Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The War Against Iran Is on the Right Trajectory

Since the US and Israel returned to a more proactive and interventionist posture in the Middle East following the Iranian-sponsored, Hamas-led October 7 massacre, many assumptions about the relative strength of US adversaries in the region have been proven grossly inaccurate.
A look at today’s geostrategic landscape in Lebanon, for instance, helps elucidate this point. One might argue that because Israel has not yet been able to defeat Hezbollah entirely, its military campaign was ultimately for naught. However, before 2023, Hezbollah was generally considered an instrument of Iran’s extended deterrence—so lethal, in fact, that it was thought capable of deterring both the Israeli and US governments from ever launching direct attacks on Iran.

Nothing short of the large-scale destruction of Haifa and critical Israeli infrastructure in the Tel Aviv area, as well as thousands of civilian fatalities, was expected to result from an all-out conflict with Hezbollah. Yet civilian and military casualties in Israel notably defied those predictions, while Hezbollah’s significant missile and rocket arsenal was preemptively diminished before it could be unleashed simultaneously and en masse, vindicating those who advocated the use of preemptive force, myself included.

Israel’s risk matrix in the north has thus not only been reduced; the Lebanon campaign has, moreover, also confuted Iran’s entire deterrence concept, at relatively little cost to Israel.

Similarly, many analysts and commentators expected thousands of US military casualties in the event of a war with Iran, coupled with substantial civilian casualties in Israel and the Gulf Arab states.

Yet this war has thus far distinguished itself by an extraordinarily low body count despite intense and prolonged hostile exchanges. The US has never incurred fewer casualties in a war against a major state actor. That is an incontrovertible historical fact.

Even though the campaign was deliberately designed to avoid a high number of US military casualties, Iran’s theory of victory was partially predicated on inflicting precisely those casualties. In spite of this, Iran’s stockpiles of missiles and drones were not sophisticated enough to reliably penetrate layered US and allied air and missile defenses, disconfirming the type of scenario envisioned by Iranian planners and anticipated by analysts skeptical of waging war against Iran.

The US has demonstrated that it can fend off large-scale Iranian missile and drone barrages at an astonishing interception rate of above 95% and that it can wage war against Iran, its third-most-powerful adversary, without incurring mass casualties. The US military further demonstrated that it can effectively impose a blockade on Iran without losing a single surface combatant, just as it failed to lose a single surface combatant when the US Navy successfully quarantined Venezuela for almost half a year.

The US and Israel, meanwhile, displayed an exceptional ability to strike anywhere inside Iran at will and to disable the country’s air and missile defenses within days. This success, in turn, paved the way for the further degradation of Iran’s already impaired nuclear program, as well as its stockpiles of missiles, drones, and missile launchers.

Finally, the US has been adept at quietly organizing escort operations in close coordination with its Gulf allies to break Iran’s stranglehold on outbound oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, effectively restoring oil flows to an average of two-thirds* of prewar exports and staving off an economic crisis. This is yet another outcome that defied prewar expectations, much like the low casualty rate during the conflict.

To actually topple the regime in Tehran, the status quo needs to be amended in two ways. First, the initial bombing campaign must be resumed sooner or later, followed by a hyperlocal drone campaign aimed at conducting relentless and widespread micro-targeting of Iranian police, Basij militia members, and IRGC ground-force personnel who are either patrolling the streets to prevent large-scale demonstrations or in the process of suppressing ongoing protests.

Second, the US government must express its unequivocal support for the Iranian people, both rhetorically and materially. To that end, it is incumbent upon the administration to unabashedly declare regime change and concomitant democracy promotion to be the overarching objectives of the war, while abandoning the notion of negotiations with the Islamic Republic before the fall of the regime.

*Note: By early October, outbound crude shipments have returned to pre-war levels thanks to US Navy Operation Project Freedom.
Top | New | Old
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Trajectory: The free flight path of an object given a strong starting impulse, unable to control its own route, nor be controlled beyond the initial aiming.

I.e. once thrown, it is deflected by external forces but can not be diverted, nor recalled, by the thrower.

It is beyond the thrower's control.
trollslayer · 51-55, M
I mean, really… Iran is the way it is now because of a US/UK sponsored regime change in 1953. And you think it is a good plan now???
CedricH · 22-25, M
@trollslayer No, you can’t just defeat ideologies. And liberalism, the human desire for self-determination, equality before the law, and personal freedom is just as much an ideology as the Mullah‘s islamist fanaticism. And it’s an even more potent force.

It is an ideology the regime in Tehran hasn’t been able to extinguish. Not in 1999, not during the Green Revolution in 2009, not in 2017/18, not in the throes of the Women, Life, Freedom protests in 2023 and not even now after the Islamic Republic killed about 30.000 Iranians back in January.

It is our responsibility, our destiny and strategically consistent with our self-interest to support those courageous men and women who seek to rid themselves off any hostile regime that violates both their rights & dignity as well as the norms of the American-led world order.

People in Iran don’t oppose their regime because they resent the absence of McDonalds or GI Joe action figures. That’s trivial.
They may just want a government that won’t slaughter, impoverish and oppress them under the guise of a dilapidated Islamic ideology that has lost much of its appeal since 1979.


Also, I suppose it’s time to revive some Cold War-style propaganda in the US (and especially in Europe) to lead people like yourself back to the light.
trollslayer · 51-55, M
@CedricH Also, I suppose it’s time to revive some Cold War-style propaganda in the US (and especially in Europe) to lead people like yourself back to the light.

The irony of this statement compared those that preceded it!!!
CedricH · 22-25, M
Excellent analysis.
SunshineGirl · 41-45, F
I think the "trajectory" you have described is wishful thinking at best.

I find it difficult to know where to begin . . but to take up your point about success in intercepting Iranian drone attacks. A drone costs in the region of $5K. The interceptor missile rquired to stop it costs in the region of $500,000. The asymmetry of cost alone is eye watering and goes a long way to explaining why a "weak" Iranian regime has been able to hold its own on the battlefield for the best part of half a year. And American missile stocks are dangerously depleted.
@SunshineGirl The US--thanks in part to Ukraine and vendors like Anduril--is rapidly adopting drone offensive and defensive technology.
In fact, the dispute with Iran may have hastened the US shift and have prepared it better for disputes with other adversaries.
CedricH · 22-25, M
@SunshineGirl I‘m not quite sure that‘s right. See, the impressively high US and allied interception rates are a statistical fact. Interceptors are mostly expended to neutralize missiles. Drones, on the other hand, can be downed by fighter aircraft (fixed-wing or rotary), with relatively cheap air-to-air missiles.
And there‘s a whole range of cheap and easy to produce counter-drone systems, which is why Ukraine is currently intercepting a large amount of enemy drones but, unfortunately, a declining fraction of incoming Russian ballistic missiles.

It’s these very ballistic missiles that Russia can produce en mass because Ukraine, unlike the US and Israel, hasn’t been able to seriously degrade Russia‘s military industrial base or hunt for ballistic missile launchers deep inside Russia at scale. That’s exactly what the USAF and the IAF have been doing in Iran, however, which is why the ballistic missiles and missile launchers are now arguably a scarcer commodity for the Islamic Republic than Patriot, Thad or ship-borne interceptors for the US.

I also wouldn’t characterize Iran‘s military performance as "holding its own on the battlefield". Its military has lost in any measurable sense.
The fact that its regime is still standing does not disprove the military defeat it is currently experiencing.
Nevertheless, the military defeat and a political defeat have to coincide for the regime to finally collapse which is why the campaign isn’t over yet.

Contrast Ukraine and Iran‘s battlefield performance. Ukraine‘s holding its own. Iran is not. Just because both employ drones doesn’t mean both have to be equally proficient at it.

In Russia, refineries are burning all over the country. Iran‘s incapable of replicating Ukraine‘s western supported deep strikes.
Its military situation is dire and progressively deteriorating as it expends scarce projectiles and opens itself up for further strikes.
Elessar · 31-35, M
Enjoy paying gasoline $20/gallon I guess
trollslayer · 51-55, M
Because “regime change” is nearly always a disaster and usually makes the situation worse. Especially in the middle east.
trollslayer · 51-55, M
@Waveney well, how do you measure success?

Almost none of the above countries were a direct threat to US safety - including Iran. So our interventions were motivated by other things. So, you cant say “eliminated a threat to the safety USA” because none of them were direct threats in the first place. Yes, some were lawless breeding grounds for terrorists. But so is Idaho. Iraq never attacked us. Neither did Iran, Libya, panama, Cuba, vietnam…. The threats were to our national interests (such as oil) but the average US citizen in milwaukee was not in any danger of being bombed.
Waveney · M
@trollslayer I know.
Waveney · M
@LamontCranston why a thumbs down?
ElyssTTTrucks · 100+, M
Well cedric, you can always back up your neocon views with your carcass and not just your mouth by volunteering yourself to physically fight in this war that you're so much in favor of.
ElyssTTTrucks · 100+, M
@CedricH And maybe you'll get captured and become a mullah's dancing boy. 😆😆😆
CedricH · 22-25, M
@ElyssTTTrucks Why do I believe you would not volunteer for any conflict, no matter how essential?
Shayama · FVIP
Not worth fighting 👎
This message was deleted by the author of the main post.
ElyssTTTrucks · 100+, M
@Shayama And not even legal and opposed by the majority of the American populace.
@Shayama You may have forgotten the history.
Waveney · M
This is wrong on so many levels I'm not even going to bother to go into it 😂
CedricH · 22-25, M
@Waveney Oh well, such a pity.
peterlee · M
America is out of its depth and it does not seem to realise it.
Musicman · 61-69, M
@peterlee Actually we are not. We're just to chicken shit to do what needs to be done to end it.
peterlee · M
@Musicman Little understanding of the various strains of Islam, nor the multifaceted cultures of the region. The State of Israel being an independent but strategically important player in the geopolitics.

Easy to start a conflict, but far more difficult to bring harmony.
Musicman · 61-69, M
@peterlee That is totally true.

 
Post Comment