Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It didn't work in Iraq. Why would it work here?


no boots on the ground and more moderate goals. The current state of Iraq - severely corrupt moderately religious not threatening anybody kleptocracy would be a success here. Not threatening is the key - Iran has been behind sectarian violence in Iraq, behind Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthis, helping Assad, ... one can see that Iran's regime should have already been taken out yesterday just in order to advance peace in the Middle East.

Note - no boots on the ground wouldn't be a big limitation because in case of say ethnic violence, with Azerbaijani and Persian being the largest groups, or even just great social chaos, Turkey and Azerbaijan, are, as far as i understand, ready to bring their armies into the Iran's Azerbaijani populated provinces, which would leave Persians, who are many don't like that "Arab's Islam", in their provinces to their own devices, probably even restoring the monarchy with the Shah's son, which again would be a good outcome here.


No boots on the ground... yet. We don't know how Iran reacts next. To their leadership, this is a pretty serious existential threat.


They don't have much options. They have only Revolutionary Guard for them. Army hates the Guard. The Guard isn't really a fighting force, it can only launch missiles and beat unarmed protesters. Once it runs out of missiles (with a lot of missiles lost to the bombing), it is done.

I expect a full no-fly zone enforcement, and with that the regime's domestic authority and power will quickly go down the drain.


Iraq today is alot less of headache to it's neighbours than if Saddam Hussein was still here. So clearly it did work on the long term.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: