Arjun
IPCT Contributor
Is the regime in Iran soon to be toast?
- Thread starter Sybertiger
- Start date
No idea obviously what he's gong to do, hell he doesn't know.
But this would be the sane thing to do at this point.
But this would be the sane thing to do at this point.
I agree, That's was our oil and we only steal them,
Oceanslider
Known around here
There is no doubt in my mind that this is precisely the objective behind the war. In my view, the issue also reflects deeper differences between Western and Islamic ideologies. I do not believe Islam is, or can become, a religion of peace without fundamentally altering its core texts, which would require a complete rewriting of the Quran.
Agreed, this shit regime should have been handled years ago. Every year that went by the task became more difficult to deal with. It's late but I'm glad someone has a the backbone to take it on. Those that promote the idea that we should've just let it go on and kick the can down the road might be in denial, have TDS or simply are hoping that we didn't tackle this while they were alive so as not to be impacted by it. Some go through life always looking at how events hits them in the pocket with little regard for what's best for America or the world long term. Personal greed isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Their theoretical plan was to take out Iran Supreme leader and get the folks who where also killed as the new leader and do Bush style "Mission accomplished".
Trump said he cannot accept the new guy who is Ayothella Son, since no one will buy the Victory claim. So now they will try to take him out, which will kill the blood line chain and then call it victory.
Or just put a nuke penetrator and say there was no radiation leak in atmosphere and call it victory.
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 18,011
- 30,242
USA and Israel, needs to finish what they started ..
Holy War is here now, Shiite's are now going to increase their terrorism. I see no easy way out at this point.
We really should not have taken Saddam Out imho, Baath party was anti-fundamentalist
Now if USA succeeds in getting rid of the Iranian Shiite Regime, the new leaders of Shia will be in Iraq.
It's my understanding that the Iranians were bragging to Witkoff during "negotiations" that they already had enough nuclear material to build 11 nuclear weapons
Agree that region Baath party kept even the terrorism in check. Assad was probably the best of the rest in terms of western style freedom for women and religion. But all of them was a obstacle for Greater XXXXXX plan.
Trump envoy Steve Witkoff says Iran claimed it had enough enriched uranium to make 11 nuclear bombs
President Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff told Fox News that Iranian negotiators said Iran had the "inalienable right to enrich all their nuclear fuel."
www.cbsnews.com
Classic malfunction of older PAC2 interceptor, stock of newer PAC3/MSE must be depleted .
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 18,011
- 30,242
Review of a number of USA radars hit in the Middle East
before and after satellite photos
before and after satellite photos
Parley
Known around here
Day 7 of the U.S.–Israel War: The Strategy Appears to Be Working, and Iran Is Losing
“War is the continuation of politics by other means.” – Carl von Clausewitz
Seven days into the U.S.–Israel war with Iran, the central question is not simply what has happened on the battlefield, but whether the strategy behind the war is working.
In classical strategic terms, war must always be evaluated through the relationship between political objectives and military action. The Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz argued that the political objective determines the military means used to achieve it. The success of a war cannot be measured simply by explosions, missile launches, or headlines. It must be measured by whether the use of force achieves the political objectives of the war, whether through territorial control, destruction of military capability, or compelling the enemy to change its behavior in accordance with those objectives.
The first task, therefore, is to identify what those objectives actually are.
Thus far, the United States has been consistent in publicly stating its goals. President Donald Trump’s March 1 statement announcing the start of operations made clear that the war is aimed at ending the Iranian regime’s nuclear weapons pursuit, destroying the missile capabilities that Tehran has long used as a shield for that nuclear ambition, and eliminating Iran’s ability to threaten global commerce through the Strait of Hormuz. Senior officials have repeated this framework in multiple public briefings, including remarks by President Trump on March 1, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on March 2, and joint press conferences by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine on March 2 and March 4.
Across these statements, the political objective has remained consistent.
“War is the continuation of politics by other means.” – Carl von Clausewitz
Seven days into the U.S.–Israel war with Iran, the central question is not simply what has happened on the battlefield, but whether the strategy behind the war is working.
In classical strategic terms, war must always be evaluated through the relationship between political objectives and military action. The Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz argued that the political objective determines the military means used to achieve it. The success of a war cannot be measured simply by explosions, missile launches, or headlines. It must be measured by whether the use of force achieves the political objectives of the war, whether through territorial control, destruction of military capability, or compelling the enemy to change its behavior in accordance with those objectives.
The first task, therefore, is to identify what those objectives actually are.
Thus far, the United States has been consistent in publicly stating its goals. President Donald Trump’s March 1 statement announcing the start of operations made clear that the war is aimed at ending the Iranian regime’s nuclear weapons pursuit, destroying the missile capabilities that Tehran has long used as a shield for that nuclear ambition, and eliminating Iran’s ability to threaten global commerce through the Strait of Hormuz. Senior officials have repeated this framework in multiple public briefings, including remarks by President Trump on March 1, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on March 2, and joint press conferences by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine on March 2 and March 4.
Across these statements, the political objective has remained consistent.
Arjun
IPCT Contributor
Arjun
IPCT Contributor