No. of Recommendations: 14
Iraq isn't Iran. Far from it. It's amazing to me how people are missing this.
There won't be an "invasion" the way some people seem to think, with 500k troops rolling in. No, any "boots on the ground" are likely to be Green Berets working with Mossad types to identify locals who want to work with us.
That's why it's foolhardy. That's extremely unlikely to be sufficient for us to shape events in Iran. We're just throwing the dice on this as to what happens going forward - whether the existing regime survives, whether the country devolves into chaos, or what. Right now, the future of Iran going forward is likely to be left entirely to chance and forces outside of our control.
I do agree that this isn't Iraq. Trump seems perfectly content to ignore the "You break it, you bought it" rule, and just wash his hands of everything in a month or so regardless of how it turns out.
But thanks for taking care of the earlier gripe about ""poor planning"". Great execution is a function good planning.
But that doesn't really "take care" of the earlier gripe, because great execution of some parts of the mission doesn't mean that all of the mission was well-planned.
As I've told you, it's a part of a larger plan with China as the goal. When, not if you dispute that you should ask yourself how many of their main ally pool of Russia/North Korea/Cuba/South Africa/Venezuela/Iran are still fairly healthy. Then once you've crossed 2 of those off your list you might ask yourself how well Chinese equipment is performing.
Then you might ask yourself who gets hurt a lot if Iran lashes out and manages to close the straits of Hormuz. And then you might ask yourself where the country that's being hurt by this would go for a backup. And then you might ask yourself a few more questions...like, what is that country going to do if that backup isn't there.
Oh, I think China is going to come out of this smelling like a rose. If not in better shape than before. In the very short term, they've been managing their energy needs to plan for and prepare for constant geopolitical interruptions in oil supply - diversifying their energy providers, building up massive reserves, and promoting renewable energy. They can do just fine through short term interruptions. They also know that the U.S. isn't going to let Hormuz stay closed for more than a short time, even if Iran manages to pull that off. They don't need a back-up.
The other near-term consequences are beneficial to them. Trivially, the U.S. is burning many billions of dollars in military expenditures in the Middle East which resources will not be available for other uses. It's pulled focus from Venezuela, which allows their allies there to dig in and protect themselves against being dislodged by a regime more friendly to them. If there are disruptions to Iran's actual oil output, those can be readily replaced by other petrostates modestly increasing their production and replacing Iranian exports - OPEC has tons of slack capacity, created by some 3 million bpd in production cuts implemented over the last year or so.
Long-term, many of the possible outcomes of "regime change" in Iran actually work to their favor. The most likely outcome is either the existing regime continues or they're replaced by another faction that's equally friendly to China. Because the Administration will need to declare victory, the most likely outcome is that Iran emerges free of sanctions (just like Venezuela) and open for business with Iran in a way they were deeply hindered before. With Russia (Iran's prior main patron) now sidelined by Ukraine, it's a world of opportunity for Chinese energy companies to really get in and develop a solid energy source - and foster a relationship with a new government that has fewer historical ties to Russian patronage and will be relying on Chinese money.
We're likely to just be replacing a very problematic partner for China with a far better one for them, on our own dime. Hopefully it doesn't work out that way. Hopefully we pull an inside straight and a government emerges that is not: i) the existing regime; ii) a faction of the existing regime that's still hostile to the U.S.; iii) a stalemate between multiple factions that are hostile to the U.S.; or iv) chaos and failed state. It's possible, and I hope for our sake that's what happens - but I think it's phenomenally foolish for us to have hoped that this would work without some sort of plan for making it happen.
