The killing of civilians in Iran is condemnable. However, the arrogance of the U.S., which acts like a gatling gun against enemies and allies alike, is equally intolerable. Beset by serious internal issues (ICE and the Epstein Case), Trump seeks to demonstrate just how great he imagines himself to be. History provides its examples, and they are not encouraging.
If the IRGC is nearly 250,000+ people, controls key parts of the economy and is spread everywhere, it is difficult to see how they can just be “bombed” away. Particularly if they know it’s coming.
The IRGC also know that they will have no part in any “new Iran” so there’s no point in surrender.
Iran has a nine-point separation of powers, giving civic responsibilities to elected secular groups, while leaving the religious leaders in charge; the Guardian Council acts as a bridge.
The United States will have to target a lot people to ensure that this whole structure will collapse. The IRGC reports direct to the Supreme Leader; probably they can manage without him or appoint someone else in his place.
Agree with most, but not the seperation of powers. GC is not a bridge, its designed to appoint only people approved by the Ayatollahs. EG - it approves who can stand for Majilis.
Brilliant strategic analysis. The part about Iran having to choose between two forms of capitulation is really the core tension here. When regimes face existential threatss like this, rational calculation tends to go out the window and we've seen that play out historically in a pretty consistent pattern.
It is increasingly more unstable and frightening but it is unbearable to hear the news out Iran and the numbers of people dying and the way that they are being murdered.
Doubtful.
The killing of civilians in Iran is condemnable. However, the arrogance of the U.S., which acts like a gatling gun against enemies and allies alike, is equally intolerable. Beset by serious internal issues (ICE and the Epstein Case), Trump seeks to demonstrate just how great he imagines himself to be. History provides its examples, and they are not encouraging.
If the IRGC is nearly 250,000+ people, controls key parts of the economy and is spread everywhere, it is difficult to see how they can just be “bombed” away. Particularly if they know it’s coming.
The IRGC also know that they will have no part in any “new Iran” so there’s no point in surrender.
Iran has a nine-point separation of powers, giving civic responsibilities to elected secular groups, while leaving the religious leaders in charge; the Guardian Council acts as a bridge.
The United States will have to target a lot people to ensure that this whole structure will collapse. The IRGC reports direct to the Supreme Leader; probably they can manage without him or appoint someone else in his place.
Dancing bus drivers, these people are not.
Agree with most, but not the seperation of powers. GC is not a bridge, its designed to appoint only people approved by the Ayatollahs. EG - it approves who can stand for Majilis.
Brilliant strategic analysis. The part about Iran having to choose between two forms of capitulation is really the core tension here. When regimes face existential threatss like this, rational calculation tends to go out the window and we've seen that play out historically in a pretty consistent pattern.
Thank you. Agreed.
It is increasingly more unstable and frightening but it is unbearable to hear the news out Iran and the numbers of people dying and the way that they are being murdered.
Indeed. Once a regime has killed in those numbers it will do it again because if they lose - the revenge will come.
Do you think China will exploit the distraction in any meaningful way?