Comments

On Iran’s future — 33 Comments

1. It appears the Iranian people have retreated from the streets to their homes, driven by mass killings delivered by their overlord regime, where they can now begin the process of perishing by means of starvation and dehydration, out of sight of the world at large. Woe is their lot.

2. Say you are Trump just for fun. What and when do you attack?

   Their leaders
   Their infrastructure
   Their navy – one ship is in South Africa It’s reported
   Their IRGC buildings
   Their Basij
   Their airports

   636,400 square miles and 90 million people – not that simple.

   At night, at day – many nights and many days???

   When do you stop?

3. Saw a couple of unconfirmed reports this morning of a US aircraft carrier enroute and other assets moving towards the ME. Maybe Israel and US buying time .

4. Since the evil bastards might use their enriched uranium in dirty warheads to attack Israel, we probably want massive counter missile capability in theater.

5. Well the could piss away their U-235 instead of using, say nerve agents, or something far less costly to produce and which can’t be used for military or civilian uses. They aren’t called the “mad mullahs” without cause.

   However, severe health’s effects from U-235 require inhalation or ingestion of very large amounts, it ain’t Plutonium. half life U-235 is 700,000,000 years vs Pu-239 at 24,000 years, which gives a guide as to the rate difference of alpha particle emission. Alpha particles internally are a very bad thing.

6. John Galt III,

   I thought similar things about Maduro and Venezuela a month ago. It does seem impossible, but the U.S. special forces operation in Venezuela showed many impossible things are possible for our military. I sincerely hope they have something very clever to execute very soon to help the Iranians.

7. Several past U.S. Presidents have implied support to Iranians protesting their leadership, only to do nothing as the regime regained control and violently purged the nation of revolutionaries.

   I have believed Trump would not allow the same to happen after offering personal encouragement. I pray our nation is able to do something soon to help the brave Iranians who are trying to oust the despots in command of Iran.

8. John Kiriakou (former Arabist with the CIA) opines that Crown Prince Pahlavi has been bought off by the Israelis, who have paid him large sums of money. He also opines that it would be very difficult to overthrow the Mullahs because there are so many of them, spread over most of the country.

   Granted, “the Iranian people” are largely opposed to the people in power. Can they be ousted by military intervention, especially from outside the country? I am skeptical this can be done without overwhelming force in a dozen or more cities. It isn’t enough to bomb the goverment’s central office in Teheran — you’d need to take and hold lots of ground, and you’d have to do it quickly so the IRGJ doesn’t start lobbing missiles all over, and as @Chases Eagles says, dirty ones at that.

9. F:

   Why would Israel buy him off, and why would he be susceptible? That sounds like “expert” horse manure to me. He’s been wanting to come back and restore the monarchy for 45 years.

10. F and Chases Eagles:

    When you talk about dirty bombs think fission products Sr-90, Cs-137, or Co-60. Uranium-235 isn’t toxic enough, nowhere as deadly as Pu-239. Fission products come from the splitting (fission) of fissile elements in a nuclear reactor or a nuclear weapon. Iran has neither. Has Iran bought fission products from some other nation? Or does Iran have access to Co-60 from civilian uses sufficient to load into a missile? Probably not IMO.

11. Sounds like John Kiriakou is not a “former” Arabist lol

12. Some experts opine that Trump has acquiesced to Israeli and Arab pleas to not take action. If that is accurate, I profess to not understand the Israeli thinking, and give no credence to the Arabs. Actually, I don’t understand the position of the Sunni Arabs for that matter.

    I just feel that it will be a terrible thing if the Mullahs continue in power; and are, in fact, strengthened by surviving the challenge. Terrible for the Iranians; terrible for the targets of Iran’s terrorist surrogates, and terrible for the United States after Trump made his very bold, very loud, very public statements.

    Like some school yard bully, Trump may have let his mouth put himself, and the United States, in a ‘put up or shut up’ mode.
    Trump might do well to reflect on TR’s advice.

13. “John Kiriakou (former Arabist with the CIA) opines that Crown Prince Pahlavi has been bought off by the Israelis, who have paid him large sums of money. – F

    If this is to demonstrate the level of anti-Israel propaganda, it’s just run of the mill.

    This is the undercurrent that distorts any support for toppling the Islamic terrorist regime controlling Iran.

    “We can’t be for anything that would benefit Israel.”

    That sums up the world’s reaction to what’s happening in Iran and any support the US will offer Iran.

    I think we can all make a list of the positive things that would result in the toppling of the Islamic Republic of Iran. We can’t even say that would be the goal of a US military operation in Iran, though. All we can say at best is our actions would be to punish the regime for it’s repressive policies toward its citizens.

    But the unstated goal has to be the aiding of the Iranian people rising up and toppling the regime. The problem is the Iranian people are unarmed. The Islamic Republic has an internal army the IRGC of 150,000 soldiers and a militia, the Basij, of 1,000,000 (effectively about 100,000). That’s not counting the Artesh, the military arm of Iran with 420,000 active duty personnel.

    Unless the US has credible intelligence there is a portion of one or more of the military branches would defect from support of the regime, it seems to be a fools errand.

    Just like Israel, we could suppress the anti-air missile batteries, and Iran effectively doesn’t have an air force, so we could establish air supremacy.

    How many weeks or months would it take to kill enough of the military, the IRGC, the Basij and Artesh to cause them to signal a change of allegiance to a secular government, like Pahlavi?

    Does the IGRC have enough fanatics that would fight to their last breath? Do they resemble the proxies like the Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas? Israel leveled much of Gaza and Hamas fights on.

    Even if the Artesh capitulated to a civil government, would Iran just turn into a civil war? If that occurred, would US voters blame President Trump? Would the 2026 election be the casualty?

    I think President Trump and his administration are taking all this into account. I think President Trump’s instincts have been good. If the President draws the conclusion any military action would be counterproductive, I would be disappointed, but I would understand.

    Am I being hyperbolic, though, to suggest his administration is risking the progress it has made dismantling the rabid collectivists in this country by taking on the Islamic regime in a meaningful way? Would the American people turn on the President if things went sideways in Iran?

14. Oldflyer, I have read the Arab states want Iran weakened but not removed because of the possible turmoil in their own countries if they saw a thriving democracy in Iran.

15. Brian E: If the President draws the conclusion any military action would be counterproductive, I would be disappointed, but I would understand.

    Agreed, alas.

    What would be productive … ?

16. John Kiriakou (former Arabist with the CIA) opines that Crown Prince Pahlavi has been bought off by the Israelis, who have paid him large sums of money. He also opines that it would be very difficult to overthrow the Mullahs because there are so many of them, spread over most of the country.
    ==
    (1) Why would we think this is something other than the work of his imagination? (2) There are always lots of government employees ‘all over the country’.

17. Unless the US has credible intelligence there is a portion of one or more of the military branches would defect from support of the regime, it seems to be a fools errand.
    ==
    Militaries and paramilitary outfits are social organisms. They often cohere rather poorly. See the Afghan armed forces we assembled over a period of 20 years.

18. Oldflyer:If that is accurate, I profess to not understand the Israeli thinking, and give no credence to the Arabs.

    On the Israeli side, a perfectly understandable desire not to die for regime change in Iran is no doubt part of it.

    Experts have warned that Israel may find itself less equipped to defend itself against Iran’s missile threat that it was in the two countries’ 12-day round of fighting in June, when Israel targeted the Islamic Republic’s military leadership, nuclear program and missile production.

    They have to live with Iran in a way that we don’t. Easy for us to say we should do what it takes to remove the mullahs, it will only cost us money and the lives of volunteer military, our homes are not at threat in the way Israeli homes are.

    And while the mullhas would be morally at fault, the dead Israelis would nonetheless be dead.

19. AppleBetty, good question.

    If Israel is saying wait, they might be aware of a tipping point among the militia/military at some point in the near future.

    I’m not sure there is any way to counter the regime’s jamming of Starlink’s signal. It’s surprising they could jam the signal across the entire country. Re-establishing communication among protesters/rebels and the ability to receive/transmit messages to the outside is crucial to maintain the momentum.

    The underlying grievances aren’t going away. Their currency will still be worthless next week and the month after. The infrastructure will still be crumbling and the extent the water shortage is critical isn’t going away either.

    The militia’s share the living conditions the protesters/rebels are suffering with.

    Iran’s economy continues to retract. Right now Iran is storing 150 million barrels of oil in tankers offshore, which represents 50 days of production. Some oil workers have joined the uprising and production in some facilities has slowed/stopped. If that’s true, that would give Iran only a few months of revenue as they sell off the stored oil.

20. Neo: Why would Israel want to buy off the crown prince? It’s what intelligence agencies do — hoping to avoid having an enemy if/when he returns to power.

    The Israelis have demonstrated numerous times that they have lots of assets in the country — assassinating senior Iranian officials, installing malware into operating systems, and being able to map anti-aircraft systems so Israeli airforce planes can knock them out. They certainly want to know Iranian capabilities and intentions, and if the Crown Prince is able to take over, they want to have access to him. Israel gives every impression of having free rein wherever they want to go.

21. F is making my point for me!

    “We can’t be for anything that would benefit Israel.”

    Are you suggesting that Pahlavi wouldn’t have the interests of the Iranian people, if a Republican Monarchy was the choice of the Iranian people?

    Pahlavi has made it clear that some form of democratic government would be established. He would have influence, but wouldn’t be the source of power.

    It might steer Iran to a relationship, even a close relationship to Israel– but there is plenty of indication that the Iranian people, at least the Persians, would support a relationship with Israel anyway.

    So, we’re back to because Pahlavi might support a positive relationship with Israel, we should be against it.

    This is just naked propaganda. If the goal is psyops, this isn’t particularly effective.

22. Something to watch closely (if it emerges into public view), particularly on Iranian indications and actions:

    Steve Witkoff voiced the US demands to Iran:

    – Stop uranium enrichment;

    – Reduce missile stockpiles;

    – Reduce approximately 2000 kg of enriched nuclear material (3.67–60%);

    – Stop supporting regional proxies.

    Washington wants to formalize these demands in an agreement. In return, Iran will recieve the lifting of sanctions and a return to the international community.

    https://x.com/i/status/2012323886554128513

23. Iran and Venezuela are both object lessons on why it is necessary for the people to be armed.

24. Part of the problem is that we don’t know if the commoners in Iran really want a regime change, with the implications thereof, or if this is just a sort out furious outburst.

    Remember the ‘Arab Spring’? It looked like a revolutionary moment, but in truth it was as much or more a protest against the cost of food. Also, to the degree it was real, the risers didn’t have the organization ready to take advantage. The one group who did was the Muslim Brotherhood, in Egypt, and they were arguably worse than the former regime.

25. While this may not be dispositive, it’s certainly indicative of the Iranians faithfulness (or lack of) to their religion.

    A cross-national survey (covering multiple Middle Eastern countries, including Iran) found that around 12% of Iranians reported attending mosques more than once a week (roughly 12.4% for men and 11.5% for women), with many attending only rarely (e.g., once a year or on special occasions: ~51–57%). This places Iran among the lowest in mosque attendance in the region.

    Older reports (e.g., from the early 2000s onward) and clergy statements have cited even lower figures for regular attendance, such as less than 2% attending Friday congregational prayers specifically.

    Recent anecdotal and official indicators (2023–2025) point to further declines: Senior clerics reported 50,000–75,000 mosques closed (out of ~75,000–80,000 total) due to sharp drops in attendance, with some officials calling the trend “highly alarming.” A 2023 government-linked study suggested only ~11% always participate in congregational prayers, while 45% never attend Friday prayers.

    I would say it is highly likely the populace favors a secular government or at least not a fanatical Islamist government like the one that took control basically making promises they never intended to follow through with.

    Democracy and Political Freedom — In Paris interviews (e.g., with Western media) and early 1979 statements, Khomeini promised a democratic system, free elections, a popularly elected government, and that clerics would not interfere in governance or hold ruling positions long-term. He spoke of a “government of national unity” and even suggested clerics would step aside after helping the revolution. Once in power, he quickly sidelined secular and moderate allies (e.g., Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan resigned in late 1979 over increasing clerical dominance), purged opposition, banned parties, and established a theocracy with himself as Supreme Leader under velayat-e faqih. The 1979 constitution enshrined clerical oversight, and dissent was suppressed.
    Freedom and Human Rights — Khomeini repeatedly referenced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, promising freedom of expression, thought, equality before the law, and rights for all (including women, minorities, and political opponents). He claimed Islam guaranteed these and that the new system would respect them. In reality, the regime imposed strict Islamic codes (e.g., mandatory hijab, initially presented as optional), censored media, executed opponents, repressed ethnic/religious minorities, and curtailed freedoms far beyond the Shah’s era in many areas.
    Economic Prosperity and Social Welfare — Famous promises included free water, electricity, housing for the poor, reduced military spending redirected to welfare, and an end to corruption/poverty. These appealed to the disadvantaged classes. Post-revolution, economic mismanagement, war with Iraq (1980–1988), sanctions, and prioritization of ideological/military goals led to persistent poverty, inflation, and inequality—many of these pledges were never realized or were later downplayed.
    Rights for Women and Minorities — He assured women would have choice (e.g., on hijab) and that ethnic/religious minorities (Kurds, Baluchis, etc.) would enjoy equal rights. Compulsory hijab was enforced soon after, and minorities faced discrimination or suppression.
    No Theocracy or Clerical Domination — Khomeini avoided publicly detailing velayat-e faqih during the revolution’s height, assuring audiences (including in Paris) that religious leaders would guide but not rule directly. Critics and former allies (e.g., first president Abolhassan Bani-Sadr) later accused him of betrayal, saying promises made in exile were “convenient” but discarded once power was secured.

26. Brian E, your point from some comments back is well taken. I agree that the Arab Monarchies would fear a successful popular uprising in the region. I was overly focused in my comment on the idea that a Shia regime is anathema in the world of the Sunnis–except, of course, when they ally against an infidel.
    It is still not clear how chaos in Iran would work against the Israelis; particularly if it portended regime change..
    I have been led to believe for some time that the mass of the population of Iran is not Muslim. It is well documented that Iran was a fairly contented Secular state before the overthrow. I had friends who worked and resided their and they confirmed that. I suppose that events subsequent to the overthrow just illustrate once again the unpredictable nature of a power vacuum.
    I do not know enough, but wonder if the IRGC and conventional military are committed Muslims, or if they used the Mullahs as a front to consolidate their own power, while paying lip service to the religion. I suppose someone knows.
    I expected some push back from my comments about Trump’s bluster.

27. For whatever it might be worth (if anything):

    Going back 30-35 years, I had lunch with a chap from Iran, who was a bartender. I noticed that he drank alcohol, and asked him if he was a Muslim. He said yes, and I said “Aren’t Muslims not supposed to drink?”
    He said “Yes, but we all do.”

    Around the same time I was acquainted with another Iranian, who worked in a liquor store. I don’t know if he was Muslim, but suspect he was. Nice guy.

28. @Selfy: I noticed that he drank alcohol, and asked him if he was a Muslim. He said yes, and I said “Aren’t Muslims not supposed to drink?”
    He said “Yes, but we all do.”

    I asked that once, of a Bangladeshi Muslim, and followed up “so why not pork”. And he said “it’s because all our lives we’ve been told that pork is disgusting, but no one says that about alcohol.”

    Once at party a Nigerian Muslim dressed in white from head to toe told me he couldn’t eat anything served there, since it wasn’t halal, with a beer in his hand.

29. There is another factor that suggests a weakened Islamic state in Iran serves Saudi Arabia more than a free democratic Iran is this:

    Saudi Arabia has reportedly urged the U.S. to delay strikes on Iran until the regime is further weakened, but without pushing for total regime change—fearing it could empower Israel disproportionately (e.g., as the “biggest strategic winner” in a post-Iran vacuum) or destabilize oil markets. Riyadh has also signaled neutrality (e.g., denying airspace for U.S. strikes) and lobbied for de-escalation. While Saudi Arabia shares Israel’s interest in containing Iran, it has conditioned normalization (e.g., joining Abraham Accords) on Palestinian statehood progress—potentially complicated by a Cyrus Accords framework that integrates Iran-Israel ties without addressing Saudi priorities.

    The Cyrus Accords apparently was first suggested by Victoria Coates and Len Khodorkovsk in 2021 as a potential peace initiative between Israel and Iran. Crown Prince Pahlavi has suggested such an alliance in 2025.

    Cyrus the Great was the Persian king that freed the Hebrew people (539 BC) from Babylonian captivity and allowed them to return to Israel to rebuild the Temple. It was completed during the reign of Darius I.

30. @ Brian: “… to return to Israel to rebuild the Temple.”
    As a matter of history and just generally “because we can or ought to be able to…”
    I think we should be rebuilding a number of the old heritage buildings and sites, but with a means of indicating the older original (remaining) material vs. the material added in modern times. A Jewish friend of mine said that is what the Israelis do with the Western Wall? I am thinking of the Jewish Temple, the Acropolis, selected Egyptian sites, older castles in Britain and Europe, etc.

    I don’t understand why there aren’t wider campaigns to do this, especially since we now have cranes and other means to make the job faster, safer, stronger if necessary (?), etc.
    Maybe ruins are more attractive as tourist locations? Or perhaps build 1/10 to 1/4 scale models?? Some of the CAD “reconstructions” are really amazing, but still not quite the same as having real physical buildings or models.

    To “rebuild” the Temple, do you have to disassemble the Dome of the Rock?
    My understanding is that when built in 691AD, it was really a temple for Arabic non-Trinitarian Christians. Any references to “Muhammad” are really not a name but a title for “praised one” or something similar, and they are referring to Jesus as the non-divine creator/leader of that faith group.
    I could see disassembling it, recording the pieces parts as you go, putting the pieces in the Jordanian or Saudi desert on a geographic line between Mecca and Jerusalem, with instructions for reassembly.

    Plus, perhaps create a model of this temple somewhere near Jerusalem for any non-Trinitarian Christians still around?

    Or you could build replicas as tourist attractions almost anywhere: temple of Karnak in the AZ desert? Colossus of Rhodes astride some river somewhere? Etc.

31. Couple of points;
    The regime’s inhuman treatment of what we consider basic human rights–women must be covered, so forth–is likely not very popular. But if the religion confined itself to relgion–Muslim to Allah and back again–perhaps a “muslim” regime would be acceptable.

    If I had my druthers, I’d see the equivalent of a 105mm HE round in every IRGC and Basij office in the country, large or small. Ditto the regulars’ comm nodes.
    Minor collateral damage, reminder to the rank and file things could get worse, confusion about what’s to be done, the people take over. Alas….

    The point of a dirty bomb is not in the physics. It’s in…how many generations of “official” insistence does it take before anybody will venture near the impact site? Picture lower Manhattan being totally uninhabitable and useless….

32. IIRC the collapse of the Twin Towers released significant amounts of airborne asbestos, a well known carcinogen. Is Manhattan an abandoned empty zone?

    People make real time decisions about personal risks every day.

    It would be the same for the much feared and much imagined Iranian dirty bomb.

33. Om
    Asbestos hasn’t been getting the publicity that RADIATION has been for the last eighty years. In addition , there are firms which abate/remove the stuff.
    And asbestos has to be ingested to do damage
    So it’s not so scary.
    Some of that radioactive stuff is in a crack…over there
    Shining its radioactive across the room.
    Picture the irrational reactions to covid, cubed
    Maybe a cheap, pocket-sized counter of Geiger would sell.
    In 1960, our HS chem teacher showed how to make a kitchen table cloud chamber
    Just in case.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>