No. of Recommendations: 7
That feeds us back to the two alternatives discussed earlier: that the US and Israel can jam "Prince Reza" down their throat, or leave a failed state full of warring groups, in the rubble.There is a third option, which honestly I think is most likely: that the regime just continues to hold power with someone stepping in that's completely unacceptable to the U.S. It's the possibility that Trump mentioned today:
President Donald Trump on Tuesday outlined his worst-case scenario for the war in Iran, now in its third day: the regime change he seemed to be pursuing when the conflict began could fail.
“The worst case would be we do this and then somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person,” Trump said in response to a question during a press availability in the Oval Office alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “That could happen. We don’t want that to happen. It would probably be the worst — you go through this and then in five years, you realize you put somebody in who was no better.”https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/03/trump-adm...I don't know if that's the
worst case, but it's certainly a pretty bad outcome. And it's not going to take five years to realize that's what's happened, if this scenario occurs.
When the Administration talks about everyone that might step in having been killed, I think they are referring to their short list of who they
wanted as a possible successor to Khameini. Someone they thought they could talk to if that guy took over, so that this could get wound down. But it appears that all the folks they had in mind as candidates were also killed in the early attacks.
