"If Operation Midnight Hammer" Topic

completely obliterated the Iran nuclear programme, why does the usa want a new Nuclear Deal (like Obama's I guess) with Iran?

They have no Nuclear capability – unless Trump & Hegseth lied, which can't be true – so why the military build-up to try and force a deal?

One reason is the Uranium which was already refined still remains. It may be buried (or not), but as long as there is a will to weaponize it they have the materials.

If your enemy says their religion demands that you have no right to live and that you must be destroyed it's best to take them at their word and act accordingly.

The talk about Iran's current missile capacity and their ability to strike "within days" is exaggerated according to the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The current situation sounds just like the Dems or Reagan trying to deal with the mullahs. I don't care how much military leverage you send, you don't cut deals with these guys – or Hezbollah, or the Taliban, etc. Apparently, somebody in the WH thinks they will bend to our will. They will honor no deal, ignore terms that don't suit them, stall, lie and hide their intentions. So you send Kushner? After all the talk about the Dems and talks?

The original report from Trump left no doubt that we clobbered Iran last time. The Kushner meetings with say otherwise. And expending the cost/wear and tear on the men and ships. Reverse engineering this in the usual fashion, its all part of a brilliant plan.

"Travel Advisory Update: Authorized Departure of Non-Emergency U.S. Government Personnel and Family Members of Personnel from U.S. Mission Israel."

🤔

Maybe for Iran, it will be as the end of the world:

"no one knows the exact day or hour of the end of the world, not even the angels or Jesus, but only God the Father"

😏

Iran's enriched uranium went where Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction went. 🙄

Seems many of our allies in the ME don't want a war. Why?

"Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi is set to meet with Vice President JD Vance and senior U.S. officials in Washington on Friday for a previously undisclosed round of discussions aimed at preventing a military confrontation with Iran, MS Now reported Thursday night.

The meeting follows a session in Geneva on Thursday between Al Busaidi and special envoy Steve Witkoff, along with Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law. Al Busaidi has recently played a key mediating role in indirect negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, facilitating the exchange of communications between the two governments.

The talks coincide with Trump's increasingly forceful warnings toward Iran, including threats of military action if diplomacy breaks down. The president's decision not to seek congressional approval for potential strikes has drawn sharp criticism from Democrats, amid concerns that his administration is steering the country toward open conflict.

Vance pushed back on those concerns Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post, insisting that the United States was not headed for a prolonged conflict with Iran. "The idea that we're going to be in a Middle Eastern war for years with no end in sight; there is no chance that will happen," he said while speaking aboard Air Force Two, despite growing alarm from Pentagon leaders and lawmakers who warn that extended operations could compromise U.S. military preparedness."

"Secretary of State Marco Rubio will travel to Israel early next week to discuss Iran and other regional issues, the State Department said.

The announcement of Rubio's visit comes amid growing concern that the United States will launch attacks on Iran.

MS Now reported Friday that Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi will meet Friday with Vice President JD Vance and other American officials in Washington for "previously unreported talks in an effort to stave off war with Iran.""

The Saudis have given super big bucks to Kushner, who knows who else… They are the deciders.

"The Pentagon just activated its first kamikaze drone unit, Task Force Scorpion, ready to strike if Trump orders action against Iran.

These aren't your dad's drones. One-way, $35 USDk each, autonomous, and built to swarm soft targets like missile sites and roads. Basically "cheap, disposable, and lethal."

It's a pivot from expensive Reapers to kamikaze drones inspired by Iran's Shahed-136. The U.S. is catching up fast, and if Iran thought small-scale drone attacks were scary before… they haven't seen anything yet.

Source: Bloomberg"

"Eleven U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor stealth fighters have arrived at Israel's Ovda Air Base in the country's south, Fox News reported, marking the first-ever operational deployment of American combat aircraft to Israel. The move comes amid a broader U.S. military buildup in the region not seen at this scale in years and as concerns grow over Iran's nuclear program and missile capabilities.

For American decision-makers, the significance is straightforward: The F-22 changes the military equation.

"The F-22 is indeed the most air-to-air capable fighter in the world; nothing comes close to it in the air-to-air role," said retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Guastella, former deputy chief of staff for operations at U.S. Air Force headquarters. During a May 26 webinar hosted by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), he described its presence as "a very clear deterrent signal" that allows the United States to "negotiate with strength.""

OVI +1

I think the POTUS/Admin know how the theocratic islamist gov't does business. They know the Ayatollah and his cronies are basically trying to buy time. Hoping they can bluff, lie, obfuscate, etc. long enough to hope that the next POTUS will be more like e.g. Biden or Obama. They will keep trying to make nukes. And maybe the next POTUS will give them $. USD Lots and lots of it. It worked twice so far.

Everyone in this admin, the Pentagon, etc. has no doubt that you can't trust the Ayatollah and his minions. It is a certainty they want deployable nukes. And their BFFs, e.g. Russia, China, North Korea and probably a few others are assisting then on their "holy quest".

The POTUS, et al. is waiting until all the US assets needed were in place in the area. Then even if the Ayatollah and his crew say "Uncle"! The US still knows they can't be trusted. They are killing their own people. And no matter what they … they want deployable nukes.

This islamist regime is faltering. They could easily fall, and replaced with a new less islamists more secular gov't.

I believe the POTUS was playing their game. And let them think their delaying action may just be working. Now that the board is set. US assets could strike at any time. Surgically removing key targets of personnel, equipment, C3 and if need be the Ayatollah and his crew.

Then with a new much less militant islamist gov't. Closer to 0 as possible. Then the real deal making can occur …

The Iranian regime has and will continue to insist they have no desire for a nuclear weapon and will happily swear that in any format desired. What they are, at the moment, refusing to do is give up enriching uranium. The original agreement limited them to a very low level of enrichment that was good enough for fuel but not close to bomb grade. While the agreement was in force both US Intelligence and the IAEA agreed was they were honoring that agreement but once it was abrogated, best estimates are that they are very close to if not already in possession of enough highly enriched uranium for multiple devices. Any successful agreement has to impound that material.

Short of actual on the ground inspection with full access and confiscation of centrifuges, the ability to permanently destroy their enrichment program is likely to be impossible. That capability was not obliterated but simply badly damaged. If the Iranians disperse and persevere in hardened small scattered locations, they will rebuild again. An agreement has to involve unfettered inspections and the impoundment of the existing highly enriched uranium.

Under no circumstances can I see the Iranians agreeing to eliminating their ballistic missiles although they might accept a range limitation but, that is almost impossible to verify and even easier to cheat.

Color me skeptical. "Beware of fundamentalist Muslims bearing Uranium". 😏

CBS

"NEWS: Iran has agreed to give up its stockpile of enriched material – zero accumulation – & allow for full verification by the IAEA of its nuclear program according to US-Iran talks mediator, Oman's foreign minister Badr al Busaidi."

And it's now on.

Operation Epic Fury

Subject: Mario Nawfal on X: "🚨🇮🇷 More footage of the reported strike on fmr President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's home. t.co/Gc859mVVZd / X


link

Subject: Israeli strikes target Khamenei, Pezeshkian as Netanyahu says Israel, US intend to ‘remove existential threat' posed by Iran | The Times of Israel


link

Now let's see how the Iranian people use this opportunity.

Of course this could be a stick, to show the regime how easily the US and Isreal can hit them, so come to the table and be prepared to actually give up the nuke development.

But really I think that time has passed.

So many people (both conservatives and leftists) are so fixated on Trump that we tend to forget that Iran has been the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world and that the eradication of this regime will save countless lives. I'm not sure why the UK isn't backing the U.S. but it really doesn't matter, now does it?

Choctaw,

Correct

I'll add: Iran has attacked US assets or citizens 44 times since the original revolution.

The allies had their feelings hurt by Trump (tariffs, NATO % increase, belittling of their overall contributions and real importance. Trump is not tactful and he talks meanly 😉). Also most of them are run by globalists liberals.

"Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡
@shanaka86
They did not bomb Iran. They waited for Iran's entire leadership to sit down in the same room and then they bombed Iran.

Months of intelligence. Thousands of hours of surveillance and signal intercepts. One variable: the moment the Supreme Leader, the President, and senior military command gathered in a single location at the same time.

That moment was 8:15 this morning. Daylight. Every previous Israeli strike on Iran came at night. June 2025 launched in darkness. October 2024 after midnight. Iran's entire air defense doctrine is built around the assumption that Israel attacks in the dark. Israel attacked in broad daylight because the target was not infrastructure. The target was a meeting.

Reuters confirms strikes targeted Khamenei and Pezeshkian. CNN confirms months of joint US-Israeli planning. Israeli officials confirmed the strike hit the location where Iran's top officials were gathered. Whether Khamenei was moved before the strike or extracted after is the most consequential unknown on the planet right now. If before, someone inside Tehran's inner circle told Jerusalem when and where the meeting would happen. If after, the strikes hit the room and he survived. Both scenarios are catastrophic for the regime.

Because Iran's leadership now knows three things. Israel knew where they were meeting. Israel knew when they were meeting. Israel knew who would be in the room. And everything we watched over the past month, the F-22s at Ovda, the tankers at Ben Gurion, Al Udeid emptied to zero, 270 transport flights, all of it was the delivery architecture for one precision strike on one gathering.

Every future meeting of Iran's senior leadership now carries one question: does Israel know about this one too.

This is not a military operation. This is the destruction of institutional trust inside a regime. Every general who sits with Khamenei tomorrow will wonder who told Jerusalem about today. Every IRGC commander who receives a meeting summons will calculate whether attendance is duty or a death sentence. Every secure facility in Tehran has been proven insecure.

In June 2025 Israel killed 30 generals in the opening minutes. That was brute force across dispersed targets. This was a scalpel. One meeting. One moment. Months of patience.

Iran fired missiles at six countries in retaliation. Most intercepted. One civilian dead from debris in Abu Dhabi. Saudi Arabia responded by pledging all its capabilities against Iran. The Gulf coalition that did not exist yesterday exists today because Tehran built it by attacking everyone simultaneously.

Israel traded one morning of precision strikes for the permanent destruction of Iran's command cohesion.

That is not a battle. That is checkmate disguised as a first move."

If true, 👍👍👍👍

"Israel's N12 News is reporting that the Israeli government believes that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is dead.

A translated version of an N12 update from Saturday morning citing a senior Israeli official suggests that the Israelis have assessed that Khamenei is "no longer with us" after the United States and Israel launched a joint operation against the Iranian regime overnight."

I think it is far too early to be certain of almost anything. Getting Khamenei is far more consequential than their President but how resilient and disaster planned their structure is probably determines whether a competent succession plan exists. The IRGC and Basji command structure are the big sources for repression and their elimination would be key in giving an opposition a chance to succeed.

I am curious as to how the US and Israel define victory. Do we need a new government or is X% damage enough to claim victory?

McKinstry

There is much out on the web answering much of this. Check the other thread in TMP for some I've posted, as well as those killed so far, according to multiple sources.

Here is some, but not all:

PST

"Reported Military Successes (February 28, 2026)

Destruction of Nuclear Infrastructure: U.S. B-2 stealth bombers reportedly "totally obliterated" or severely damaged key nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

Neutralization of Air Defenses: The Israeli Air Force (IAF) conducted its largest strike in history, using approximately 200 fighter jets to target Iran's missile arrays and air defense systems in western and central Iran.

Broad Target Acquisition: The IDF reported hitting "hundreds of military targets," including surface-to-surface missile launchers and anti-aircraft batteries.

Successful Interceptions: Regional allies, including Qatar, Kuwait, and the UAE, reported successfully repelling waves of retaliatory Iranian missile and drone strikes targeting their territories and U.S. bases.

Strategic Precision: Drone strikes reportedly hit a headquarters of the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah militia in Iraq, killing at least two members.
BBC
BBC
+7

Strategic Impact
Iranian Leadership: Unconfirmed reports suggest Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei may have been killed or incapacitated during the strikes."

….

"High-Profile Leaders Reported Killed

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: Numerous Israeli and U.S. sources report that Iran's Supreme Leader was killed when his compound in Tehran was struck and "reduced to rubble". While Iranian state media initially claimed he was safe, he has not appeared in public since the strikes began.

Major General Mohammad Pakpour: The Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is believed to have been killed in the initial wave of strikes.

Amir Nasirzadeh: Iran's Minister of Defense was reportedly killed alongside other top military officials.

Ali Shamkhani: A senior adviser to the Supreme Leader and former Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council was confirmed dead by Iran International.

General Mohammad Bagheri: The Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces was reportedly targeted and killed in the strikes on Tehran.
ایران اینترنشنال
ایران اینترنشنال
+11

Intelligence and Military Commanders

Reports from The Jerusalem Post and other outlets indicate that at least four senior intelligence officials were killed:
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
+2

Javad Pourhossein: Head of the foreign intelligence division.
Mohammad-Reza Bajestani: Chief of the security branch.

Ali Kheirandish: Director of counterterrorism operations.

Saeed Ehya Hamidi: Senior adviser on the war portfolio with Israel.

Other Targeted Individuals

Mojtaba Khamenei: The Supreme Leader's son and a potential successor was reportedly targeted, with some indications he may have also been killed.

President Masoud Pezeshkian: His status remains unconfirmed, though he was reportedly a target during the strikes. "

OVI +1

Choctaw +1

I would still like to hear how we define a victory sufficient to stand down. Do we need a regime change or is destroying x amount of people, capability or war making infrastructure the goal? I have a son somewhere there and would like to know if there is a clear endgame. I did a tour 55 years ago and another son that did an Afghan deployment, neither of us regret serving but, it was clear to both of us that nobody could define what constituted a win and we were just treading water.

No one in the US Executive seems ready to tell us about anything other than military success. The complexities of the aftermath and what they plan to do about it. We are now on a path of national building on a large scale. We know the history of doing this. Or some do, at least.

Tort check the current TMP link on the attack.

You sound like you are looking for bad news. Why?

There are loads of information on the attacks on the web. I've posted many in the other post.

There are civilian deaths of some of our Arab allies. Unlike the U.S. and Israel, who try to restrict civilian casualties, the Iranians attack indiscriminately. I'm sure some Iranian civilians are dead as well, by our forces and their own. Heard they attacked one of their own oil tankers today.

But there are many positives. Even reported by Arab and Iranian sources. Remember, a lot of Iranian civilians are supporting this and are supplying information as well.

This country has attacked the U.S. and our allies since the Revolution in the 70's. They are the #1 supporter and supplier of Islamic terrorism worldwide. They have attacked us directly or indirectly 44 times since the Revolution. This should have been done long before, by presidents of both parties. Worse, we should never have tried to appease them with money.

But if one is looking for negatives, I'm sure you can find some here. I've been reading this too.

Subject: Live – Heavy bombing rocks Tehran a day after Khamenei killed as conflict widens | Iran International


link

OVI +1

Tort -1

Not looking for bad news, just worried about the consequences. I am as glad as anyone to see the mullahs get theirs. But this is the ME, it is never stable, it cannot be made so, IMO. Every American bomb recruits new crazies to replace the old ones.

I have long supported covert actions against the mullahs via US/israeli specialists. This should have been happening long ago. This war, after the obliteration of Irans nuclear program last year, makes me wonder why go to war now? War is easier than peace, especially in the ME. It is what is. But when everything is rubble, what then? I don't mean the vague "they"need to step up. "They" better have a plan…

Case in point

"….for certain hardline Shiite ideologues, including in the U.S., this is not an ending but a prophetic showdown that will usher in the arrival of the "Mahdi," a messiah, according to Islamic eschatology, or the theology of end times.

In this prophecy, Mahdi will emerge to battle Dajjal, the Islamic equivalent of the Antichrist, in a final battle of Armageddon. For many of these ideologues, President Donald Trump is Dajjal.

At a recent Friday sermon at a local Shiite mosque in northern Virginia, an imam closed prayer with an earnest plea, before war broke out in Iran: "May Allah destroy all the nonbelievers – or kafiroon or munafiqoon," he said, using Arabic words that refer to "nonbelievers" and "hypocrites."

He asked for this victory "before the arrival of Imam Mahdi.""

"…observed the sermon and also witnessed a special table of honor in the middle of the mosque's main prayer hall, featuring framed photos of Khamenei embracing Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrullah, also killed by Israel for orchestrating terrorist attacks."

…..

You cannot press a poisonous scorpion to your bosom and not expect it to sting.

I agree! Stirring up the whole nest just drives them crazier….

Probably nothing we do will win the peace there. Fanatics dont change.

The Iman of Northern Virginia es now in jail…?

Armand

Heard someone on the radio, a conservative show, say how what the US is doing now will end terrorism. I highly doubt that is going to happen. Terrorism is like a cancer that just grows and grows and keeps coming back. This war may do a lot of good, I don't know, but end terrorism. Nope.

Terrorism on the grand scale needs money. This should dry up a significant source of that money.

This will degrade Iran and their proxies ability to indulge in terror but as ISIS, Al Quaeda, Boko Haram and Al Shabab among others have demonstrated, angry cretins with a grudge and the cloak of religion are not an endangered species. Whatever the outcome, the threat may change somewhat but it isn't going away.

OVI +1

McK +1

We all have heard the concept that killing terrorists only breeds more. And there is something to be said about that. But when you can't talk to them as they are radicalized islamic fundamentalists who are bent on killing all infidels.

So short of the second coming to convince them. Terminating with extreme prejudice at every opportunity. They have more to replace the ones we kill … well you just keep killing those replacements, etc. Repeat … until there is a major change in their beliefs, perceptions, etc. However, unlikely …

Terrorism is like a cancer that just grows and grows and keeps coming back.

Bottom line – protect your people from such threats. If continuously killing them will save our lives. So be it … Just keep the munitions factories churning 2407 …

This war may do a lot of good, I don't know, but end terrorism. Nope.

It will significantly mitigate the islamist threat in the region and the West.

Remember AQ, ISIS, etc. attacking people in the US, Europe, etc. ? Don't hear too much about those attacks in many places currently. Certainly, a very rare loner like we just saw in Austin, TX. But if one looks at the past … islamists attacks have been reduced to almost being statically insignificant. Of course, one is too much … But until we can read minds. We just have to be vigilant, aware, proactive, etc.

Why is that ? Why have the frequency of terrorist attacks have been so drastically reduced ? We know what to expect now. We have more situational awareness, etc. IMO and others one critical move was we took the fight to them. And we are as relentless as they are. You don't see AQ or ISIS, etc. in the headlines that much anymore. Both have taken major losses at the hands of the infidels[us]. There are scattered remains of them. We still take out one or two of their leaders, etc. on occasion. In Syria, Iraq, etc. They operate in Africa in some numbers. Which we attrite some of them by helping the local gov'ts there. Sometimes in the form of drones or airstrikes …

Short answer IMO – keep up the fire … They keep showing up … we have a lot of ammo and can make more.

Probably nothing we do will win the peace there. Fanatics dont change.

Yes that is why you just keep killing them off. To protect your own people. No matter no long it goes on. This is clash of cultures, societies, lifestyles, etc. This will take time … and a lot of deaths. Mostly theirs … I won't shed any tears…

I would still like to hear how we define a victory sufficient to stand down.

Maybe it is more about OPSEC. As we see with the "militants" in Congress and the media the chance of a leak, etc. has increased.

My few posts have been more about the peace than the war. I assumed that underneath the bombastic WH tone, we really did clobber the nuke program last year. So that was over, or maybe it wasn't as great a result as we were told, so we're have gone back.

Iran's fanatic leaders have been causing major grief since Beirut, plenty of reasons to even the score with these outlaws. But why go to full on war right now if the nuke threat was over? Possible political reasons for sure for the two leaders. There is more to this than meets the eye. But whatever, it's done and we go for it.

Once the trigger is pulled, the military is no longer looming as leverage…it's committed to winning. Given the endless strife in this region going back centuries, peace is not gonna last, even if we reach an end to combat operations. We will not be getting a transparent accounting. Who will be better off? I hope we will be safer, and the Iranians free from tyranny, and can start anew with whatever is left. But we will be juggling plenty of spin from the politicos.

My concern is that we carry a big stick, but now we keep using it with a lot of loud talk. We are switching from being a deterrent to something else. The late 19th century vibe is there for me. I could be wrong. I have hated the Iranian led terrorists since 1983. But I am not feeling entirely good about the war. Not even sure why.

I also not thrilled that we seemed to have done this because Israel pushed us into this.

Grattan you must have missed my post from yesterday in the other TMP thread.
It is the latest talking point on the MSM news. Various wording of the same phrase.

Somewhat like the old "Trump is a puppet of Putin's".

"35thOVI Supporting Member of TMP 02 Mar 2026 2:27 p.m. PST

SB, Legion, Stone and some others, I think this is the liberal spin.
Thought I jump their posts.

"We did not want to do this now. Israel wanted to do this. It wasn't our decision. Israel was going to do this without us. Trump is jumping to Netanyahu of Israel's tune".

Various versions of those words."

35thOVI +1

I find it quite amusing that the Western Left and Putin now speak with one voice on Iran and the death of Khamenei…

But I am not feeling entirely good about the war. Not even sure why.

All you have to do is realize what havoc could be caused if Iran's islamists gov't actually had deployable nukes. What a tragedy …

I also not thrilled that we seemed to have done this because Israel pushed us into this.

That has been repeatedly said to be false. And from everything I know it is …

Again no one in their right mind has to be pushed into a war to stop militant islam from getting nukes.

The concern of these religious fanatics getting nukes should override everything else …

SB, Legion I do find it extremely bewildering that most of the world and many on TMP are so concerned about what we did the first time we hit Iran, our grabbing the drug lord of Venezuela and sinking drug runner boats, the fantasy takeovers of Greenland, Canada and Panama and now this…….. but are amazingly silent about Pakistan vs Afghanistan and Nigeria (which only we have made any attempt to rectify). They even seem to have forgotten about the Ukraine. I've seen nearly nothing about those 3 in the MSM.

If any country deserves what is going on, it's Iran. Should have been done when they took our embassy, and many times since.

Ok I'm not really bewildered, I think the real reason is very obvious. 😏

Maybe this will help. I had read this from multiple sources. An anonymous Arab, who said he was in negotiations denied this. But I rarely believe "anonymous"Arabs.

"President Donald Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, said Monday on Fox News that Iranian negotiators bragged to him that Iran had enough enriched uranium to make nearly a dozen nuclear bombs.

The account fits a key piece of the administration's evolving rationale for joining with Israel to preemptively strike Iran: Trump himself has said he believes the Iranian regime was close to having nuclear weapons, as well as missiles capable of carrying them to the United States.

"In that first meeting, both the Iranian negotiators said to us directly, with no shame, that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60%," Witkoff said in the Fox interview, referring to the uranium's level of enrichment. "And they're aware that that could make 11 nuclear bombs, and that was the beginning of their negotiating stance."

"They were proud of it," Witkoff added. "They were proud that they had evaded all sorts of oversight protocols to get to a place where they could deliver 11 nuclear bombs.""

No?

Ok how about this:

"Iran has maintained significant stocks of 60% enriched uranium, with estimates suggesting they could produce enough 90% weapons-grade material for multiple nuclear bombs within a matter of days or weeks if they chose to do so. Reports indicate that Iran's "breakout time" has decreased significantly, allowing for rapid enrichment.
Iran Watch
Iran Watch
+2

Stockpile Capabilities: As of mid-2023, Iran possessed over 114 kg of 60% enriched uranium, with some reports indicating potential enrichment levels reaching up to 83.7% or 84%.

Weaponization Time: Analysts have stated that Iran could use its 60% stocks to produce enough 90% enriched uranium (weapons-grade) for one nuclear weapon in as few as 12 days.

Advanced Centrifuges: Iran has continued to use advanced, fast-enriching centrifuges, shortening the time needed to reach weapons-grade levels.

Negotiation Context: Despite ongoing negotiations, Iran has continued to increase its uranium enrichment levels and stockpile, leading to international concerns about its "breakout" capability.

Previous Limitations: Before 2015, Iran's stockpile was much larger, but the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) aimed to reduce this to limit breakout capability."

They have long range missiles that can currently hit Northern Europe, and I'm sure NK would sell them better.

But nukes or not, Iran has done enough just to us, to deserve this for a long long time.

Okay, so last year's bombing did not do the trick despite the adamant assurances and bravado, I'll assume. I don't trust this admin anymore than the last one to level with us. I think most everyone gets the need to stop the nukes – and you cannot deal with their people. Between our special forces and Israel's could we not have done the regime change at some point?

Now we have loss of American lives. Iranian missiles eat up air defenses. We are taking some hits, dropping tons of bombs, missiles. Even a short war could take up 20% of the defense budget. Attrition. I guess its the war budget, defense is a woke word.

So victory is what? Regime change goes at a snails pace. The invading forces often need to remain in place for stability.
Do we ever learn? Or is this all planned out?

Tort regime change was not listed as an objective for our forces. Check the other thread, they are there (3 of them). Regime change is up to the Iranian people. We may supply arms. We may degrade the Republican Guard. We may bribe the Kurds to come in and help. Maybe change is Israel's goal and they may do something. Maybe Iran will off their Arab neighbors and they will come in and do it.

Maybe as this proceeds the President will change his mind.

But 3 goals for us were stated. The President even said today, it's possible a regime could take over equally as bad.

I have heard the MSM and Democrats now trying to say regime change is the primary reason now. Why? Well so they can claim failure if it does not happen. Success is NOT an option.

Remember all the "now he has to change the regime in Venezuela. We will be in there forever. Boots on the Ground!!!"

What happened? He let the vp takeover. She works with him and he's content.

35th, when the guys running the country are killed or made prisoner its regime change. We still have military in and around Venezuela. Letting the vp takeover is regime change, but the reality is that the "new" Venezuelan leaders are held responsible for maintaining US interests there under US military presence. I don't see way around this reality. Cuba may be next.

As to Venezuela. Yes as long as she does what was requested of the previous leader, who refused to obviously, she will be there. Unless of course her people or military decide to change things.

As to Iran, go to the other thread.