter the strategic environment.

States don't intervene because they "owe" anyone. They act when external behavior crosses interest thresholds.If Iran were internally repressive but externally inert, this wouldn't even be a debate.The real question isn't moral desert. It's whether allowing a hostile regime to acquire advanced capabilities increases long-term risk.

Regime change outcomes are historically unpredictable. That uncertainty is precisely why most policymakers default to deterrence and containment rather than wholesale overthrow. But "they chose it" doesn't end the discussion. Popular origin decades ago doesn't confer perpetual non-interference immunity.

Israel can degrade Iran. It cannot "take out Iran."

There's a difference between striking and eliminating.Israel has the reach and precision to hit facilities, missile sites, and IRGC assets. It has demonstrated that repeatedly. But Iran's most sensitive infrastructure is deeply buried, dispersed, and hardened. Permanently eliminating that program would require capabilities Israel does not independently possess at scale.

Even a successful strike would likely delay, not erase, the program. The knowledge base doesn't disappear. More importantly, a unilateral strike would almost certainly trigger large-scale retaliation — ballistic missiles, proxy activation, multi-front escalation. That's not hypothetical; it's built into Iran's deterrence model.

So the real calculus isn't "can Israel hit Iran?" It's whether a strike achieves more than it provokes. Degrade? Yes.Eliminate? Unlikely. Escalate? Almost certainly. That's why this isn't a simple +1 scenario.

GEN Kean RET. just was interviewed this morning on FOX … And I agree … We along with the IDF Has to strike key and critical targets in Iran ASAP. Targets should include C3, IRGC, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iraq's and Shia militias that also have crossing into Iran. To support the Ayatollah and his islamist regime.

These strikes will primarily be, TLAMs, air strikes and possibly some very low level IDF Spec Ops. Who are already there. They have been for a very long time. Provide recon, intel, support the anti-regime elements, etc.

It won't be a short op. Weeks probably. This is a critical inflexion point. The regime is as weak as it ever has been. Some of the leadership has already shipped out some of their assets/$, etc., etc.

The regime still wants nukes. They talk about nothing else when it comes to US meetings, etc. They are trying to buy time. Again we cannot trust anything the regime and their supporters say or do. They are already trying to rebuild/repair all of their nuke fractalities, etc. That was stuck by US assets last year.

Step back and look at this from a strategic level. To eliminate this regime will change the dynamics of the entire region. And very much so for the better. They maybe "devils we know". But they are so evil, so dangerous so very anti – US, Israel, 80% of their own population, etc. They are the biggest supporter of islamic terrorism in the world.

Now is the time to strike. When the enemy is at its weakest. Not just militarily but as important as economically.

Taking out this despotic islamist, cancer in that region, etc. is needed for getting that region somewhat stabilized.

Their removal from the board would affect the other terrorists they support in at region. As well as their support to Putin's imperialism.

Of course, many in Congress, DC, the media, the far left, woke progressive socialists, etc. As well as some in Europe, etc. they will all howl like banshees on Salwen. As they do for pretty much everything the current US POTUS, Admin, etc. do.

X-factor : Thanks to the Biden Admin, his party in Congress, many of the media, etc., etc. Their supported, sanctioned, assisted, allowed, etc., actions on the open border. And even in the courts. We have little idea of how many islamic terrorists, including those from Iran, CCP spies, etc., etc. are at large in the USA. Awaiting the green light to start committing acts of terror, subterfuge, cyberattacks, etc., etc.

This is one of the most critical times in modern US history since after WWII and even Vietnam. The US is being attacked with anti-US rioters from within supported by not only radical elements from the US. But by our enemies' Anti-US agents, etc. from outside …

We really have a 5th Column in the streets. Plus in media and most dangerously from members of our elected and appointed gov't officials.

In the end for now at least … turn certain places in Iran into the dark side of the moon. Kill key leadership thru out Iran. And anywhere else they are found.

We are at war … including the continuing GWoT …

Legion4 +1

Let me repeat what I wrote:

"So when and if they fail, what is the advantage to the U.S. to intervene on the behalf of those protesting?

A new government? Possibly. But friendly to us or as bad or worse? We just don't know. 0

The acclaim of other countries in the world and their praise for bringing the fundamentalist Muslims down? 🤣😂. RIGHT!! That's going to happen!! -1

Destruction of more nuclear and missile production? Probably. +1

Stopping Iranian support for radical Islamic terrorism world wide? In the short term yes. Longterm? Who knows. Also, this only happens if the government falls. So 0

So advantage to the U.S…. A big 0."

Let me correct that last line with what I actually meant.

"So advantage to for the US a net 0."

1) The only "real" advantage to us, is destruction of military and nuclear facilities and weapons. Something both Israel and the U.S. have already done once. I have no issues with doing it again.

2) overthrow the regime? A) might happen if we hit targets. B) might not happen, even if we hit targets. C) might happen and the new regime would be favorable for us D) happens and the new regime is worse than the current, or equally as bad. We cannot do it just for regime change, because the outcome, short of us putting troops on the ground, is an unknown variable. I assume no thinking individual wants our people on the ground.

3) we should not do it because Trump said: "I've got your backs". We owe the people of Iran nada! Yes, they are responsible for the government they have. The current government was not forced on them by invasion and they were very happy with it when it took over and then they took our people hostages. I say the same for the Venezuelans.

4) putting a dent in Islamic Terrorist funding, is a big "if". If the regime falls, in the short term, yes. Long term will depend on who and what takes over. It could be worse or better. If the regime manages to stay in power even with air strikes, I don't see it as getting better for short or long term.

5) World thanks? Come on!! They will hate us if we do or don't. It's Trump for God's sake! There will be no positives either way. So ignore that as any reason to do this.

So the U.S. should only act, if the government determines that advantages will work out to be in our favor. "Advantage US!"

I'm not advocating do or don't. Not my job or pay grade.

As to Israel and why I posted that. Well if you watch the news, you know their leader came over early to talk to the president. He may well be saying that Israel is ready to strike, with or without us and so will take it out of our hands as to first strike.

"#USAF United States Air Force / #RAF Royal Air Force – Middle East Activity
7 February 2026 – 1700z

A total of 112 U.S. Air Force C-17's have now either arrived or are en route to the Middle East with a further 17-18 in-progress flights, a number of Royal Air Force logistics flights from RAF Marham to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, and movement on U.S. Air Force CORONETs

NOTE: All information is obtained via public sources (ADS-B/ACARS), and this list is by no means exhaustive.

Arrived/En Route/Filed via ACARS: 112
Muwaffaq Salti Air Base: 67
Al Udeid Air Base: 13
Prince Sultan Air Base: 13
Diego Garcia NSF: 9
Ali Al Salem Air Base: 7
Isa Air Base: 3

Pending flights: 17
Biggs Army Airfield: 6
Robert Gray Army Airfield: 5
Pope Army Airfield: 2
Hickam AFB: 1
North Island NAS: 1
Anniston Army Depot: 1
Francis S. Gabreski ANGB: 1

Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, Jordan
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III 3x
#AE1242 04-4137 – REACH 215 (Anniston Army Depot)
#AE145B 06-6157 – REACH 842 (Biggs AAF)
#AE2FA5 08-8193 – REACH 860 (Biggs AAF)

REACH 860 has arrived in Jordan, with REACH 842 having diverted to Nuremberg, travelled back to Spangdahlem Air Base and now filed for Jordan too. This makes it 11 flights from Biggs AAF to arrive in Jordan since the 4th February.

The first flight from Anniston Army Depot, REACH 215, has also arrived in Jordan.

RAF Akrotiri, Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III 1x
#43C04E ZZ175 – ASCOT 6256

Airbus Atlas C.1 1x
#43C5EA ZM416 – ASCOT 4278

Two Royal Air Force logistics flights, ASCOT 6256 and ASCOT 4278 have arrived in Cyprus from RAF Marham. Six F-35B's from Marham deployed to Akrotiri yesterday – we will likely see a few more of these logistics flights.

U.S. Army Airfield Flights
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III 7x
#AE1177 02-1105 – REACH 894 (Biggs AAF)
#AE2FA2 08-8190 – REACH 125 (Biggs AAF)
#AE10BC 01-0193 – REACH 199 (Biggs AAF)
#AE2FA8 08-8196 – REACH 227 (Biggs AAF)
#AE1239 04-4129 – REACH 261 (Biggs AAF)
#AE123D 04-4132 – REACH 468 (Pope AAF)
#AE146E 07-7176 – REACH 857 (Robert Gray AAF)

Lockheed C-5 Super Galaxy 1x
#AE055E 85-0001 – REACH 1801 (Robert Gray AAF)

Eight new flights from U.S. Army Airfields have either filed for their airfields, or begun their journey to the Middle East. The total number of flights from Biggs AAF is now at least 17, and from Robert Gray AAF at least 39.

REACH 1801 is the 12th C-5M Super Galaxy to take part in this airflift.

Diversions
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III 1x
#AE49C6 09-9210 – REACH 049 (Pope AAF)

Lockheed C-5 Super Galaxy 2x
#AE057D 87-0032 – REACH 1830 (Robert Gray AAF)
#AE0564 85-0007 – REACH 8055 (Robert Gray AAF)

I've had messages today about a number of aircraft that seemingly all turned round within a short time of one another:
- REACH 049 from McGuire to Pope AAF turned around at 0517z
- REACH 1830 from Dover, which didn't file a plan via ACARS, turned around at 0635z
- REACH 8055 from Ramstein to Prince Sultan Air Base turned around at 0651z

It's likely a coincidence, but as I don't have any additional information I don't want to speculate any further.

CORONET East 005
Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker 2x
#AE065A 59-1486 – BLUE 82 (Fairchild AFB)
#AE0686 60-0328 – BLUE 72 (Fairchild AFB)

Two KC-135s from Fairchild Air Force Base have positioned to Moron Air Base in Spain on a Coronet East 005 tasking. This code was last used in mid-january in what was thought to be a mission to drag 12x "MO" F-15E's home from Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.

They were replaced by "SJ" F-15E's, but rumours that these jets had issues was reported to be the reason for the "MO"s extended stay. These two tanker movements look as if the "MO" F-15E's will be returning to Mountain Home Air Force Base within the next few days, and may go via Moron or Lajes rather than RAF Lakenheath as they had originally planned to in January."