ATL Bear said:If we don't find the off ramp within a reasonably short time frame, it will be a significant geopolitical shift, but not what you think. Hamas has not been defeated in Gaza. Sure, they're militarily and infrastructurally decimated. They've lost dozens if not hundreds of their leaders, and at least half of the land area they previously controlled. But they remain in power.whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:
Tell us without telling us you don't know Shia from Sunni.
Iran's refusal to negotiate a ceasefire has nothing to do with martyrdom or global jihad. It's a predictable (and predicted) calculation by the country with the upper hand in the war.
Lol I didn't say anything about Sunni/Shia, and Iran is most definitely not winning the war. Good Lord.
The regime is starting to come apart. Exactly as I suggested it might.
BREAKING: Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian is reportedly clashing with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as the regime begins to split over the handling of the war.
— Eyal Yakoby (@EYakoby) March 29, 2026
They're collapsing from within. pic.twitter.com/tnGzQNKzgX
Suggested it might??? You bet the mortgage... If the ends in anything other than a total regime collapse and Iranian's rejoicing in the streets you lost the house..
Your reading comprehension is as bad as your analytical skills. I specifically said in the initial post on the matter that I was not predicting it, but rather instantiating it as a scenario to watch for. We now see actions which fit the opening phases of such a scenario. What we see now may be all we see. Or events could devolve further. Just gotta watch.
The Iranian regime is in what almost certainly a planned survival strategy - go to ground...survive....act on pre-existing orders - with no real need for constant commo with the Hqs element. Define victory as survival and just try to outlast. It's analogous to insurgent cellular structures, where there is zero lateral communication....where units are clueless as to even the existence of other elements and are acting solely on discretion within a defined order of battle. That's a perfectly reasonable survival strategy. But it's a terrible way to fight a war. There is no maneuver. No mass. No concentration. No ability to mount an effective counterattack in any meaningful way. Just hunker down and take it while leaving your enemy free to operate t discretion.
One reason for Trump doing all the public yammering? To stoke exactly such divisions cited above. To incite remaining religious structures to attack remaining secular structures in order to prevent latter from cutting a peace deal. Problem is, the cellular structure the regime has adopted as a survival strategy leaves itself vulnerable to exactly what we are doing - destabilizing the regime by stoking fears of one portion of the regime seeking a separate peace at the expense of the other.
One thing for sure among all scenarios? One where Iran wins. They are in a world of hurt. Their best case outcome is a reset to 1980. You are digging yourself an awfully deep hole here........
We're going after Iran. They are defined by mosaic defense. It's not only how they control such a large nation, the IRGC operates normally in dispersed command and control. Decapitation doesn't stop them, and they were built to operate without real time battle orders. It not only makes them resilient, it increases the danger as some regional actors may escalate in ways others may not agree with. It's likely the source of some of the regional potshots they've taken on neighbors.
You of all people should know that the exact tactics you discuss above are why great powers struggle long term and accumulate great cost in both money and blood in asymmetric warfare. We were never not going to be able to crush them on a comparative basis. But the calculus is not 1 to 1. It's more like 1000 to 1 or greater in many scenarios. Iran doesn't need a Navy. They only need to project a threat on traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. That cost to the world is greater than the entire military and industrial value of Iran.
At this point I'm not even sure if actual discussions are happening, and that's not a good thing. And Trump can do all the public "yammering" he wants. Other than official channels, communications in Iran are mostly a black hole, and what does happen is still state directed.
We've achieved a decimation of their nuclear capability and greatly weakened their military apparatus. If we move to regime change and rooting out the RGC, it's going to be a slog.
Part of the issue is conflicting policy points, we are shedding allies yet expanding our footprint. We are choosing to destabilize areas requiring more resources for less return. At the same time, letting China and Russia off, at the expense of traditional allies. (such as Russian oil).
As I said, and I agree with him ATL Bear, Iran dies not have to win, they just have to not lose. They do nit need a Navy, they control Homuz with asymmetrical means. All they need is to keep it drawing US resources in.
Give me Mattis over Hegseth any day. This is not a winnable strategy. Hell one carrier is already out for whatever reason. Add Houthis closing Red Sea? This is overreach and poor planning after the first strike.
