Yves here. As we have often noted, Paul Roger’s articles are a mixed bag. He often raises good issues but then is a prisoner of conventional wisdom. Here he focuses on a question that many alternative media commentators have yet to address, which is whether the US and Israel launching an attack that Iran has made clear it will treat as a war will spiral into regional upheaval.
Most analysts have been preoccupied with the Trump “Will he or won’t he?” and the immediate issue of whether the presumed US plan, of delivering a hard, fast blow, could effect regime change. Experts ranging from Larry Johnson to retired UK Royal Navy Commodore Steve Jermy have described in detail the difficulty the US would have in sustaining operations against Iran.
In particular, this article underplays the possibility that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz. Not only has Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Mohammad Akbarzadeh recently pointed out that Iran has “complete control” of the Strait, but to drive the point home, it is conducting live-fire drills there. The US has growled in response. As CENTCOM posted on Twitter:
TAMPA, Fla. – Yesterday, Iran announced that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is conducting a two-day live-fire naval exercise in the Strait of Hormuz scheduled to begin on Sunday.
U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) urges the IRGC to conduct the announced naval exercise in a manner that is safe, professional and avoids unnecessary risk to freedom of navigation for international maritime traffic. The Strait of Hormuz is an international sea passage and an essential trade corridor that supports regional economic prosperity. On any given day, roughly 100 of the world’s merchant vessels transit the narrow strait.
U.S. forces acknowledge Iran’s right to operate professionally in international airspace and waters. Any unsafe and unprofessional behavior near U.S. forces, regional partners or commercial vessels increases risks of collision, escalation, and destabilization.
CENTCOM will ensure the safety of U.S. personnel, ships, and aircraft operating in the Middle East. We will not tolerate unsafe IRGC actions including overflight of U.S. military vessels engaged in flight operations, low-altitude or armed overflight of U.S. military assets when intentions are unclear, highspeed boat approaches on a collision course with U.S. military vessels, or weapons trained at U.S. forces.The U.S. military has the most highly trained and lethal force in the world and will continue to operate with the highest levels of professionalism and adhere to international norms. Iran’s IRGC must do the same.
Want to publish your own Article?4:59 AM · Jan 31, 2026
It is over my pay grade to know whether these drills will lead insurers to jack up their rates for carriage in and out of the Gulf.
·
By Paul Rogers, Emeritus Professor of Peace Studies in the Department of Peace Studies and International Relations at Bradford University, and an Honorary Fellow at the Joint Service Command and Staff College. He is openDemocracy’s international security correspondent. He is on Twitter at: @ProfPRogers. Originally published at openDemocracy
In his way back from Davos last weekend, Donald Trump warned the Iranian leadership of a naval force heading for the Middle East with an implied threat of military action. Since then, an aircraft carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln has arrived in the Indian Ocean bordering the Arabian Sea and within the US Central Command’s area of operations.
Trump’s previous promise of US intervention in Iran if anti-government protesters were killed appears to have had little impact on the Tehran regime. Nearly 6,000 people have died and 41,800 detained, according to human rights groups, although new evidence suggests the death toll could be as high as 30,000 amid a determined cover-up by the state.
Even so, Trump’s current naval build-up seems less concerned with the mass killing of protestors than a US-led military operation to change the Tehran regime.
The US already has some 30,000 military personnel in the Middle East, with a carrier strike group now there as well. But, as I noted in my column last week, the Pentagon would prefer to have overwhelming power in the region for any operation against Iran, and a second carrier strike group headed by the USS George H W Bush, the world’s largest warship, is headed to the region.
A key issue is whether a joint US/Israeli operation is being considered, and that now seems likely. It would certainly fit in with the Netanyahu government’s vision for Israel’s future.
Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar suggests this vision goes a lot wider than Iran. Speaking during an official visit to Kazakhstan this week, Sa’ar said: “Proxy terror states in the Middle East – Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen – must be dismantled. Without doing so, there will be no regional stability, and this is our objective.”
If a US/Israeli attack on Iran was on the cards, what would it look like and what might be the impact? Some possible answers can be found in Iran: Consequences of a War, a detailed analysis of a possible attack by the United States that I wrote for the Oxford Research Group 20 years ago.
That analysis assumed that the main target would be Iran’s nuclear ambitions, rather than regime change, and focused on a unilateral US attack with little direct Israeli involvement, rather than a joint operation. Yet it raised several issues that remain pertinent today.
The first is that both Israel and the US would put a premium on avoiding casualties among their own military. For Binyamin Netanyahu, deaths among Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) personnel are to be avoided like the plague, and for any IDF soldiers to be taken hostage in Iran would be disastrous.
Trump, too, would avoid the domestic opprobrium at all costs, which means that “collateral damage” from US air strikes will be tolerated rather than putting US troops on the ground. Heavy Iranian casualties would be acceptable to both Netanyahu and Trump, and the 2006 Oxford Research Group report forecast thousands of Iranian deaths. After all, the Israelis have killed 73,000 Palestinians in Gaza, with thousands more missing, and the US led two wars in Iraq and Syria that killed more than twice as many.
As to the attack itself, it now seems that early aims would include disabling Iranian air defences, killing the religious leadership in Tehran and the leadership of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (the police and the security forces responsible for killing protestors). If that was considered successful by the Israelis and Americans, then a short pause might follow to allow anti-regime elements the space to force a change of government.
Given their perceived successes in Venezuela, Gaza, the occupied West Bank and southern Lebanon, the US and Israeli leaderships do not lack confidence bordering on hubris.
They may get what they want, but if significant elements of the religious and security leaderships survive, then the next phase of the war would be days of intense attacks from Israel and the US, directed primarily at the IRGC and other military and paramilitary elements of the Iranian state.
If the theocratic regime survives and domestic mass public opposition to it fails to show itself, even after the thousands of deaths, then the IRGC and others could then begin to look to the future.
They might even threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz, a significant shipping channel between Iran and the UAE, which Iran has reportedly already warned it will conduct live-fire naval exercises in next week. Closing it altogether would incite a global increase in oil prices and take us back to the disastrously stagflation-ridden days of the mid-1970s. Meanwhile, the war would continue.
If that sounds unlikely, then remember two quite separate factors. The first is two failed wars, in Afghanistan from 2001 and Iraq from 2003. Both appeared at first to be easily won but then took disastrous turns, with overoptimism verging on hubris playing a role.
The second is the big unknown when we look at how the IRGC and the Iranian military might react. It is easy to assume that Iran’s security establishments, already crippled by the overwhelming attacks by Israeli and US forces, will be in no position to offer much resistance, but that doesn’t factor in Iran’s development and large-scale production of cheap short-range armed drones over the past decade.
These drones have already been used to chilling effect in Ukraine by Russia, are easily hidden and their manufacture can be readily dispersed to numerous small factories. While few have the range to cause damage in Israel, many are well within range of plenty of US military forces, including its largest air base in the region, in Qatar, and the headquarters of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Bahrain.
If there is one thing the Trump government cannot afford is American casualties. In a “normal” White House, we might hope that sensible strategists would think things through and would successfully advise caution this time around. In Trump’s White House, we are dealing with a singularly abnormal and unpredictable president who is losing support at home and badly needs a foreign diversion.
The potential closure of the strait of Hormuz makes this a suicide mission for Republicans, assuming the midterms happen. Much more importantly, in Iran there are soccer moms, cutthroat businessmen, aunts who devote their lives to charity, addicts, retirees, and clerks whose lives will be upended should these plans be implemented. Iran and America are both highly religious ‘managed democracies’, which I would hope might inspire some empathy.
A few points:
The Arab countries the leadership of which have denied overflight rights are probably not serious enough to enforce their demand.
The cynical and opportunistic use of Kurdish and Balochi nationalism will destabilize surrounding countries like Pakistan.
If the Israeli vision of a Near East with no governments hostile to them is achieved, through violence, they still live in a region where everyone else hates them, which doesn’t seem to me like a recipe for security.
Vicky Cookies: Thanks. I also noted that business about “proxy” movements in Lebanon (Hizbullah), Yemen (Houthi), and Gaza (Hamas) — as if those movements hadn’t arisen from a base in the populace. This was made more clear than ever when the Israelis pulled off that war crime with the pagers — the victims were part of the Hizbullah / Shi’i social organizations, something that each religious group in Lebanon sponsors. Not members of the militia.
And what will the Israelis do in return? Their unending brutality toward the Arabs is more than evident. Do they plan to arrest Daniela Weiss, grandmama of the settlements, and pull out of all of the illegal settlements?
Likely not. Which means that the conflict will go on by other means.
If the theocratic regime survives and domestic mass public opposition to it fails to show itself, even after the thousands of deaths, then the IRGC and others could then begin to look to the future.
I happen to have worked on a book (as editor) that included long and detailed descriptions of the governments of Iran, China, and Russia. Just for information — Russia is a federal republic with a multi-party parliament, which means that Vladimir Putin isn’t in complete control. So “Putin did it” doesn’t wash with me as a form of analysis. Yves Smith has pointed out many times that Putin heads an elite and that there are interest groups in Russia.
China and Iran are republics, but the distinguishing characteristic is an elaborate structure that supports and controls the government. In China, it is the communist party. In Iran, it is the Islamic parallel structure.
This Wiki entry is pretty good, and it shows the many complications:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Iran#
Note the Assembly of Experts and the Guardian Council. Those ultrasavvy geostrategists in Washington (heirs to the wars in Vietnam and Yugoslavia) likely think that they can “decapitate” the Iranian government. The Israelis likely are feeding the fantasy — heck, Uncle Sam will still pick up the bill.
Yet the redundancies mean that the Iran government has plenty of men in positions to take over in case of disaster. Note, too, the parallel in armed forces — the revolutionary guards are not the regular Iranian army (Artesh). (Same in China — knocking off Xi Jinping will have less effect than Marco Rubio thinks.)
So, besides its complex geography, Iran has a government that the U S of A and Israel are going to be hard put to remove. And, natch, they let a doofus like Reza Pahlavi wander around till they can find someone even worse.
Yet: I want to blunt the idea that the Irans have no grievances and all of the unrest is being caused by Israeli and U.S. intelligence.
The Iranians have real grievances. There are plenty of articles, books, and films out there that show the petty harassment by the religious and the enforced conformity.
Yet the Iranians aren’t waiting for Anglo-America to save them. [Nor is the rest of the world.]
In short, that “if” about the regime surviving is a weak “if.” And the obstacle for civil society in Iran is the endless oppression, which has only been made worse by U.S. sanctions.
I forget where I saw/read this but a point was made that the Iranian faction that preferred the “escalatory ladder” approach were killed by the Israeli fifth column last June. Macgregor says this means only the hard liners remain.
Everyone seems sure that Trump is not going to back down but he backs down all the time. It’s still possible that he isn’t as gaga as we think and this is a failing bluff–although it does seem true that he would have attacked if the fake revolution on the Iranian streets had not been suppressed.
Do remember that, though, same doofuses who think they can decapitate foreign governments and “win” also think that, if they just knock off Trump, HRC or Kamala Harris could easily waltz into the White House.
They believe in a sort of weird version of “great men” theory of politics–they can manipulate anything to their hearts’ content if only they could do away with a few meddlesome priests (literal in case of Iran, I suppose).
THE GREAT AMERICAN DELUSION – JUST THAT ONE GUY
King Henry II was English, or, depending on what you take the Angevins to be, French. (Granted, he didn’t actually think killing Becket would solve all his problems.)
Good points. Of course there are grievances within Iran, different political factions as in any country. But at the same time the sanctions, attacks, infiltration and meddling by US/UK/Israel, currency attacks, etc. (CIA boilerplate) have greatly affected the situation. One can only speculate how the revolution would have progressed if it were not for near-constant attacks from the empire.
IMO, The implicit bias of the author using the well-worn terms “theocratic regime” is noteworthy. It smacks of Orientalism and hypocrisy. It may seem trivial but language is important: the heavily loaded term “regime” for non-western countries, and “government” or “administration” for western countries sounds typically imperialist and colonial. Those swarthy natives are not capable of a modern republic with a “democracy”, only the “enlightened” white western nations are capable of that. (See Henry Kissinger).
And of course we can see the gross hypocrisy when casually perusing the history (Mossadegh etc.).
Some could say the US is a lawless and rogue empire, not a constitutional republic. Elections Inc. in the US are merely PR exercises to create the illusion of choice and facilitate massive political bribery.
So, why do many informed, educated people in the west still cling to the biases and hypocrisy? Perhaps a psychologist is needed to answer.
“Perhaps a psychologist is needed to answer.”
Or perhaps an economist, who can show it is their “rational choice” to cling to their biases and hypocrisy because it personally benefits them.
Or alternatively, “jungle” vs “garden” per Josep Borrell.
I think this is a really good comment, and there are even more ways the Western picture of the Iranian government is ridiculous.
For example, take the idea that Khamenei is a dictator that can just order whatever he wants, when even Western media regularly reports the elected government trying policies he’ll publicly call stupid. I’m not 100% sure on exactly how his command of the IRGC (Sepah) works, but even then, I suspect he doesn’t tell the generals what to do, only approves or vetoes plans. Pretty much, IIUC unless he declares ex cathedra that something is Islamically fard (obligatory) or haram (verboten), he can’t positively impose a policy on anybody.
On the economic grievances it seems to finally be breaking into the Western alt-media that they’re largely (and correctly) aimed at a neoliberal tendency among Iranian economic planners. The catch is that tendency is overwhelmingly boosted by elected reformist governments, not the hardliners or judiciary (who are also very much not conservatives). The “Jahangiri dollar”, the “just negotiate with America harder” meme, the recent cuts to the protected exchange rate: all pushed by reformists.
I think this also gives a glimpse into why the Iranian government acts so “measured” in general, including military engagements. I think their evaluation is that time is on their side vis-a-vis America, even militarily and economically; the real danger is an internal rupture similar to the USSR under Gorbachev. The main element in Iranian society that threatens that though is a subset of “courtier” types, a residue of Qajar & Pahlavi society in particular.
I think the government evaluation is that, a few fringe separatist groups aside, those elements have largely sorted either into the lumpenproletariat (I wouldn’t be surprised if a large portion of the recruited attackers in the recent protests turn out to be drug-addicts) or parts of the reformist-leaning middle-class. With that in mind, the hardliners and especially Khamenei treat moments like these as a chance to give the reformists enough rope to hang themselves, then perform surgical purges. For example, there are already reports that wealthier families seen as supporting attacks within the protests will have their assets seized.
In short, the Western consensus that these dust-ups are weakening the Iranian government isn’t merely wrong, it’s exactly wrong.
The above is a round up of MSM talking points including the “maybe 30,000.” This, from two days ago, seems like the straight dope from an actual military expert. Judge Nap/Douglas Macgregor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KyOMTLixwM
When asked whether Congress would go along with an attack he says we are already living in a “post Constitutional republic” and they are irrelevant when it comes to dissent.
Of course his Goldman sourced $700/barrel oil is a standard talking point from the other side but one would think the plutocrats might have some power to restrain Trump even if our struggling democracy does not. They don’t care about us but they do care about money.
The article mentions the “high” number from the Guardian – not a reliable source, but fails to mention the “high” number of the unstated genocide – oops, I mean just killings (as if justified) per the author, much less the “high” number for the US wars.
That said, the point remains: the West cares not for civilian casualties (and never has, since perhaps the breakup of the Roman Empire?) – e.g., Europe’s internal and external history.
I seem to recall that Iran is a key link in China’s flagship Belt and Road initiative to forge a trading spine across the Eurasian landmass. As well the ancient, messy ethno-politics of the region, including Russia.
I like Rogers but any discussion of the current situation that omits China and Russia, let alone the Gulf States and India is limited, at best.
There seems to be very little discussion of how China might react to a US-Israel attempt to destroy its ambitions. Yet I note recent changes in its military command.
Maybe the point is we have no idea about China’s red lines? But I am reminded of the person looking for their keys under the lamp post, even though they didn’t lose them there, because that is where the light is. We are blinded by Trump’s incessant and banal media blitz and it’s hard to look elsewhere.
Rogers dusting off a 20 year old report is, with respect, interesting background but not much more.
The neocons have always had their “real men go to Tehran” faction and the Pentagon has always said no. Have they agreed to a disastrous (for the Pentagon) war this time? Or did they merely agree to a quick and out air war?
Nobody benefits from an attack other than the Israeli faction that wants the US permanently attached to our “ally” that isn’t an ally.
Macgregor says the Chinese have sold lots of missiles to Iran and that the Russians have revamped the Iranian air defenses after the 12 day.
“Revamping air defenses” is an >2 year project.
On paper Iran has one of the best layered air-defense systems on earth, not much to revamp. Except improve the collaboration between the regular army and the revolutionary guard – which has been going on for years now. In practice, there’s always room for improvement in every level.
Nevertheless, Iran uses many systems from both Russia and China, as does China. China has also been phasing out older systems that Iran is still using, so it is possible China has been restocking Iranian missiles, launchers and even radars with Chinese and Russian stuff Iran is already familiar with.
And of course both Russia and China can deliver top-notch communications equipment to improve the reaction times and general battle management of the Iranian air defense zones. Switching more of the existing military networks to use fiber-optics, microwaves and satellite links will take only weeks or months, not years.
Come to think of it, Russians could help a lot by letting some Iranian radar officers to visit their batteries in Crimea, Donbass or Belgorod for a few days just to see (again) how the real thing looks like at the radar screens and command centers, perhaps show some recently (hard) learned tricks of the trade and let the Iranians figure the rest out themselves.
It performed poorly when tested by Israel in the 12 day war. It also is reported not to have its system well-integrated as Russia does. Iran does not have any S-400s. Alexander Mercouris reported that Iranian operators are training now in Russia, that it will take >1 year, and Iran does not get the S-400s until the training is done.
I’m not arguing you, I said “on paper”. Naturally any untested system will experience problems and issues when suddenly (like during negotiations) put under tremendous pressure. 12 days was likely just long enough to identify many of the issues and needed improvements, but not really act on them.
According to the Ukrainian source it takes about 2-3 weeks for the Russian air-defenses to adjust for any new trick or weapon the Ukrainians use.
Maybe it behooves to say that S-400 was originally called S-300PMU-3. Iran has S-300PMU-2 version. They are not totally different systems, they share many components even if S-400 often has an improved version – fire-control radar is 30N6E2 instead of 30N6E1 and search and tracking radar is 91N6A instead of 91N6 (S-500 has 91N6M).
The big difference is the 40N6E missile for the S-400 system, which has range of 400 km and can kill satellites. Also, the S-400 command center 55K6E can command an S-300 battery, but not vice versa.
Given that during the 12 day war Israel did it’s utmost best to destroy the Iranian S-300 batteries (especially the radars) and even claimed (without any proof) to have succeeded, it seem that Israelis do think S-300 is good enough system for now.
Russia and China have been arming Iran with Moskit Sunburn cruise missiles designed expressly to take out warships for decades. War with Iran is not going to be as easy as it was dealing with Saddam’s Koream War vintage weapons. Mixing in a couple in with the 100s of swarming drones is to be expected.
China and Russia also have huge projects in oil/hydrocarbon reserve in the Iran/Iraq border regions.
China’s BRI is lightly in Iran, but Russia north south “addendum” is in Iran.
Where both stand when Trump attacks their strategic investments…….
Trump actions affect BRICS as well.
Will it be viewed as attacking the global south?
I too was wondering about the recent changes in military command. If you are going to war, one way or another the peacetime military command needs to be retired. During peace, various corruption and inefficiencies are tolerable that are intolerable in a war, as they lead to direct battlefield losses. If the military cannot make this transition, the country loses. At this point, the Russian command has largely been replaced.
Listening to Johnson’s interview with Karaganov, who would argue that Russia should not get directly involved, but should ensure the US bleeds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlxqImrRcsg
I can’t think why anybody would take Rogers analysis seriously. He has no credentials that would justify paying attention to any military or economic analysis of contemporary Iran by him.
In a fight between a small and a large power, the smaller power has to do only one thing really – don’t lose. This was true of the American Revolution and it was true of the Vietnam war. And that small power should be able to land some major blows from time to time. I think that the US Navy use to have a saying about this – ‘Rock ’em and sock ’em but don’t lose your shirt.’ The Battle of Midway was an example of this. Point is, Trump will be seeking a short, sharp war where he can try to kill Iran’s leaders, bomb military targets and then take a victory lap when Iran capitulates. He cannot afford a long drawn out fight as each day will lose him support across the board, especially in this election year. The Iranians, on the other hand, will make it their business to draw this war out as they know that time will be on their side. They have already stated that they will shut the Strait of Hormuz for three months which the US Navy will not be able to stop. As oil prices climb, Mr. Market will definitely clear it’s throat and reign in Trump’s adventure. You get a few US Navy ships and cargo vessels hit, the Pentagon will not be happy either. And if Iran slams Israel repeatedly with ballistic missiles, for Trump that will be like somebody kicking his favourite puppy again and again. This is all on Trump. There were the makings of a great deal last year on the table but then Trump let the Israelis have a go at murdering the Iranian negotiating team. I can only think that Trump has been told that Iran is ready to collapse and all that is needed is one good series of knockout blows and the job is done. That is why he is not serious about negotiating a deal and only offering Iran terms that amount to capitulation. Idjit.
Since the 12-day war last year is the only real data point we have on Iran’s wartime actions and performance, I’m going to go with that as the starting point for any sort of analysis.
So what did we see last year?
1. The Iranians repeatedly did not escalate as far as they might have done. I do not know whether this was due to internal politics, or their relationship with China, or some combination of both, but their target list every day was almost “Putin-esque” in terms of restraint. For example, the only big infrastructure project they went after, as I recall, was the Haifa refinery – imagine if they’d started knocking off Israel’s non-nuclear power plants one by one. Which, if the war had continued, they might have done, but my point is that their initial target list was predominantly military (air bases and such), and much less stuff that would irretrievably hurt the Israli population.
2. They also took pains to reassure their neighbors, e.g. the Saudis and the Iraqis – I am going by published Iranian press accounts, by the way, who knows what was happening behind the scenes – that Tehran “won’t do anything rash”. And they did not, either during or after the war, “go after” places like Azerbaijan, that were clearly aiding the Israelis. Again, there is a clear wish not to escalate beyond whatever level is absolutely necessary.
3. And through all this, their press was…militant is not even the right word. The Russian press viz. Ukraine, by contrast, was and is far tamer than the statements published in Pars Today or wherever.
So my point is – I suspect Tehran will measure its response based on what it feels is the minimum necessary to send a message and assuage domestic public opinion. In other words, if Trump, say, pulls a Syria circa 2018 – a single splashy missile strike – they’re not going to escalate to closing the Strait of Hormuz, but will instead find some American base to hit in response. And, possibly, give the Americans a few hours’ warning to get into shelter, so as not to actually kill anyone.
Of course, if Trump is looking to go bigger, then the response might be rather more painful. But again, up to a certain escalatory point, it benefits Iran more to “show benevolence” and keep the Strait open, for example, than to push the proverbial red button straight away. And, again, I wonder about how the Chinese are looking at things, and whether they will also act as a sort of restraining hand when push comes to shove…
‘Measured’ response is what they did do in the 12 days war, but not what they’ve said recently. Imo they’re up against the wall, desperately need exports/income, and under constant attack eg the mossad-led recent ‘uprising’. Imo they will do what they say, close the straits, go full out and try to sink the carriers and do what they can to make israel unlivable, just as Russia is making Ukraine unlivable.
Trump needs a big win, israel desperately wants to destroy Iran, and Iran is a cornered wild cat.
With a second carrier coming gonna be tough for trump to back down, seems more likely than not we’ll see all out war… and carriers have maybe 2 weeks of defensive missiles.
A 2-300 drone cloud with some anti-ship missiles will drain a US navy carrier group air defense in 2 salvos.
Maybe not even 24 hours before the US navy carrier group (or what’s left) run to Diego Garcia to reload.
I agree with John K that Iran’s response will not be restrained — but for another reason: this time the USA, and especially Israel, will go after Iran’s civilian infrastructure. Since that infrastructure is fragile, difficult to protect, and run-down, Iran will not be able to adopt a restrained attitude and endure an attrition war; it will have to strike back hard, ruthlessly, and decisively to compel Israel and the USA to stand down forthwith, before the country collapses with electricity, water, and telecommunications unavailable.
Historically, the USA regularly switched to attacking civilian infrastructure when strikes on military targets did not show rapid results. To wit:
1) In 1999, the Serbs managed to camouflage their military equipment, luring the USA to bomb dummies. Besides, their anti-aircraft defences destroyed two F-117 stealth fighters. Milosevic did not relent, so the USA, frustrated with their lack of success, went after power plants, bridges, the radio and TV centre, and even the Chinese embassy.
2) in 2024-2025, the USA, Israel, and the UK made a large number of sorties to destroy Ansarallah’s missile launchers, arms depots, radars, and to decapitate Ansarallah’s leadership. They were quite frustrated when the Yemenis continued to pelt Israel and the US Navy with an apparently inexhaustible supply of missiles and drones, while shooting down with apparent ease a surprising number of Reaper drones. They then went on to destroy airports and passenger airplanes, harbours, power plants, factories, residential buildings, a media centre (killing and wounding journalists) and even a jail full of illegal immigrants.
Israel is even less patient; every time it was in conflict with Hezbollah (2006 and 2024-2025), it rapidly switched from unsuccessful attempts to ferret out and destroy Hezbollahs militias out of their network of bunkers (especially since they showed to be very competent at eliminating Israel’s surveillance infrastructure and nearly sinking an Israeli warship) to razing entire villages and neighbourhoods in Lebanese cities.
During the 12-days war, Israel and the USA went after nuclear sites, missiles launchers, IRGC command posts, and military and political leaders; after some initial exultation, it is now recognized that the outcome of the offensive was very disappointing and did not substantially degrade Iranian capabilities — neither regarding nuclear installation, nor the stock of missiles.
Draw the conclusion about how the USA and Israel will proceed based on their past behaviour.
Teheran also stated clearly that if they are attacked they will immediately go after the centre of Tel Aviv…
An attack on Iran by the US has all the ingredients to be a disaster. Over-estimating US capabilities, and underestimating Iran’s is the likely first mistake, as that famous early 2000s war game demonstrated. Second is how much longer Trump can continue to resist the blandishments of Zionist donors like Adelson, and the urgent pleadings of Netanyahu. The Iranians have made clear that the Straits of Hormuz will be blocked in the event of an attack. That by itself is sufficient to warrant caution, but US hubris may trump that. Unless the US/Israel have an advanced tech method to disable Iran’s air defenses early on, aircraft flying into Iran may not return in large numbers. According to Larry Johnson and others, neither Israel nor the US is capable of missile/drone defense more than a few weeks. After that, and assuming Iranian assets are still in play, advantage Iran. Worst case: Israeli infrastructure gone, a US carrier battle group damaged or gone, US bases in the region damaged/gone, and US deaths number in the thousands. Then the question to be asked is: does the loss of a carrier result in a “Remember the Maine” ,wave the bloody flag moment for Americans, or do they remember who started this war and beat a hasty retreat, as Reagan did after the Lebanon barracks attack? Given US priors, and the fact our Neo-Cons have no reverse gear, an escalation up the nuclear ladder seems very possible to me. With US mainstream media cheering war president Trump on. For the mid-terms, the message becomes: “Don’t change horses in mid-stream.” And let the Commander-in Chief do his job: avenge the perfidy of the evil Iran regime. Because, sadly, one can never under-estimate the intentionally dumbed-down ignorance of Americans. I hope I’m wrong, and we avoid entirely this disaster in the making.
My SWAG is that your military analysis is on target, but I think Mr Market will send a message that cannot be ignored by a nation with 39 trillion in debt – nuclear war is a step too far. Would like to comment on one point:
“Unless the US/Israel have an advanced tech method to disable Iran’s air defenses early on, aircraft flying into Iran may not return in large numbers.”
Why was it not used in the 12-day war as a follow-up to cyberattacks? Israel was forced to restrain itself to standoff missiles from well outside Iranian airspace. If such a “weapon” existed, would it not have been used on day 2 (once Iran rebooted its systems) – had Iran not stopped on day 12, it would have been existential for Israel.
Since even light gunfire was not used against the lightly armored Chinooks in Venezuela, there clearly was a stand-down order. But who knows what was told to Trump, and who knows if he listened or forgot immediately, whilst Bibi whispers in his ear.
There are two problems with this: 1) being “measured” is interpreted as weakness by the US and Israelis, and is certainly spun that way by western media. Everyone I know IRL thinks that the 12 day war was a huge victory for Israel and that they barely sustained any damage at all, because that’s what the media have told them. That interpretation is just inviting ever more and ever escalating salami-slicing, because there aren’t high enough (perceived) costs to continuing to poke the hornets nest.
2) So many of the “we have to be measured” brigade in Iran were killed already. The Chief of the Iranian General Staff, the Commander in Chief of the IRGC, the head of the IRGC Aerospace forces, his deputy head, the commander of the IRGC air defense forces, etc etc. Being “measured” got these people killed. Trusting in negotiations with Uncle Sucker got these people killed. If I was any of these officers replacements, that’s certainly the lesson I would take from what happened last year. How much more patience for “measured” is there left amongst Iranian leadership, both figuratively and quite literally?
Apologies, this was supposed to be a reply to Safety First’s comment above.
The mainstream media are major villains of the entire situation. The same is true of Ukraine. I remember how they sneered at Putin during the Sochi Olympics.
Alastair Crooke is a bit (hugely) more impressed with IRGC naval and military competencies.
IRGC has been given authority by the IRI legislature to shutter the Strait around Hormuz, ostensively at first shot by US’ vaunted armada.
Another aircraft carrier: USS Lincoln cannot enter the Gulf of Oman risk; it is too dangerous! That means its few daily strike aircraft would need refueled in IRI airspace to get standoff weapons range of Tehran! Another aircraft carrier, another target that won’t go in harm’s way!
IRI have also stated Tel Aviv is on the preauthorized target files.
Rogers mentions Shi’a proxies. He ignored PMF etc in Iraq who are the cause of ousting ISIS from Iraq when the official US puppet army and casualty adverse US forces would or could not oust the CIA spawn.
Suppose Hizbolah in Lebanon decide to launch their rocketry in sympathy with IRGC!
IRGC naval assets around Hormuz would shutter the strait in a New York minute!
US keep your gas tanks full.
I would assume there have been discussions among Iran/hezbollah/houthis and other resistance. A real opportunity to turn things around.
Odd to me that the zionists don’t want to be patient, seems as if they’ve been winning. Makes me wonder if Israel’s in a worse way than I thought.
I believe Netanyahu still has to deal with his corruption trial and an election in 2027 at the latest and given how long it took him to form a coalition last time plus the uncertainty around us commitment the closer we get to midterms the window to do the attack at all probably closes for good by August/September if not June this year
I admire Crooke, but he underestimated Israeli capabilities and bloody-mindedness during the last Lebanese fight, and overestimated Hezbollah.
Worried about Iran closing the Straights of Hormuz? Think about Israel and mushroom clouds. This utterly unnecessary and unprovoked war might well be the beginning of the end.
If China and Russia seriously wanted to defend Iran, their options in the Gulf seem too limited to have much effect. What they should do is tell Trump (not the press) that if the US and Israel feel like they can attack a sovereign country with no UN mandate, then they will feel unconstrained in the same way. So expect an attack on and overrunning of Taiwan as soon as the bombs start falling on Tehran. Or Russia could easily take out US proxies in Europe, the Baltic states most easily, but maybe some demilitarizing missiles could be spared for Poland and Rumania as well, or even the big enchilada, the UK. In other words, you want World War III, Donny, bring it on! Like every other world war, it can start with attacks on weak allies of hostile major powers.
Maybe this is naive but I still don’t see China actually invading or striking Taiwan unless they were forced to destroy US weapons. I don’t see how it benefits them to engage in hard war when they seem to be winning the soft war
I don’t see where two permanent seats at the UNSC would go kinetic over US habitual disdain for UN Charter at this juncture.
But DPRK might drop a salvo on US bases in Guam, and the first island chain bc US dissing UN.
I wonder why China would want to invade Taiwan other than a sense of pride or to remove US armaments stipend there.
China grabbing Taiwan’s semiconductor plants is risky, as the USA has already gamed that the USA could bomb the plants rather than let them fall into China’s hands.
Not a good look for an ally to be bombing an allied country’s crown jewells.
All China has to do is blockade Taiwan.
Iran will do nothing, their goverment is done for.
Let hope the aftermath is not messy. Iranians are smart people.
The technological gap is immense, there is no chance for the religious cult to survive this, Allah can only do so much. It baffles me when experts claim end of the world scenarios.
I would give credibility to such claims only if Russia or China got involved in the Iran’s side.
Aint going to happen.
RU and Iran have a mutual defense alliance treaty.
We were in Afghanistan for twenty years and the Taliban are still in power there. I doubt the US will have any better luck in evicting the Shia from Iran.
We are told that Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country and Iran is a house of cards.
We’ll have to wait and see.
You have no basis for saying that. Making Shit Up is a violation of our written site Policies.
Iran has belatedly recognized there is no point in negotiating and the US represents an existential threat. I said it will close the Strait of Hormuz. That has focused minds all over the region. John Kirakou has 3 Gulf State princes as contacts (and not playboy princes, working contacts). These states are so worried that the UAE, Oman, the Saudis, and one other + Egypt have all called Trump firmly telling him not to attack Iran. They have a VASTLY better measure of what is afoot than you do.
Amazing interview – Danny Haiphong with Ali Alizadeh
https://x.com/GeopoliticsDH/status/2017333477960458522?s=20
Good one, I saw that last night, I was not familiar with Alizadeh before. He emphasized that the political factions in Iran have been united like never before in the face of the recent attacks and threats. Prof. Marandi has said this before, as has Nima Alkorshid. (I hope he is doing well, I have not seen a post from him in about a week).
https://x.com/Dialogue_NRA/status/2017373249898770515?s=20
Thanks, I wonder why he hasn’t been posting interviews lately on the YT channel? I assume the internet connection isn’t good enough.
I think it is much simpler.
Trump does not want to go to jail. Job number 1.
Job number two is looting and monetizing, and he’s doing well at that as he pings around.
His amply-tailored suit sleeves have infinite shiny orbs to keep everyone, all over the world, distracted.
His every day a new smelly nearly wet fart-in-a-hot-skillet behaviors are wreaking very real, dire, long-term negative consequences.
His hangers- on and sickinfants are lurking to capitalize on the chaos.
He is a TERRORIST.
He is a cornered, lame-duck three year old lashing out in a deepening panic and malaise.
He does not give a sh*t what it takes to keep the world at bay and not go to jail.
War with Iran… talk is cheap, moving fleets expensive, but good for a few days of distraction.
I bet no, the real sh*t will start to hit the fan as we get closer to an election, and he and his posse determine whether they can clearly win an election, or need to create a rationale for cancelling elections and declaring martial law.
Can’t “we” file a class-action-lawsuit under anti-terrorism laws?
I realize my need to simplify could be a result of head-and-heart sickness, and a consequently reactive weakening of cognition.
I looked at polymarket, could not find (weak navigator!) any bet for whether there will be 2026 mid-terms in the US. Odd(s), that?
Judge Napolitano and Col. Larry Wilkerson. utube, ~26+ minutes
COL. Lawrence Wilkerson : Can Iran Defeat Israel in a Regional War?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMvVhwDIejI
Watch second half with John Mearsheimer and Alastair Crooke.
https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/631722-new-old-paradigm-trump/
Here is an interesting article about how bad Iran’s outlook is.
https://m-vz-ru.translate.goog/world/2026/1/30/1390797.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
I am not sure that Iran has what it takes to fight back. In the latest interview by Diesen Mirandi says that several hundreds of police officers and civilians were killed. Israel bragging about their role in this carnage. Iran just meekly take this. E.g. why is the water production and distribution system still working in Israel? How come there are no Iranian sabotage groups in Israel? Until Iran debilitates Israel they will never be safe. Israel has killed loads of Iranian nuclear scientists over the years. Where are the graveyards of Israeli nuclear scientists or cyber warfare engineers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6XHVDtHRX4
? Not sure if Iran has what it takes to fight back? Did you listen to what Marandi said in the clip you posted? Have you paid attention to what Johnson, Crooke, MagGregor, Ritter, Wilkerson, and many other experts have said?
The Israeli Jewish population has at bedrock strong cohesion, despite ethnic and religious cross-currents. It’s extremely rare for an Israeli Jew to become a spy for another state. I’m not aware of a single case. Israeli Jews who no longer agree with the Zionist paradigm may emigrate, but they don’t become turncoats.
“It’s extremely rare for an Israeli Jew to become a spy for another state. I’m not aware of a single case.”
Things are changing, apparently: The Israeli Jews who spied for Iran in biggest infiltration in decades (Reuters).
Maybe read about what happened in the Iran-Iraq war.
Shia are famed for their ability to take pain that no others can endure. They revere martyrdom par none.
Crooke as an illustration describes how when the Caliphate came in, the Shia were told not to go to their mosques, lest they lose a finger each time.
They persisted, losing all their fingers, then toes, then hands, then feet.
Iran has a couple of permanent, local targets that it can threaten whenever it wants: the Straits of Hormuz, and Israel. These have the advantages (from Iran’s standpoint) that (a) they can never be removed or protected from danger, and (b) attacks against them can be dialed up or dialed down to an almost infinite degree.
The Hoothis taught a master class in extracting maximum leverage from a nearby waterway even without a lot of money and armaments. Certainly Iran can do everything the Houthis did, only 100 times more, all the way from issuing scary press releases to swarming and sinking carefully chosen ships. Commercial ship traffic, we saw, is very easy to terrify since they are operated by sober and bottom-line-oriented business executives. And when it comes to “blocking” the Straits of Hormuz, Iran can do pretty much anything it wants or can think of, with little or no loss of life, or with carefully chosen loss of life, and no one can do anything about it.
The Russians have also been teaching their own master class on how to dismantle a first world society and render it uninhabitable, and these lessons could easily be applied by Iran to Israel now that the former can reach Israel via large numbers of unmanned missiles. Israel really has a glass jaw since it was kind of plopped down in the middle of a desert and relies on a small amount of high-tech infrastructure (water, power, energy, sewage, foreign shipments) to keep the society running. Anything from a little to a lot of this infrastructure could be destroyed by people pushing buttons inside Iran, again with a carefully chosen loss of life.
Maybe it’s just me, but it seems like Iran has the upper hand in a present day conflict by a huge margin.
For many decades, before one of the many US military adventures, I’ve invariably run into anti-war people claiming that that the latest US prey has a decent military, that the US would likely pay a heavy price if it attacked, and so forth.
Also invariably, none of that has ever happened. When attacking the prey, the US has always been successful. The US has never been good in dealing with the aftermath of its regime changes, but its expertise in knocking weaker countries over is hard to deny.
I think you have a point, especially in terms of just starting an attack at the tactical level. But outside the immediate start, I would change it from “weaker” to “isolated & divided” countries. That seems to be the common thread between lower-casualty wars the US has fought since WWII, particularly Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Korea and Vietnam were obviously very different though, and that was despite the US military being orders more powerful than it is now. And despite the West’s best efforts, I think it’s also clear that Iran is far from strategically isolated or terminally divided today.
What makes kinetic war between the US and Iran so weird is that it’s already been on-and-off my whole adult life, and the Iranians keep pushing the US back with significant casualties. It just gets completely scrubbed from the narrative somehow. For example, I’m still amazed how almost everybody, even in alt-media, just accepted what the Trump administration claimed about the retaliation on Al-Asad after Soleimani was killed.
A move no one seems to discuss departs from the idea that Iran might *eventually* move to close the Strait of Hormuz.
Why wait and watch a massive US build up.
Why not impose an “intelligent” (selective) blockade on all shipping bound for US, Israel & vassal states AS SOON AS US BEGINS BUILD UP AND THREATS? Let them make the consequences manifest–not for some eventual attack after the decision has been taken.
Imo Iran would be portrayed as having started the war which would,at least in the west, be accepted as legitimate justification for nearly any response.
1. It is better for Iran to let the US forces build up and make a massive response to the first US strike and take out Israel using hypersonics while taking out any and all US ships at sea, aircraft in the sky, on the deck or the ground, along with all US land bases within reach, even if they are deep in Europe
2. I love American irony: “The U.S. military has the most highly trained and lethal force in the world and will continue to operate with the highest levels of professionalism and adhere to international norms.”
“The U.S. military has the most highly trained and lethal force in the world and will continue to operate with the highest levels of professionalism and adhere to international norms. Iran’s IRGC must do the same.”
My memory is surely faulty, but we seem to have been treated to an enormous array of US naval operations that were done outside of “international norms” over the past year. Last I heard it was not normal for navies to bomb national capitols and kill their leadership, bomb fishing boats, blockade nations or engage in piracy in international waters without a UN mandate. Whoever wrote that needs to worry that Iran will, indeed, follow our examples.
Multiple reports and video on X, showing apparent sabotage operations in seven cities across Iran. E.g.:
https://x.com/Intl_Mediatior/status/2017603924019015977
These reports triggered a selloff in cryptos.
During the Daniel Davis podcast with retired British Commodore Jeremy, the latter, noting the strategically precarious situation that Israel faces, Davis rattled off bunch of the names of the biggest warmongers-cum-friends-of-Israel with the question, let’s see if these guys change their tune. Except the problem is that none of these guys are Jews: they are all Christian fundamentalists and, as far as I know, they are fundamentally committed to the destruction of Israel and Jewish nation for fanatical religious reasons (as the precursor to the End Time or whatever), arguably far more than any Iranian or Palestinian. Even if they know what the real situation is, getting Israel (and the Jews with it) incinerated in a glorious bonfire is exactly what they want to do accomplish. Are there anyone Jewish who has thought about this, I wonder?
China Sends Type 055 and Type 052D Stealth Destroyers Toward Iranian Waters For Joint Drills with Iran and Russia
https://www.thedefensenews.com/news-details/China-Sends-Type-055-and-Type-052D-Stealth-Destroyers-Toward-Iranian-Waters-For-Joint-Drills-with-Iran-and-Russia/
Looks like those Iranian drills will be conducted with PLAN ships and some unnamed RF assets. So yeah, any attack on Iran right now could get real ugly real fast.