Originally Posted by
Ronald Reagan
The objective needs to be remove the regime from power. Once it is gone there won't be a nuclear programme or long range missile programme to worry about. ................... I wonder why it is the regime has such support, my Iranian friends often ask me the same question.
You raise a very good point
RR. Speaking for myself, I don't support the regime in the slightest at all.
I once taught an Iranian guy to fly. His family had left Iran when the Shah of Iran was deposed. We've lost touch since I taught him but he and his family (this was in the early 2000's) were quite at a loss as to how Iran could ever be recovered given the nature of the hold the regime had even back then, a hold which has only grown stronger.
The issue is how do you remove such a regime which has had time to watch what happened in the other places you mention where regime changes took place and, undoubtedly, saw where the weaknesses in those regimes were and have worked to ensure they don't have the same weaknesses.
As was highlighted some while back in this very Thread, the whole defensive structure set up by the regime is designed to spread the threat to any attacking forces far and wide, make a few surgical strikes pointless. And the ability for them to strike within the ME quite easily, and the chaos that will cause, is a card they play very well. They've thought this through very carefully over many years - they are not fools!
I suspect that this is why others have not rushed in to join the US here. We don't believe that this is a "winnable" war as it stands. Now, what the solution is ......... well, that's the $1M question. I really don't think anyone knows!
Anyway, just my thoughts!
