Iran is asking to be destroyed

The narrative circulating in some media circles that the war against Iran has "gone off the rails" fails to withstand scrutiny when examining the conflict's core objectives. From its inception, the war's clear aims have been to dismantle Iran's nuclear ambitions, curtail its ballistic missile arsenal, and dismantle its extensive network of proxy armies that destabilize the Middle East. While war inherently involves unknowns and intelligence limitations, the United States and Israel understood that achieving absolute elimination of these threats would be challenging.

“

The claim now echoing around television studios – that the war against Iran has gone off the rails – does not withstand scrutiny.

Crucially, regime change in Iran was never formally declared as a primary objective. This understanding implies that post-conflict, Iran would inevitably begin a rebuilding process, regardless of the war's duration or intensity. To mitigate the risks of Iran's military resurgence, a sustained strategy of preemptive disruption is essential to neutralize emerging threats before they mature into significant dangers.

“

By striking regional states and choking a vital maritime artery, it echoed strategic blunders of the past: King Hussein of Jordan’s decision in 1967 to join a war he had been warned against, costing him the West Bank his grandfather had secured, and Tsar Nicholas II’s entry into World War I, which ultimately cost him his throne.

Iran's strategic blunders, particularly its decision to attack regional neighbors and choke the vital Strait of Hormuz, have proven to be a historic miscalculation. These actions echo past strategic failures, such as King Hussein of Jordan's ill-fated decision in 1967 or Tsar Nicholas II's entry into World War I, both of which had devastating consequences for their regimes. Instead of de-escalation, Iran's aggression has likely pushed the conflict into a more perilous phase.

“

What has thus been conducted along a spectrum between “deterrence” and “attritional degradation” could evolve into a war of “decisive annihilation.”

If Iran continues to defy U.S. terms, the nature of the conflict is poised to shift dramatically. What has been conducted along a spectrum of "deterrence" and "attritional degradation" could evolve into a war of "decisive annihilation." This would involve systematic destruction, not necessarily through large-scale ground maneuvers, but through methodical dismantling of Iran's military capabilities, economy, and population support systems. Such an outcome, even if not initially intended, could precipitate internal unrest and potentially lead to regime collapse, though this raises significant moral questions regarding the scale of destruction.

“

Such a campaign will not be based on large-scale ground maneuvers but on systematic destruction – a methodical, almost phalanx-like destruction – aimed, in the president’s own words, at “sending Iran back to the Stone Age.”