Is Regime Change in Iran 100% Necessary?

[WestCanMan]

If the current regime manages to maintain power, through an orgy of violence we haven't seen since Pakistan's massive genocides in the 40's and 70's, and China sets up bases there to protect them, the ME is permanently screwed. 

Right now the IRGC is very likely to give in to any demands that the Chinese make for a bit of control there. 

I personally feel like we're at a tipping point in Iran:

• either it frees itself right now from islamofascism's evil grasp, and becomes a massive beacon of freedom for everyone in the ME, or
• people there give up hope permanently, and the ME is a shithole for anther 300 years minimum, as even the west continues to deteriorate

I think it would be a terrible mistake to lift the boot of humanity off of the ayatollah regime's neck right now. 

[gatomontes99]

Necessary or not, it happened. 

[WestCanMan]

9 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Necessary or not, it happened. 

You think it happened?

You don't think that the current power structure will stay in place?

Maybe you have a point 😂

[gatomontes99]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

You think it happened?

You don't think that the current power structure will stay in place?

Maybe you have a point 😂

No. They are all dead. It sounds like there is someone in there willing to end the war with a full, unconditional surrender. 

[WestCanMan]

TBH, the cardbatollah situation is 100% reminiscent of Trump's last term, when he was killing off so many terrorist leaders that no one was willing to step up to take over anymore. 

Everyone thought that Al Qaeda no longer existed until Biden took over, then all of a sudden they were killing Americans again like nothing ever happened.

Edited March 23 by WestCanMan

[suds]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I personally feel like we're at a tipping point in Iran:

I would certainly think so. But the Chinese are like the Godfather who never lets anyone know what they're thinking. I'd say there's a greater possibility of them invading Taiwan while the U.S. is presently bogged down. Why get into a shooting war with the U.S. over regime change in Iran? I doubt they have any more love for the present regime than anyone else. To them it's strictly business. It would be far easier for them to wait until the U.S. eventually declares victory and leaves and then make their move.  On a larger scale, I'd like to see both Ukraine and Russia join Nato to offset China's growing dominance in the east. The Russians have good memories and must remember the turn of events when they jumped into the sack with the Nazis at the start of WW2. As far as I'm concerned they should be more concerned about Chinese interest in Eastern Russia than Nato invading anybody.

[CdnFox]

50 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Necessary or not, it happened. 

Not yet. The leader changed but if the young son of the leader takes over and everything else remains the same it's not actually a regime change. It's basically the same government and certainly the same for all practical intents and purposes

[gatomontes99]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Not yet. The leader changed but if the young son of the leader takes over and everything else remains the same it's not actually a regime change. It's basically the same government and certainly the same for all practical intents and purposes

Hhhhheeeee' probably not in charge. There is a lot of...shall we say...inconsistencies in their current messaging that leads people to believe the regime is in a power struggle with a more moderate group. Trump is siding with the more moderate guys. Let's hope that pays off. 

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Hhhhheeeee' probably not in charge. There is a lot of...shall we say...inconsistencies in their current messaging that leads people to believe the regime is in a power struggle with a more moderate group. Trump is siding with the more moderate guys. Let's hope that pays off. 

I'm the first to admit I'm no expert on iranian politics and it sounds like you've given it some thought and study so I'll concede the point for now.  Let's hope to hell they can find someone good

 

[500channelsurfer]

Regime change in Iran is a best case scenario. It makes the world safer. These other countries like China and Russia are not interested in a direct military conflict involving the US in a Proxy type war/Cold War style conflict, especially when Iran is letting pass certain select oil vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.

Remember the first war against Iraq, where the US left Iraq severely weakened but not regime-changed? Then they returned a decade later and finally did the regime change.

A severely weakened version of the Iranian regime of last month is still an improvement for the West. Maybe a more pro-war president soon after Trump will go and "finish the job" as Bush Jr did in Iraq. A severely weakened version of the Iranian regime of last month is still an improvement for the ME as there will be less meddling by them in neighbouring countries' affairs. They will have less ability to fund foreign groups and manufacture weapons for other regimes "friendly" to them.

Edited March 28 by 500channelsurfer

[bush_cheney2004]

55 minutes ago, 500channelsurfer said:

...Remember the first war against Iraq, where the US left Iraq severely weakened but not regime-changed? Then they returned a decade later and finally did the regime change.

 

 

Yep...history has already shown us the answer.   Like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya after U.S./NATO interventions, there will be an unstable period in Iran where competing factions will fight for control, all in a weakened state and more vulnerable to external influence (good and bad).   What comes out on the other side for Iran will be different than before.

[paxamericana]

On 3/23/2026 at 2:27 PM, WestCanMan said:

people there give up hope permanently, and the ME is a shithole for anther 300 years minimum

Iran has been a thorn in the American side since 1979. My old CO said this, given the order he would glass the entire country. That was no idle threat, the US Military really could turn the surface of Iran into a furnace.

[robosmith]

On 3/23/2026 at 12:27 PM, WestCanMan said:

If the current regime manages to maintain power, through an orgy of violence we haven't seen since Pakistan's massive genocides in the 40's and 70's, and China sets up bases there to protect them, the ME is permanently screwed. 

Right now the IRGC is very likely to give in to any demands that the Chinese make for a bit of control there. 

I personally feel like we're at a tipping point in Iran:

• either it frees itself right now from islamofascism's evil grasp, and becomes a massive beacon of freedom for everyone in the ME, or
• people there give up hope permanently, and the ME is a shithole for anther 300 years minimum, as even the west continues to deteriorate

I think it would be a terrible mistake to lift the boot of humanity off of the ayatollah regime's neck right now. 

Too bad you have ZERO credibility as a pretend expert on Iran.

Though Trump is desperately searching for an exit strategy, which is why he keeps postponing his threats of war crime destruction of their power plants.

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Yep...history has already shown us the answer.   Like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya after U.S./NATO interventions, there will be an unstable period in Iran where competing factions will fight for control, all in a weakened state and more vulnerable to external influence (good and bad).   What comes out on the other side for Iran will be different than before.

Different better or different worse though I wonder.

This war started without a clear understanding of what its end would look like if it went well it usually doesn't end too great

[WestCanMan]

10 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Iran has been a thorn in the American side since 1979. My old CO said this, given the order he would glass the entire country. That was no idle threat, the US Military really could turn the surface of Iran into a furnace.

I would have felt the same way myself, but apparently most Iranians aren't drooling savages. Theoretically only a small percent are jihadis.

[WestCanMan]

10 hours ago, robosmith said:

Too bad you have ZERO credibility as a pretend expert on Iran.

Though Trump is desperately searching for an exit strategy, which is why he keeps postponing his threats of war crime destruction of their power plants.

Shut up robobigot.

I know more about everything than you do, and that's not a boast. Maggots are born knowing more about the world than you will ever know. 

[Nationalist]

12 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Iran has been a thorn in the American side since 1979. My old CO said this, given the order he would glass the entire country. That was no idle threat, the US Military really could turn the surface of Iran into a furnace.

Why would anyone do that?

And why must Iran give up their theocracy, if that's what they want?

Just stop the financing of military shitheads like Hamas, and stop the aggressive posturing. Go back to business and prosper. 

In return though, I think it would be fair to ask the same of Isreal. Like perhaps...giving up those nukes they claim dont exist?

[bush_cheney2004]

On 3/28/2026 at 3:26 AM, CdnFox said:

Different better or different worse though I wonder.

This war started without a clear understanding of what its end would look like if it went well it usually doesn't end too great

 

True, but there are never any guarantees in a war's outcome.   All we know is that the Trump administration along with Israel decided that continuing to do the same thing for over 40 years would not yield different results.   U.S. military planning has long prepared for an Iranian beat down...going way back to the "Carter Doctrine".

At a minimum, Iran will be less capable militarily after this "war".    Many old guard leaders are dead.   Popular domestic sentiment for regime change will be stronger.   Oil market volatility will give other nations pause/concern.   Israel will double down with aggressive military actions against enemies.   There will be "blowback" against U.S./Israeli interests.

But good or bad...there will be change (probably a bit of both).

[paxamericana]

7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Trump administration along with Israel decided that continuing to do the same thing for over 40 years would not yield different results. 

Greatest stable genius presidential president ever! 
 

Also, this has the benefit of warning the Chinese not to get too adventurous with Taiwan. We control the oil flow wether they like it or not. 

And to make the point that America is energy independent, sure prices will go up but we won’t have shortages like the 1970s

And good for upcoming nafta and Chinese negotiation as leverage.

Edited March 29 by paxamericana

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

At a minimum, Iran will be less capable militarily after this "war".     

Yes, but will they persist in their separate sphere of influence?

 

The American political sphere decides internally what victory and defeat means.  The material reality of the world outside is different than perceived achievements and sometimes doesn't matter.

 

As with Afghanistan, nobody talks about American failure in America as much as they talk about failure of their politics opponents.

 

That's my guess, anyway, as an outsider.

[paxamericana]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, but will they persist in their separate sphere of influence?

Probably, their 5000 years of history certainly shows dislodging them from their mountain stronghold is difficult. 
 

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

As with Afghanistan, nobody talks about American failure in America as much as they talk about failure of their politics opponents.

 

This is different though, America isn’t in the post world war 2 order order of Nation Building. We’re in the business of nation smashing. It’s easier to destroy than to build.

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

As with Afghanistan, nobody talks about American failure in America as much as they talk about failure of their politics opponents.

Will leftists here talk about the failures of the Canadian gov't in Canada? Of course not.

Our current PM is blaming Canada's economic woes on Trump. Apparently he forget that we were just as bad off while Biden was POTUS. 

When our leftists here blame Trump for the economic woes here, do you remind them of 2025, or no?

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, but will they persist in their separate sphere of influence?

 

Not in the same capacity...Hamas was already in tatters even before this "war" because of Israel.  Attacking Iran (twice) for nuclear ambitions has been normalized now, something that was only hinted at by previous, hesitant U.S. administrations.   Arab states have taken some hits and survived, proving the Persian/Shia bogeyman is not so scary after all.

 

Quote

The American political sphere decides internally what victory and defeat means.  The material reality of the world outside is different than perceived achievements and sometimes doesn't matter.

 

True, but history will provide a more objective view even within the U.S. for the long term.  The world will also assess and adjust to the changing landscape, just like all the previous "wars".   Iran was a festering blister that Trump and Netanyahu decided it was time to pop.

 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, paxamericana said:

And to make the point that America is energy independent, sure prices will go up but we won’t have shortages like the 1970s

And good for upcoming nafta and Chinese negotiation as leverage.

He's actually making the opposite point,  US prices for gas are shooting up too. 

AI: Amid the Iran war, higher gas prices could offset bigger tax refunds from President Donald Trump's "big beautiful bill," according to some analysts. The price of gasoline on Thursday was at a nationwide average of $3.98 a gallon, up by roughly 33% from one month ago, according to AAA.

Higher inflation will be a problem for him if it persist into the midterms. 

Further the impact on the world economy and food supply will wind up causing him serious grief at home as well

 

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, paxamericana said:

This is different though, America isn’t in the post world war 2 order order of Nation Building. We’re in the business of nation smashing. It’s easier to destroy than to build.

What is Afghanistan showed if you don't build, somebody else will. And then you have to wear whatever they put together for better or worse.

If All America winds up with is the same sort of dictators back in power after this conflict people will rightfully consider the war a complete failure and trump will wind up owning it