US Attacks Iran 2026

[Ernie]

What does “finishing the job” mean?

Because she feels the leadership/regime is so evil to its own people & are the worse terrorists with evil plans against Israel and the USA, she seemed to believe, as an Iranian herself, until the entire regime is gone Iranians will continue to die, suffer, and they WILL have nuclear weapons.

What will it take for Trump to finish the job?

Figure out a way to stop all drones and missiles
or
Figure out a way to get Iran to stop sending drone and missiles.

[joshuabgood]

Because she feels the leadership/regime is so evil to its own people & are the worse terrorists with evil plans against Israel and the USA, she seemed to believe, as an Iranian herself, until the entire regime is gone Iranians will continue to die, suffer, and they WILL have nuclear weapons.

What will it take for Trump to finish the job?

Figure out a way to stop all drones and missiles
or
Figure out a way to get Iran to stop sending drone and missiles.

There is a way to do it, but thankfully, due to the influence, I think, of Christianity, it isn't considered tenable any more, ie total wanton war/destruction that really breaks a people - think Hiroshima, Dresden, Constantinople, Lakota Indians, Georgians, etc.

[Szdfan]

What will it take for Trump to finish the job?

Figure out a way to stop all drones and missiles
or
Figure out a way to get Iran to stop sending drone and missiles.

There is a way to do it, but thankfully, due to the influence, I think, of Christianity, it isn't considered tenable any more, ie total wanton war/destruction that really breaks a people - think Hiroshima, Dresden, Constantinople, Lakota Indians, Georgians, etc.

My understanding of contemporary military doctrine is that air strikes alone are not enough to win a war. Aircraft and missiles play a support role by destroying infrastructure and military capability. However, in order to win a war, an invading military has to occupy to land in order to force regime change.

I think Operation Epic Fury bears this out. Even though the US has killed the majority of Iranian leadership prior to the war, the regime is still in place and still able to resist the US.

If “finishing the job,” means regime change, I don’t see how Trump accomplishes that without a large ground-scale invasion and engaging in the same kind of neo-conservative nation building he ridiculed and repeatedly promised not to get caught up in.

Of course, a ground invasion is incredibly expensive, both in money and human lives and as the past twenty-five years of American efforts in the Middle East, there’s no guarantee of success.

Trump seems reluctant to launch a large-scale ground invasion. I’m concerned that we are instead stuck in a never-ending cycle with the Iranians of broken ceasefires. Both sides at this point seems ready to give up, but also unable to accomplish their ultimate objectives.

This looks increasingly like the kind of forever war Trump promised not to get the US into.

[joshuabgood]

Figure out a way to stop all drones and missiles
or
Figure out a way to get Iran to stop sending drone and missiles.

There is a way to do it, but thankfully, due to the influence, I think, of Christianity, it isn't considered tenable any more, ie total wanton war/destruction that really breaks a people - think Hiroshima, Dresden, Constantinople, Lakota Indians, Georgians, etc.

My understanding of contemporary military doctrine is that air strikes alone are not enough to win a war. Aircraft and missiles play a support role by destroying infrastructure and military capability. However, in order to win a war, an invading military has to occupy to land in order to force regime change.

I think Operation Epic Fury bears this out. Even though the US has killed the majority of Iranian leadership prior to the war, the regime is still in place and still able to resist the US.

If “finishing the job,” means regime change, I don’t see how Trump accomplishes that without a large ground-scale invasion and engaging in the same kind of neo-conservative nation building he ridiculed and repeatedly promised not to get caught up in.

Of course, a ground invasion is incredibly expensive, both in money and human lives and as the past twenty-five years of American efforts in the Middle East, there’s no guarantee of success.

Trump seems reluctant to launch a large-scale ground invasion. I’m concerned that we are instead stuck in a never-ending cycle with the Iranians of broken ceasefires. Both sides at this point seems ready to give up, but also unable to accomplish their ultimate objectives.

This looks increasingly like the kind of forever war Trump promised not to get the US into.

Yeah I agree...what I was trying to point out is that folks aren't ready wage war like Genghis Kahn used to.

Genghis Khan wielded terror as a calculated weapon, turning psychological warfare into a cornerstone of his conquests. “Like Attila the Hun before him and Vlad the Impaler after him, Genghis Khan used rumor to inflate his reputation ahead of whatever military operation is to come,” says Crossland.

He instilled fear in his opponents with mass killings—slaughtering nearly everyone in a city, but deliberately sparing a few. These survivors would then spread word of Mongol brutality, helping convince the next city to surrender without a fight.

On the battlefield, he unleashed sensory overload. Synchronized drums, horns and bloodcurdling battle cries created a deafening wall of sound to disorient and terrify his enemies. He attacked from multiple directions to keep an opposing army, or city defenders, tense and off-balance, unable to anticipate his next move.

His strategies were remarkably effective. Genghis Khan conquered more territory in 25 years than Rome did in 400—largely through fear. “These are classic examples of psyops, and the fundamentals have not changed since then,” says Crossland. “Genghis Khan used the marketplace to spread his rumors. We use social media.”

From History.com. He also engaged in early chemical warfare catapulting dead body parts, heads etc, infected with plague into cities forcing the inhabitants to clean them up and get sick and traumatized prior to any ground invasion.

[R7ehr]

Biological warfare.

[Soloist]

The US doesn’t have to invade to produce a failed state. I see a Syria as the goal which will leave anyone in Iran far worse off and potentially risk irrational players getting the enriched uranium.

At this point… I don’t see a good outcome for either side best outcome would be occupation for the next 50+ years with major investment. So… yeah not going to happen.

The US is either going to learn to work with the current Iran government or result in a failed state.
Iran has only has bad prospects ahead of them.

[Bootstrap]

Because she feels the leadership/regime is so evil to its own people & are the worse terrorists with evil plans against Israel and the USA, she seemed to believe, as an Iranian herself, until the entire regime is gone Iranians will continue to die, suffer, and they WILL have nuclear weapons.

What will it take for Trump to finish the job?

I don't think Trump is even interested in finishing that particular job, according to his recent statements at the G7 Summit on June 16th. Regime change was a goal at the very beginning, but it doesn't seem to be now.

Trump claims, ‘I never cared about regime change’ in Iran, says its current leaders are ‘strong, smart’

Continuing his remarks about the US agreement with Iran at the G7 summit, US President Donald Trump claims he “never cared about regime change” as a goal in the US-Israeli campaign against Tehran, while reiterating his belief that the elimination of so many senior officials in the Islamic Republic effectively amounts to regime change.

“You talk about regime change. I never cared about regime change. It [was] never a part. But I guess you have regime change because you know better than anybody, the first group, they’re all dead. The second group, they’re dead. A part of the third group is gone,” he says, referring to echelons of the Iranian leadership.

“And we’re dealing with people that I think are very rational people. They were nice to deal with. They were strong people, smart people. I think actually they’re smarter than the first and second group, but they’re not radicalized and they’re, you know, looking to help their country,” he continues.

Trump says, “I don’t believe in regime change. And I’ve watched regime changes for years. They never work. It has to just happen [naturally],” he says.

[Bootstrap]

The US doesn’t have to invade to produce a failed state. I see a Syria as the goal which will leave anyone in Iran far worse off and potentially risk irrational players getting the enriched uranium.

At this point… I don’t see a good outcome for either side best outcome would be occupation for the next 50+ years with major investment. So… yeah not going to happen.

The US is either going to learn to work with the current Iran government or result in a failed state.
Iran has only has bad prospects ahead of them.

I can't think of any feasible outcome better than not invading in the first place.

[Valerie]

The US doesn’t have to invade to produce a failed state. I see a Syria as the goal which will leave anyone in Iran far worse off and potentially risk irrational players getting the enriched uranium.

At this point… I don’t see a good outcome for either side best outcome would be occupation for the next 50+ years with major investment. So… yeah not going to happen.

The US is either going to learn to work with the current Iran government or result in a failed state.
Iran has only has bad prospects ahead of them.

I can't think of any feasible outcome better than not invading in the first place.

How do you suggest keeping them from nuclear weapons? You know their desire and no, you cannot @work with” terrorist regimes.

This morning a poll came out that 44% of Muslims in America support Hamas. I for one do not find that comforting-

[Soloist]

The US doesn’t have to invade to produce a failed state. I see a Syria as the goal which will leave anyone in Iran far worse off and potentially risk irrational players getting the enriched uranium.

At this point… I don’t see a good outcome for either side best outcome would be occupation for the next 50+ years with major investment. So… yeah not going to happen.

The US is either going to learn to work with the current Iran government or result in a failed state.
Iran has only has bad prospects ahead of them.

I can't think of any feasible outcome better than not invading in the first place.

How do you suggest keeping them from nuclear weapons? You know their desire and no, you cannot @work with” terrorist regimes.

This morning a poll came out that 44% of Muslims in America support Hamas. I for one do not find that comforting-

Who there is terrorists? The leaders? The military? The government? The citizens? Perhaps there are some but I’m very unwilling to brand a nation as terrorists and unwilling to negotiate.
This nation at least before the US bombed the leadership was composed of rational players with clear agendas and strategic plans