we are losing the whole Western World every time that we fight for Israel — Eros1982

Good lord. Can you perhaps support this a bit?

How else am I supposed to interpret I focus on the violence that my country has a direct hand in. — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah, must mean I ignore all other violence if the US has minimal influence in it.

Yet I have trouble envisioning the IDF taking and occupying Tehran. And this is the real problem here: attacking Iran is problematic, because a land war would be very, very difficult.

It would require the U.S. to take Tehran, this is what the hawks and the Israeli lobby are trying to convince Trump to do now. Hopefully there is someone with a level head in that room.

It's not hard. If one were to focus on, let's say, abuse towards men, one would likely become a men's rights activist. OTOH, if one were to focus on abuse towards women, one likely ends up a feminist.

It's all about the lens we choose.

I think what creates this "Western World" are institutions, aesthetics, and culture. Those Western forced institutions brought to justice many Nazi officers, Ruanda criminals, Yugosllavia criminals, and so on. For the sake of Israel, the US is telling the whole world now that we should forget all internationational sanctions and courts which seek to stop or punish crimes against humanity. Needless to say, also, that for the sake of Israel public will is totally disregarded (in the Netherlands, which is much more liberal than US or UK, only the 15% of population supports Israel, but the Dutch government does not mind arming the genocidal Zionists), dissent is killed, the media are censored, etc. etc.

Then you have the waves of millions and millions of Muslims towards France, UK, etc., every time that Israel and US will bomb their countries.

Too many sacrifices and too much alienation in Europe, for the sake of Israel and USA (among other factors).

Just for the record:

Most Americans and Europeans do not know that the Holy Qur'an bans genocide and mass destruction. This is why there is a fetwa/ban in Iran AGAINST nuclear weapons by Ayatollah Khamenei. At the same time, whoever has read the Old Testament (i.e. the The Hebrew Bible) should know that the Lord of the Armies (or as they call him, Yahwa) orders his chosen people to exterminate certain tribes and nations, to not spare either women or children. I don't remember all the tribes/nations that the Hebrew Bible says that should be exterminated by the Chosen People (Cananites and Philistines I think are grouped with five or more nationalities/tribes), nevertheless this is a real contrast between the Holy Qur'an and the Old Testament; the first has made it clear that genocide and mass destruction is haram (though it does approve slavery, but it does not encourage it), the second does order the holocaust of seven or more nationalities.

From history books we have learned that theory and practice are not the same thing. Many Muslim leaders have committed horrible crimes against Jews, Christians, and, especially, against other Muslims. Since, however, lately you are constantly educated by the mainstream media about Islamic fundamentalism and similar stuff, do not forget that Israel recently has become very fundamentalist as well and the Hebrew Bible which is sought to be brought to life by many Israeli extremists (in the 21st century) does encourage genocide and mass destruction.

the Hebrew Bible which is sought to be brought to life by many Israeli extremists (in the 21st century) does encourage genocide and mass destruction. — Eros1982

It often describes events ~3000 years ago in the kill-or-be-killed world of the ancient Near East. No one is perfect in the Hebrew Bible, and commandments such as "kill the Amalekites" don't have relevance today. But yes, King David in ~1000 BC engaged in some very questionable but historically normal deeds. The Hebrew Bible is still a brilliant work of literature and deserves to be "brought to life."

What concerns me about modern Islam is its desire to spread to the entire world and its apparent hatred of non-believers. Its treatment of women is also concerning. Chieftains under Muhammad slaughtered the civilians of defeated villages, including Jews.

Above all, Islam seems to be an all-encompassing political system. I don't know whether this is compatible with the West.

I am saying this because Israel has never lost a war. — Eros1982

Well, in the end Operation Peace for Galilee wasn't a huge success as in the end it created Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israel had to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000 after a long low-intensity conflict. The 2006 Lebanon War wasn't either a huge success and Hezbollah then wasn't destroyed.

The basic problem is that you have a perpetual cycle of Israel attacking it's neighbors and responding to attacks from various groups, which then simply repeat time after time again. These attacks have basically made Lebanon a failed state and Syria is too, if it cannot rebuild itself. Failed states cannot make peace even if they wanted. But I guess the present Israeli administration is totally happy with perpetual war and wouldn't care if all of their neighbors became failed states.

Netanyahu may be destroying Israeli and Western institutions, but he definitely won this war on Friday --when Trump gave him the green light to attack. — Eros1982

He finally got his war after decades for craving it.

But I fear that this is only a temporary solution and simply won't solve anything in the long run. And it's crazy to think that if Israel attacks Iran, somehow then Iranians would topple their government. This is a delusional line that you can hear in Western and especially American media. Just think about it: a foreign country starts to bomb your country, what would you do? Want to overthrow your countries government? There is no "liberation" of Iran from Iranians on the cards here. Trump declaring that Iran should surrender is the tone deaf thing that idiot is perfectly capable of doing.

Supreme Leader Khamenei says Iran won’t accept “imposed war”, “peace”, and warns any US strikes on its territory will have “serious irreparable consequences”.

If now the Gulf States like Saudi-Arabia and UAE are brought into this war (for example by closing the straight of Hormuz), then we'll have a oil price shock that likely will put us into a global recession.

Iran is wasting its rockets on Israel. The regime would do better if it wins time, while spreading chaos in the region surrounding Israel (Lebanon, Syria and Iraq). If Iran chose this path, a US invasion or Israeli nukes would not make sense. — Eros1982

Well, if they can continue firing rockets at this pace for weeks, that's a clear sign that Israel would have failed. If no rockets are fired to Israel, then Israel has achieved it's objectives.

It would require the U.S. to take Tehran, this is what the hawks and the Israeli lobby are trying to convince Trump to do now. Hopefully there is someone with a level head in that room. — Punshhh

Hopefully indeed, as that is a really foolish idea. Just look at the size of Iran. And unlike Iraq, it's a quite unified country and likely would put up a resistance. The armed forces are nearly 1 million strong and Iran has 85 million people.

Basically any land operation would be temporary or limited. Perhaps to clear and destroy the nuclear facilities. Or then take some islands in the gulf. But to march to Tehran, over the mountains and deep inside in the interior of the country? Ludicrous idea.

You would need a huge alliance to do this, but I'm not seeing this forming. For example the Turkish leader is saying that Iran is defending itself. Not a line if you would want to be part of an invasion force.

And how eager would be the Saudis to join this? Not even lukewarm:

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reiterated in a phone call with Iranian president the Kingdom’s condemnation of the Israeli strikes on Iran saying they have “disrupted” dialogue aimed at resolving the crisis, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported on Saturday.

Speaking with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, MBS underscored Saudi Arabia’s “condemnation and denunciation of these [Israeli] attacks, which undermine the sovereignty and security of the Islamic Republic of Iran and constitute a violation of international laws and norms.”

“The Crown Prince stressed that these attacks have disrupted ongoing dialogue aimed at resolving the crisis and have hindered efforts to de-escalate and reach diplomatic solutions,” SPA reported adding that MBS also offered his condolences to Pezeshkian for those killed by the attacks.

The Crown Prince “emphasized the Kingdom’s rejection of the use of force to resolve disputes, advocating for dialogue as the fundamental principle for resolving differences.”

So reality is that this is either between Israel and Iran or Israel with sidekick USA against Iran.

It's not hard. If one were to focus on, let's say, abuse towards men, one would likely become a men's rights activist. — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah — and it would be they ignore the abuse of women. At least in your world.

Also no gum chewing and walking.

Yeah — and it would be they ignore the abuse of women. At least in your world. — Mikie

To which the MRA would likely say, e.g., "It's not that we ignore the abuse of women, it's that we focus on the abuse of men."

They hold the abuse of a certain group to be salient.

No. As I said, if you shoot a man that didn't shoot you, you simply need a lot explaining to do to the judge, because you will be the one that shot. And at some times, it will, even under law, be legitimate. But naturally there are quite a high bar for this.

When Israel has a nuclear deterrent, those countries who see Israel as a threat to themselves will try to get a nuclear deterrent. But you simply assume that they aren't seeking a balance, their own deterrence, but their motive is simply to destroy Israel, even if this put their own people and country to the peril of the many nukes that Israel has. — ssu

In my example, I was thinking of a scenario in which you are unarmed and face an enemy in the process of arming himself. Nobody is talking about Israel destroying Iran entirely.

It's impossible to know the Khameini regime's true motive. I note their policies and rhetoric. The world, ideally, would have stopped Iran from going nuclear years ago. It shouldn't be left up to Israel, ideally, but here we are.

Khameini's words: "It doesn't matter if we die. Iran is not important, Islam is important."

We never can know how many Americans (and Japanese) would have died if Operation Downfall would have been initiated. And naturally we forget the huge importance of the Soviet attack in Manchuria for the Japanese to admit to surrender. — ssu

Operation Downfall would have likely been extremely devastating. The typical American (Western?) position is to justify the atomic bombings as a necessary evil to avoid a land invasion. This was my position for most of my life. GEM Anscombe's essay "Mr. Truman's Degree" and her essay "War and Murder" caused me to rethink my perspective on this. You can find the first one online; it's not too long.

How about the Arabs? It would be interesting how Israel would react if the Saudi's would get a nuclear deterrent. What if the Egypt would also get a nuclear deterrent? Israel does have a peace agreement with Egypt (which it doesn't have with the Saudis). — ssu

The world should judge these countries on a case-by-case basis. Nuclear proliferation is a complex issue; I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs.

In my example, I was thinking of a scenario in which you are unarmed and face an enemy in the process of arming himself. Nobody is talking about Israel destroying Iran entirely. — BitconnectCarlos

And that's not relevant to this scenario, where Israel has a nuclear deterrent and enjoys total military dominance over it's rivals. And intends to keep it so by attacking them constantly.

It's impossible to know the Khameini regime's true motive. — BitconnectCarlos

One could educate oneself on it and not believe the propaganda. Yet in the Middle East one has to really try to make the difference with the rhetoric to the people and the real underlying policies and strategies.

The world, ideally, would have stopped Iran from going nuclear years ago. It shouldn't be left up to Israel, ideally, but here we are. — BitconnectCarlos

Have you ever thought about the possibility of Israel's enemies wanting to acquire a nuclear deterrent as to be a deterrent or do you genuinely believe that they are fantasizing about starting a nuclear war that likely will be as devastating if not more devastating for their people than the invasion of the Mongol Horde?

Khameini's words: "It doesn't matter if we die. Iran is not important, Islam is important." — BitconnectCarlos

That cannot be interpreted as Israel has to die and we have destroy it, even if we die trying.

Operation Downfall would have likely been extremely devastating. The typical American (Western?) position is to justify the atomic bombings as a necessary evil to avoid a land invasion. This was my position for most of my life. GEM Anscombe's essay "Mr. Truman's Degree" and her essay "War and Murder" caused me to rethink my perspective on this. You can find the first one online; it's not too long. — BitconnectCarlos

I haven't read this, but is has been known for a long time that Soviet Union joining the fight against Japan and it's rapid advance through Japanese defenses was a far bigger issue to the Japanese than American historians give credit.

The world should judge these countries on a case-by-case basis. Nuclear proliferation is a complex issue; I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs. — BitconnectCarlos

If you want to look at the geostrategic picture in the Middle East with the military balance in mind, you simply cannot forget that Israel has a functioning nuclear deterrent and it's enemies never had it.

It explains a lot more than at first you might think.

To which the MRA would likely say, e.g., "It's not that we ignore the abuse of women, it's that we focus on the abuse of men." — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah, and?

Nevermind. Just pretend I’m antisemitic instead. Even more stupid, but at least this way you won’t hurt your brain with something as difficult as “focusing.”

For others, try this: I tend to focus on my daughter’s well being. That doesn’t really mean I ignore the well being of my nieces and nephews. I condemn the violence in Sudan— but my country isn’t integrally a part of that violence. This isn’t hard stuff, unless you’re in the process of defending a racist, genocidal government.

Ahh I see what you're saying. Well, I think that's hyperbolic to a comic degree, but your core point elucidated here is apt. Thank you.

Israel has said it does not target Iranian civilians, but hundreds have died in the violence, among them a poet and her family, an equestrian and a graphic designer.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/18/world/middleeast/iran-civilian-deaths-israel-strikes.html

Well Israel says it— so it must be true.

Israel is turning into a serious & very dangerous liability to the United States. More than 320 billion USD have been distributed as military aid to Israel (this is federal money only, I am not counting donations & investments from US based groups, individuals and institutions), and what the Americans are receiving in return are more manipulation & suppression, weakened international laws, and new wars.

I think there is only one viable solution to this Grand Bretagna made sh.. in the Middle East: Israel should reform itself into a Belgium-like bi-ethnic country. In the long run, secular & reformed Jews may be replaced by Muslims & ultra-orthodox Jews in a Belgium-like Israel. But I see this transformation as the only way to limit all these serial mass murders in the land of Palestine-Israel. Jews and Arabs with same citizenship, same rights. Not everyone will be happy, but (as in Belgium) there will be more tourism in Israel and disagreements will become less violent.

Even though this is the conventional wisdom, I don't think it's actually the case. It's a narrative oft repeated that the United States somehow is beholden to Israel, and that the United States is basically "involuntarily" involved.

The purpose of that narrative is to exculpate the United States, and distance it from its own and Israel's many misdeeds in the region.

The belief that a miniscule nation like Israel could control the world's premiere superpower does not pass the common sense test, even if we assumed every single Israeli was a rich banker.


The truth is that Israel is a remarkably useful asset to the US, which the US has successfully used to destroy geopolitical rivals and sow chaos in a region that it was never able to fully control.

Israel is a nation that, due to its size, will always experience geopolitical threat from its neighbors, so there's always an excuse for war.

When Israel outlives its usefulness, the exit strategy pretty much writes itself. For a credible excuse, the US only needs to point at the hundreds upon hundreds scathing UN reports and human rights reports (and simply leave out the fact that the Israelis did it all with Uncle Sam's help).


The US engages in a form of gepolitical parasitism, where it skillfully sways naive countries to prostitute themselves to the US agenda, usually leading them willingly down the path of their own destruction.

Israel is one such country. I'm sure you can think of several others. Ukraine for example is currently in the terminal stage of friendship with the US.

All of that nonsense in US congress? Just a display, crafted to play a megalomaniacal narcissist like Netanyahu like a fiddle. Those senators were more than willing to pay with what little dignity they had left, in order to have Israel follow willingly to the slaughter. Do you know the US doesn't even have a defensive alliance with Israel?


To be clear, I don't blame anyone for believing the narratives. Entire countries willingly fling themselves into the abyss for those narratives. But it's in people's best interest that they start seeing through the bullshit.

I agree that things are more complicated from what I made those to be. So, it is not enough to drop Israel or Natanyahu.... Americans have to get rid of all those US based groups which enable the likes of Natanyahu (they probably need sweeping reforms in order to get rid of those corruptive/suppressive groups).

I'd like to add two things here:

1) Almost all non-US based media are hinting that Trump was somehow forced to agree on this new Israeli attack (they seem to argue that Israel will always find its way in the White House, regardless of the intentions of a given US administration).

2) In Tel Aviv you have in power some Torah-lunatics who believe that they were destined by Yahweh to conquer whomever they want. These Torah-lunatics it is said that possess more than 90 nuclear warheads. Although you might be right in arguing that all this unfolding-catastrophe in the Middle East should not be attributed to Israeli groups only, I do take these Torah-lunatics capable of blackmailing US presidents with their nukes. In others words, I have them capable of threatening to use nuclear weapons, behind the curtains. So, there is some responsibility in Israeli politics too (apart from those Jewish-banker conspiracy theories).

Anyway, you are right in other things you said. Whoever might be the benefited groups from all these wars, the USA (seen as a whole country) does not seem to benefit.

Israel doesn't outlive its usefulness to the US because Israel/the Jews bring about the messianic age according to the evangelicals, who make up a significant share of the republican party. Christians will always be fascinated with that land where Jesus walked. Changes in the political situation in Israel directly affect Christians' abilities to access specific sites, so the interest in Israel will remain. Expansions of Israeli territory often allow new archaeological digs, which add to our knowledge of ancient Judaism, the religion of Jesus.

Israel’s defense minister, Israel Katz, said that he and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the Israeli military to increase “the intensity of the attacks on strategic targets in Iran and governmental targets in Tehran.” Stepping up Israel’s attacks, Katz said, was meant “to remove the threats to the state of Israel and to destabilize the ayatollahs’ regime.” — NY Times

So this is about regime change, or it's not, or it is.

Christians will always be fascinated with that land where Jesus walked. — BitconnectCarlos

Christians think the whole Bible belongs to them. They're as fascinated by climbing Mt Sinai at dawn as they are hanging around the Jordan River.

I don't know if we'll see a regime change, but I would love to see Iran liberated.

It's nice to have other people who value the history of ancient Israel.

2) In Tel Aviv you have in power some Torah-lunatics who believe that they were destined by Yahweh to conquer whomever they want. These Torah-lunatics it said that possess more than 90 nuclear warheads. Although you might be right in arguing that all this unfolding-catastrophe in the Middle East should not be attributed to Israeli groups only, I do take these Torah-lunatics capable of blackmailing US presidents with their nukes. In others words, I have them capable of threatening to use nuclear weapons, behind the curtains. So, there is some blame in Zionists too (apart from those Jewish-banker theories). — Eros1982

The current Israeli government and the people they represent aren't really all that extreme in their religious beliefs. They're extreme in their nationalist beliefs and therefore I think the term 'ultranationalist' is a more fitting characterization.

Ironically, what one might consider the most religiously extreme Jews, commonly called 'ultra-orthodox', often oppose Zionism and the state of Israel, and don't even consider themselves Israelis, for reasons stated in the Torah. (It has to do with the land being promised upon return of the Messiah, which, according to Judaism, hasn't happened yet - alas, details).

So Zionism isn't exactly a religious conviction, but a political one.

Obviously, the state of Israel does bear full responsibility for its actions. It's just that the United States (and several European states to a lesser extent) have been enabling them since the start.

Whoever might be the benefited groups from all these wars, the USA (seen as a whole country) does not seem to benefit. — Eros1982

Despite what I think of the United States' methods, I think it is involved in the Middle-East for sound strategic reasons. (Control over vital trade corridors and oil, most notably) It has also been very effective in protecting its power in the region, at the cost of everyone else's security.

So, perhaps controversially, I view the United States as a whole as the principal benefactor of it's decades-long Machiavellian malpractices in the Middle-East.


Of course there's the usual suspects - the military-industrial complex, big investment firms, etc. - but in my view these are just the vultures flocking to the smell of fresh carrion. Squarely blaming them is just another attempt at exculpating the US by pinning the blame on some 'big bad'.

No; it is carefully calculated US strategy that is and has been the principal driver behind all of this.

It's just that the days of US empire are at their end, and no amount of Machiavellianism or sound strategy can stop the reckoning that is coming its way. That is why everything is now cracking at the seams, and people are looking for scapegoats.

Would be nice to know what the parties here seek to gain. Are these short term or long term goals?

I am of the opinion that no nation will ever use a nuclear weapon again, the fallout (pardon the term) is just too great. The isolation and stigma will be unbearable, and the media will have a field day but much more the social media circulating images that will result in acts of violence.

Assume that is true, then it is not clear what exactly the problem with "Iran having a nuclear weapon" is, after all India and Pakistan have these and had a confrontation recently.

Is it just a propaganda tool like WMD to justify controlling Irans proxies Hamas and others? That might be the case because neither Egypt nor Saudi Arabia or Turkey are a problem.

Members will excuse me if I post a AI generated prediction: (Deepseek). Apart for the sugggestion that Iran has few missiles left, it generally looks like a reasonable prediction.

Outline most probable events in next 10 days and how the Iran attacks will stop. — Me

⚠️ Key Immediate Developments (as of June 19)

Military Dynamics:

Israel has degraded ~45% of Iran's ballistic missile launchers and 35-45% of its missile stockpiles, reducing Iranian barrage sizes from 100+ missiles (Oct 2024) to 2-40 missiles per attack 410.

Critical Iranian nuclear sites (e.g., Natanz) suffered severe damage, with 14,000 centrifuges destroyed due to power disruptions 41013.

Iran's retaliation has been largely ineffective, causing minimal Israeli casualties but escalating rhetoric 78.

Diplomatic Deadlock:

Iran demands to "finish its response" before ceasefire talks, while Israel insists on full nuclear program dismantlement 1011.

U.S.-Iran talks mediated by Oman were canceled post-Israeli strikes 13.

External Pressures:

The U.S. has deployed the USS Nimitz carrier group and air tankers to the region, with Trump demanding Iran's "unconditional surrender" 411.

Russia and China are advocating de-escalation but lack leverage over Israel 1213.

Probable Timeline: Next 10 Days
Days 1-3 (June 20-22): Escalation and Expanded Strikes

Israeli Focus: Deep-penetration strikes on remaining nuclear sites (e.g., Fordow), missile bases, and internal security infrastructure (e.g., Basij paramilitary) to destabilize the regime 410.

Iranian Response: Symbolic missile barrages (5-20 missiles) targeting Israeli military sites, with attempts to mobilize proxies (e.g., Houthi drones, Iraqi militia attacks on U.S. bases) 413.

U.S. Role: Trump may approve limited strikes if Iran refuses nuclear concessions, citing pre-authorized plans 11.

Days 4-6 (June 23-25): Humanitarian and Regime Pressures Peak

Infrastructure Collapse in Iran:

Nationwide blackouts and fuel shortages due to damaged energy facilities (e.g., South Pars gas field) 413.

Protests erupt as Basij repression capabilities weaken 410.

Diplomatic Channels Reopen:

Oman/Egypt brokers secret talks between U.S. and Iran, focusing on nuclear freeze in exchange for Israeli pause 1213.

Russia offers to safeguard Iranian enriched uranium to enable negotiations 12.

Days 7-10 (June 26-29): Ceasefire and Unstable Resolution

Military Exhaustion:

Iran's missile capacity drops below 20% of pre-war levels, forcing reliance on asymmetric proxies 4.

Israel pauses strikes after confirming critical nuclear infrastructure destruction 10.

Ceasefire Agreement:

Iran accepts verified suspension of 60%+ uranium enrichment; Israel halts offensive operations but reserves covert response rights 1011.

U.S. guarantees sanctions relief for compliance, backed by Oman/EU monitoring 13.

Regional Spillover:

Houthis launch sporadic drones toward Israel, but Saudi/Egyptian containment prevents escalation 413.

How Attacks Will Stop: Key Catalysts

Iranian Nuclear Degradation: With Natanz disabled and Fordow vulnerable, Iran loses leverage to prolong war 410.

Regime Survival Fears: Internal unrest and leadership decimation force Tehran to prioritize stability over retaliation 412.

U.S.-Israeli Ultimatum: Trump's threat of direct intervention compels Iranian concessions 1113.

Diplomatic Face-Saving: Oman/Russia mediate a "nuclear freeze" allowing both sides to claim tactical wins 1213.

Risks of Failure: If Iran rejects terms, U.S. strikes could trigger a regional war involving Hezbollah (60,000+ rockets) and Iraqi militias 713. However, current trajectories favor a negotiated pause by June 26-28, with low-intensity shadow conflict persisting long-term. — Deepseek

I don't know if we'll see a regime change, but I would love to see Iran liberated. — BitconnectCarlos

I think they're planning to kill Ali Khamenei. Nothing says let's be friends like killing their religious leader.

It's nice to have other people who value the history of ancient Israel. — BitconnectCarlos

They think it's the history of their own religion, and it partly is.

The crucial thing to understand is that the balance of power in the region is shifting (just like it is shifting globally) away from the United States and Israel. If the status quo is maintained, Iran will grow in affluence, and US and Israeli influence will further diminish. This is further exacerbated by the fact that Iran has aligned itself to Russia and China. With such powerful partners it is in a good position to become the new dominant player in the Middle-East - something which the US and Israel must prevent at all costs if they wish to maintain any influence.

Israel also acknowledges that the United States is currently experiencing imperial overstretch, and is having to choose between which interests it wishes to protect. By dragging the US into a war now, it means it cannot abandon Israel later.

The United States on its part urgently needs to pivot to Asia to counterbalance China. However, it cannot do so while simply abandoning all its interests elsewhere. So here its interests align with Israel, in that they both do not want a strong Iran to emerge out of the power vacuum the US leaves behind.

Whatever the exact plans of Israel and the US, they'll both be aimed at ensuring Iran cannot expand its influence in the foreseeable future.

One way to do so is by enacting regime change, which would cause internal turmoil that it would probably take Iran several years to recover from.

At the same time, if Iran manages to produce a nuclear weapon it can threaten nuclear retaliation and impose massive costs on Israel (and indirectly the US).

So regime change and the destruction of Iran's nuclear program are two parts of the same strategy.

One important factor in this is that while Israel is the US' preferred partner now, it needn't stay that way.

If Iran shows its willingness to cooperate, the calculus for the US will start to shift.

Ultimately the US aligns itself in whatever way is most profitable, and it's conceivable that the most profitable partner in the future will be Iran, and not Israel, simply because it will become too expensive to keep Israel in a position of regional dominance.

Possibly this is why we continue to see diplomatic contact between the US and Iran even at this time. The US is trying to keep its options open for as long as possible. Admittedly, I would be surprised if the US avoids a war with Iran, but it's possible.

I'm pretty sure the people of Iran hate Khameini and would celebrate if he died.

It is the history of their own religion.

I'm pretty sure the people of Iran hate Khameini and would celebrate if he died. — BitconnectCarlos

Why do you think that?

It is the history of their own religion. — BitconnectCarlos

Partly. Like Judaism, Christianity is partly Persian and Greek.