"Iran as limited war" Topic

long back and forth with GROK about not destroying oil fields nor electrical grid. There is even a LINCOLN-TRUMP comparison for those so inclined to view with concern:

link

Here is probably the key paragraph:

That is the useful distinction for Iran. A civil war of restoration and a foreign war of unconditional surrender pull in opposite directions. The Iran campaign sits awkwardly between them. The public threats sound like 1945. The pattern of strikes sounds more like a coercive negotiation: military targets hit, export terminals mostly spared, the grid damaged and then held out as the next rung, a financial blockade preferred to a blackout. That mix only makes sense if the hoped-for ending is a deal, or a different government in the same country, rather than the destruction of the country as a going concern. It is not Lincoln's constitutional caution. There is no clause protecting the Iranian grid. It is the strategic half of his problem: how hard you can make war on a people you intend, afterward, to live with.

Dealing with terrorist fanatics leaders in a jihad is what sets this apart. They have to go, and conventional attacks don't work.
. I have said many times my opinion that you have to attack these guys from within. They do not negotiate, they will die before honoring any agreement. There is no deal, nada, period. You go in to win with a coordinated all out take down of the Guard and mullahs, foment and support insurrection, covert tactical support, hearts and minds civilian support. Wrecking the country does not matter to the mullahs. And their proxies can continue their jihad around the world in the meantime.

Yes. Regime change or we lose. I pray daily that Trump understands that. He must restrain his deal maker impulse where the regime is concerned.

And exactly how is he going to do that? He tried it and it failed. Do you want him to send in ground troops? So let us get more realistic. There is virtually no way you are going to take the regime out unless you want him to start dropping nukes. They were all in one place and it didn't work. They wil be spread out now.

And when the money runs out? as is coming very soon

And we do not know what else in in p[rocess

If this was the ACW we wouldn't even be out of 1861

Or WWII, it would be early 1942

Ultimately only the Iranian people can change the regime. They need weapons and some space. The regime forces number in the millions and must realize they are sitting on top of a volcano. The ordinary people must have huge reservoirs of hate built up, and the regime supporters face retribution.

But the regime is going bankrupt, literally, and that very quickly. Of course the people with the guns will be the last to suffer as the economy disintegrates. We are likely to see a "preference cascade" in which the regime stands until suddenly it doesn't anymore.

My own hope is that plans are afoot to liberate a small section of Iran and use it as a base to expand. Our air power could isolate a section and prevent the regime from crushing a rebellion. These things take time. I expect Mossad knows what it is doing , and maybe even the CIA does.

• According to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), clashes have escalated between Iranian regime security forces and anti-regime fighters, particularly in southeastern provinces like Sistan and Baluchestan.
• Recent violence includes armed ambushes and checkpoint attacks around Zahedan and Rasak, resulting in casualties among both the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and local security personnel.
• State-backed internal security measures are intensifying alongside the external conflict with the U.S. and Israel, including a massive civil mobilization campaign announced by Iran's Interior Ministry.
• Reports indicate that the regime is facing severe internal strain, including reports of military resource challenges and lowering the minimum age for war-related support roles.

Also

Saudi Arabia is reportedly preparing to support a Yemeni government offensive to recapture territory on the southern Red Sea coastal plain from the Houthis. Yemeni government forces likely have the capacity to successfully execute such an offensive, assuming the objectives are limited.

Saudi allies Pakistan and Turkey are providing defensive and offensive military support to Saudi Arabia and the Yemeni government. Pakistani and Turkish military support to Saudi Arabia reflects increasing military cooperation between the three countries under the "Mecca Pact," a mutual defense treaty which the countries signed on August 7.

Saudi and Yemeni government-aligned forces are attempting to disrupt Houthi advances in southwestern Yemen by conducting airstrikes targeting Houthi front-line positions, reinforcements, supply centers, and command and control (C2).

" Iran's currency slides past 2.7 million rials per dollar"

" Euro tops 3 million rials as Iran's currency hits fresh record lows
Oct 3, 2026, 10:56 GMT+1"

Even the NYT had to admit that oil is flowing at, at least 60% of pre war levels through the straits. Other sources like CNN have admitted 80%. I'm sure the NYT will come around after the November elections. 😏

But Iran is like Charlie Sheen used to say during his alcohol and drug induced fall: "Winning!" 😏

Shades of the Nazis trying to hide their acts in 45?

Iran International 12 hours ago

One of the last watchtowers at Iran's Rajaei Shahr (Gohardasht) prison was demolished Saturday, as authorities dismantle a site of mass political executions despite longstanding warnings that its destruction could erase evidence of crimes against humanity.

The prison in Karaj in western Tehran was one of the sites of the 1988 massacre of political prisoners. The exact nationwide toll remains unknown amid official secrecy, but rights groups estimate that around 5,000 people were executed across Iran.

Gohardasht was central to the prosecution of Hamid Nouri, a former Iranian prison official sentenced to life imprisonment by a Swedish court in 2022 for war crimes and murder over his role in the executions there. His conviction was upheld on appeal, but Sweden released him in June 2024 in a prisoner exchange with Iran.

Authorities have presented the prison's redevelopment as a project to provide cultural facilities, university space and parks following its closure in 2023.

Warnings over destruction of evidence

When the prison closed in August 2023, the Norway-based Iran Human Rights organization called for urgent action to prevent its demolition, warning that evidence of atrocities could be lost before the full scope of the crimes was established.

"Gohardasht Prison is the place where crimes against humanity were committed by those who currently hold key positions in the Islamic Republic," its director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, said at the time.

"We still don't know the full scope of those crimes and destroying the evidence is without doubt one of the key motivations behind its closure."

The organization described the closure as part of a systematic effort to erase traces of state crimes. Its warning came after Nouri's conviction, while his appeal was still pending.

Executions at Rajaei Shahr continued long after the 1980s. Iran Human Rights said at least 530 people were executed there on murder charges alone between 2015 and 2022.

The group also cited reported efforts to destroy or alter Khavaran cemetery in southeastern Tehran, where victims of the 1988 massacre were buried in unmarked mass graves. Victims' families had appealed to the UN human rights chief to prevent destruction or interference at the cemetery, it said.

Authorities promise parks and cultural facilities

A Saturday report by Iran's state-linked Student News Network described the falling watchtower as the end of a familiar urban landmark. It did not address the prison's role in the 1988 massacre or the warnings about preserving evidence.

Officials have justified the closure by citing a law requiring prisons to move outside cities, alongside complaints about prison-related traffic and other neighborhood problems.

Judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei ordered the closure in April 2023. The prison was emptied by August that year, with prisoners transferred to Ghezel Hesar, according to the state media account.

Demolition of the perimeter walls began in the final month of the Iranian year ending in March 2026 and intensified in September, the report said. The head of Iran's prisons organization described their removal as necessary to settle the land's future and enable new projects.

Authorities say the roughly 60-hectare site will include green space, a women's park, a cultural center, an auditorium and an art gallery. They have also pledged to retain the main prison building for university and cultural uses.

Well, the people have risen up two or three tims now and gotten slaughtered. I highly doubt they are going to try it again anytime soon. Trump has shown he is perfectly okay with leaving dictators in place as long as he gets what he wants. So, even if Iran does give up, I doubt you are going to see any regime change.

Grattan

Well, the people have risen up two or three tims now and gotten slaughtered. I highly doubt they are going to try it again anytime soon. Trump has shown he is perfectly okay with leaving dictators in place as long as he gets what he wants. So, even if Iran does give up, I doubt you are going to see any regime change.

1) there is conflict going on and the guard are losing troops. There is also unrest in multiple areas. The media as a whole is not reporting it. It's hard for the information to get out due to suppression by Iran. But sources like Iran International and sources in the ME are reporting it. Is it large, we have no real idea. But it is happening. Someone is supplying arms, at least in some provinces.

2) since when should the US NOT do what is in OUR best interest ? Are we supposed to be different than every other country. Most presidents have tried to do what is best for the U.S. Who would want one who did not?!

3) left dictators in place?? Did not Joe skedaddle from Afghanistan leaving dictators in place? Did not Jimmy Carter cut support in Iran in the first place and leave dictators in charge?

Let's look just recently;

However, looking at the historical record of U.S. foreign policy—particularly during the Cold War—several administrations explicitly prioritized anti-communist stability or strategic alignment over the promotion of democracy. Prominent examples of U.S. presidents associated with supporting or maintaining authoritarian leaders include:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: Maintained diplomatic and financial ties with several Latin American dictators to secure regional stability during World War II. For instance, his administration supported Anastasio Somoza García in Nicaragua and Rafael Trujillo in the Dominican Republic. Roosevelt is famously (though apocryphally) quoted as saying of Somoza, "He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."

Harry S. Truman: Formulated the Truman Doctrine, which focused on containing Soviet expansion. Under this framework, the U.S. provided substantial military and economic aid to the right-wing authoritarian governments of Greece and Turkey to prevent communist takeovers.

Dwight D. Eisenhower: Authorized covert operations by the CIA that overthrew democratically elected leaders and ultimately replaced them with or empowered authoritarian regimes. Key examples include the 1953 coup in Iran, which consolidated the autocratic rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and the 1954 coup in Guatemala, which ousted Jacobo Árbenz and led to a series of military dictatorships.

Richard Nixon: Along with his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, Nixon heavily prioritized strategic alignments over a leader's internal human rights record. The administration actively supported General Augusto Pinochet after the 1973 coup that overthrew Salvador Allende in Chile, and maintained close ties with Yahya Khan of Pakistan to facilitate the historic U.S. opening to China.

Jimmy Carter: Despite making human rights a cornerstone of his foreign policy rhetoric, Carter's administration continued to support the Shah of Iran and Anastasio Somoza Debayle in Nicaragua until their respective overthrows in 1979, largely due to concerns over geopolitical stability and oil supplies.

Ronald Reagan: Focused intensely on countering Soviet influence globally (the Reagan Doctrine). His administration backed authoritarian governments and military juntas that were firmly anti-communist, including the military dictatorship in Guatemala under Efraín Ríos Montt, the government of El Salvadorduring its civil war, and Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines. The administration also initially provided tactical and economic support to Saddam Hussein in Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War to counter the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I won't even go back further in the U.S. or delve into other countries.

If you really get down to it, Franklin Roosevelt left Stalin in power at the end of World War II.

4. There seem to be more than one on here, who seem to wish for a failure, in order to say "Ha! Ha!". Their hate of the President overrides what would be best for the U.S. and the world as a whole.

That is horribly sad.

Why do you hold this President to a different standard than the Presidents above?

I can't let Barrack get by

Prominent examples of the Obama administration supporting or leaving autocratic leaders in place include:

1. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi (Egypt)
* The Context: Following the 2011 Arab Spring, Egypt's longtime dictator Hosni Mubarak was ousted, and democratic elections brought the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed Morsi to power. In 2013, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi led a military coup that overthrew Morsi and launched a violent crackdown on political opponents. [1, 2, 3]
* The U.S. Action: The Obama administration initially froze certain military aid to Egypt but explicitly avoided legally designating the takeover as a "coup" (which would have forced a total cutoff of aid under U.S. law). By 2015, citing the need for Egypt's cooperation in fighting ISIS and maintaining the Camp David Accords with Israel, Obama fully restored the $1.3 USD billion annual military aid package to Sisi's highly authoritarian government. [1]

2. The Al Khalifa Monarchy (Bahrain)
* The Context: In 2011, peaceful pro-democracy protests erupted in Bahrain. The Sunni monarchy brutally crushed the uprising with the help of military forces from neighboring Saudi Arabia. [1, 2, 3]
* The U.S. Action: Bahrain hosts the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, which is vital for monitoring Iran and securing Persian Gulf oil shipping lanes. Fearing the collapse of the monarchy would empower Iran, the Obama administration chose not to push for regime change. Despite vocal criticism of the human rights abuses, the administration resumed arms sales and military maintenance to the Bahraini government. [1, 2]

3. Hailemariam Desalegn (Ethiopia)
* The Context: Ethiopia's government had long been criticized by international watchdogs for suppressing the press, jailing opposition figures, and executing flawed elections. In May 2015, the ruling coalition claimed 100% of the parliamentary seats in an election widely condemned as a sham.
* The U.S. Action: Ethiopia was a crucial U.S. counter-terrorism partner in the Horn of Africa, particularly in combating the Al-Shabaab terrorist group in neighboring Somalia. During a visit to Addis Ababa in July 2015, Obama drew heavy criticism from human rights groups when he publicly referred to the Ethiopian government as "democratically elected". [1]

4. Islam Karimov (Uzbekistan)
* The Context: Uzbekistan under Islam Karimov was widely considered one of the most repressive and brutal dictatorships in the world.
* The U.S. Action: The U.S. relied heavily on Central Asian routes—known as the Northern Distribution Network—to supply American troops fighting in Afghanistan. Because of this strategic necessity, the Obama administration waived congressional human rights restrictions to allow military assistance to flow to Karimov's regime.

5. Bashar al-Assad (Syria – By Omission)
* The Context: While Obama publicly declared that Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad "must go" after he turned his military against civilians in 2011, critics argue the administration's actions ultimately allowed Assad to remain in power.
* The U.S. Action: In 2012, Obama drew a famous "red line," warning that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would trigger a U.S. military response. When Assad used sarin gas in 2013, Obama decided against military strikes, opting instead for a Russian-brokered diplomatic deal to remove Syria's chemical stockpiles. While the deal averted a new war, it left Assad's regime structurally intact, allowing him to eventually win the civil war with Russian and Iranian support

Iran international

47 minutes ago
BREAKING NEWS
Several explosions heard near Iran's Sirik Island – IRGC outlet

Several explosions were heard from the direction of the sea in parts of Iran's Qeshm Island and Sirik on Sunday, the IRGC-affiliated Fars news agency reported.

1 hour ago
BREAKING NEWS
Explosion heard near Iran's Qeshm Island – IRNA

The sound of an explosion was heard from the direction of the sea near Qeshm Island in southern Iran, state news agency IRNA reported Sunday.

IRNA said no impact had been reported on the island itself. Local sources have not provided further details.

2 hours ago
BREAKING NEWS
Iran's oil minister resigns, replacement appointed

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian accepted Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad's resignation and appointed Hamid Bovard as acting oil minister, the deputy head of communications at the president's office said on Sunday.

Yemeni government launches offensive to seize all areas from Iran-backed Houthis

link

Armand

And…

Turkey and Pakistan to send troops to support Saudi Arabia
Saudi fighter jets struck rebel Houthi targets in an offensive to retake swathes of Yemen, including the Red Sea coast, after attacks on oil infrastructure

link

Why and When Bombing Still Wins

link

Armand