US Politics |OT|

[Ryuu96]

sundin13 said:

Ryuu96 said:

There's a lot of US bases within range of Iranian missiles and bombing campaigns are unlikely to result in regime change and instead backfire into uniting the populace against the bomber, especially when the bomber has a disregard for civilian collateral which America tends to have and Israel definitely has, which would be a real shame because Iranian populace right now hates the current regime but America and Israel could fuck all of that up and turn peoples hatred towards Israel and America instead of at the current regime.

"There are currently no indications that the central government in Tehran is losing control — quite the opposite. The Iranian regime appears to be tightening its grip," the three officials said. "Most Iranians are hostile to the regime and oppose it, but there is a sense of national solidarity at the moment. Right now, the people are focused on one thing: survival.

"When they see Israeli strikes causing casualties and destruction — even if the regime is unpopular — the immediate threat is seen as Israel. That's why people are rallying around the flag. I emphasize — not around the regime, but most of their anger is currently directed at Israel."

Israel's Strikes on Iran: No Signs of Regime Instability Since Operation | The Jerusalem Post

So what comes next if aerial bombing doesn't result in regime change? What comes next after Iran bombs the shit out of US military bases and kills American soldiers? US media will suddenly start beating the drums of war and saying "we need revenge for our American troops! Destroy Iran!" and that is when I fear American troops on the ground will happen.

I agree with this general sentiment. More subtle long-term effects seem to be the most likely consequence of American missile deployment in Iran without much to show for it. While destroying their capabilities to build a nuke is a "win" in a sense, it's absurd that the prize for this whole war is something that Trump gave away in his first term...

However, I personally don't think that we are close to deploying troops to combat in Iran, nor do I think that the American media would support a war the same way they have in the past. I think Trump would get a lot of blowback for a decision to enter the war, which would only be amplified if troops lost their lives because of it.

I don't think you're close, yet, I'm just considering the domino effects of starting a bombing campaign against Iran. You have more faith in the media than me, Lol. I think they could easily spin it as "Iran was about to build a nuke and kill us all!" and fool Americans into thinking that it was the right thing to do (to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities) and thus Iran should accept it, but Iran had the nerve to fire back and kill American soldiers, something like that, but I hope I'm wrong and the American populace see through that.

If America really did bomb Iran's nuclear facilities then Iran doesn't have much reason to care about negotiations anymore, they'd have "nothing" left, so I could see them just going all out on war, the alternative (surrender) would likely result in the end of the regime. Would America be willing to spend years of bombing back and forth? They'd be unlikely at that stage to get regime change in Iran and stop the bombing of American bases in the Middle-East unless America actually invades Iran, otherwise regime change is extremely unlikely and the fight continues for years.

All this because a deal said "Obama" on it...Fucking Pathetic.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 21 June 2025