Andrew Fox is a level-headed former British army officer who has considered what the Trump administration should now do in Iran. To wit: should it attack now, even if it has not yet prepared enough forces in the neighborhood, because the protestors are in danger of being crushed, and in delay there lies no plenty? Or should the Americans first build up their firepower in the region, even if that means delaying an attack by many weeks, during which time the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) may destroy — kill and wound — so many of the protestors that there will be little left to protect? More on the dilemma facing the Americans can be found here: “Iran: airstrikes and the intervention dilemma,” Andrew Fox, January 11, 2026:
Donald Trump warned Tehran against unleashing widespread violence against the ongoing protests, explicitly linking the regime’s behaviour to the potential for US military action. On 9 January, he stated, “If they start killing people as they have in the past, we’ll get involved,” emphasising that Washington “stands ready to help” Iranians fighting for freedom. Iran International now reports that some 2,000 people have been killed.
Shouldn’t 2,000 dead protesters in Iran be enough to trigger a response from Donald Trump, who has repeatedly said if Iran “kills protesters as it has in the past,” there will be hell to pay, as he, Donald J. Trump, will cry havoc and unleash the dogs of war? But so far during this mass revolt against the regime in Tehran — there are ongoing protests in more than 100 cities across Iran — he hasn’t launched a single missile or sent a single plane into Iranian skies.
Will Donald Trump put his money where his mouth is? American media reports suggest that Trump’s advisers have formulated possible air strike options, although he has not yet made a final decision as of this writing. The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times both indicated that such contingency plans are under discussion, but the US military has requested more time to complete its planning….
However, Iran is not Venezuela. Tehran presents a far more challenging military target: it is deep inland, its security apparatus is highly alert, it has substantial loyal forces, and Iran’s geography and air defenses create severe difficulties for inserting commandos, as well as the likelihood of regime leadership being deep underground. This currently strikes me as an unlikely option.
Even if a bold raid by air or special forces succeeded in “cutting off the head” of the regime, what would follow? Iran’s power structure is dispersed; the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Basij could continue their brutal actions without direct orders from the very top. Unlike Venezuela’s army, Iran’s ideologically driven security forces might continue fighting, leaderless or under a hardliner who survives. A decapitation strike in Iran might not halt the bloodshed, and it could even cause chaos if multiple factions subsequently compete for control….
This possible competition among different groups in the Iranian military after the army heads have been decapitated, which could lead to internecine warfare, may be a bad thing for the Supreme Leader’s loyalists, but a good thing for the Americans, who should welcome such fighting in Iran as a way to weaken those opposed to democratic, secular rule, with Reza Pahlavi as a useful unifying symbol. Pahlavi has already said he has no interest in power, but is willing to be a figurehead.
We can all see the need to support Iran’s brave protesters, but military strikes are not as simple or complete a solution as they might appear.
The Americans, should they finally decide to intervene in Iran militarily as President Trump has threatened when the number of protesters killed reached a number that he, Donald Trump, deems excessive but refuses to reveal, will face a dilemma.
Do they wait for some weeks, until our aircraft carriers can be move into position close to Iran, in the Red Sea or in the Persian Gulf, knowing that there is distinct possibility that before then, the protesters will have suffered still more thousands killed, leading many of them to finally give up, convinced that Trump won’t come to their aid after all, just as the Americans failed to do in previous upheavals in Iran, including those in 2009, 2019, and 2022?
Or do the Americans strike now, with what they have available, having concluded that even if they would not have the huge strike force that aircraft carriers could make available, they would at least have the seven B-2 planes that last June were flown all the way from Missouri to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, as well as another 125 planes — that flew on June 22 — refueling and intelligence-gathering planes, and fighter jet escorts. In that scenario, the protesters in Iran would still be out in force, and thus needing to be protected, rather than having been beaten down by the IRGC and the Basij and returned, downcast, to their homes.
Right now in the Pentagon, they are surely weighing the two possibilities for attacks on Iran: one to be launched soon, with fewer military resources in the area than they would like, but with protesters still active on Iranian streets; the other possible attack, that would be launched later, when more weapons and Special Forces have been moved closer to the targets in Iran, but after the protests have died down. Not an easy answer.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
The USAF could target strategic power infrastructure of the islamic regime, such as their main TV broadcast station in Tehran, their comms nationwide, and in places where massacres have been reported, IRGC bases there. I doubt that they have to pile forces anywhere nearby, be it Iraq, Qatar or anywhere else. Also shut down the skies over Iran, so that IRGC forces are unable to move quickly b/w places to quell revolts. Oh, and also, shoot down planes carrying regime members who are trying to flee to France, Russia or anywhere else
Given all the statements that President Trump has issued to date, he’ll prove to be another Obama w/ his red line should he not act quickly. It’s day 16 of the revolt, but the regime hasn’t fallen. If it takes too long, they may yet survive this one
I AM THE INFIDEL YOUR ALLAH WARNED YOU ABOUT says
Trump to get into action NOW as many have already been killed……including children and women. Why wait? You have to strike now. We don’t need to see any more deaths of innocents
cornelius says
Rand Paul expressed his disdain for the Mullahs but at the same time cautioned that direct US intervention might just change the internal dynamics in Iran, discrediting the protestors and evoking at least a degree sympathy for the regime as the sons of Iran are killed by Americans. Conversely, Obama and Biden did nothing during the unrest in their own tenure, the demonstrators were slaughtered and the regime regained control.
It really is a tough call,….and I don’t have the wisdom to know what is the right course to take, but one thing is certain: Trump should never have made his intervention threats unless he planned on carrying them through. If the current slaughter continues and Trump does nothing, the Iranian people will have every right to feel betrayed….and an entire generation of Iranians might end up hating America for very different reasons than those currently promulgated by their oppressive government.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Rand Paul has lost credibility w/ me. It’s unbelievable to watch him call for Congressional oversight when we were bombing their drug boats, and when we captured Maduro. It’s not a war, and nor has there been any regime change there: in fact, many of the oil executives who have been asked to help Venezuela are balking, given that Venezuelan institutions that would protect their legal rights are still not functional. In other words, it’s no different than it was under Maduro
On Iran, too many of the doubting Thomases are drawing parallels to Iraq and Afghanistan. Except that this time, a bunch of ground realities are different:
⮞ There are no talks of an US established regime in the country, the way there was w/ Hamid Karzai and the guy who became the first president of Iraq – forgetting his name
⮞ Nor is the US writing a new constitution for Iran. Iran will have a transitional regime where people will get to vote on what type of government they have, as well as what goes into any new constitution
⮞ Unlike in both Iraq or Afghanistan, there is popular support for Pahlavi, someone who has name recognition both within and beyond Iran. And Reza Pahlavi himself has a plan that he’s put together w/ Iranians, and that seems to have a lot of support
Since US politicians are pretty ignorant about Iran, they’d do well to sit this one out. Instead, we have these bizarre political observations from Rand Paul, and then we have Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, and shockingly enough, Rudy Giuliani, endorse the Mujahideen Khalq. Which is a cult composed of the Red-Green alliance, and not a party worth supporting
James Lincoln says
࿗Infidel࿘ says,
“Rand Paul has lost credibility w/ me.”
Yes, with me also.
He is highly intelligent, a highly skilled ophthalmologist – and was an excellent counterweight against Fauci during covid.
But he sometimes appears arrogant and “doesn’t know when he doesn’t know” regarding the handling of the foreign affairs that are currently on the table.
Mark Stang says
Rand Paul is a twit and a prancing martinet. His comments on the subject of Iran’s future should be totally ignored.
Hoi Polloi says
Tough situation now that the threat has been issued.
Time for the “Not all muslims!” crowd to step up and prove they don’t love death or support brutal oppressors. Time for them to handle the evil ones in their own backyards. Past time.
Rarely says
Iran has +/- 82,000,000 people many of whom support the current regime.
It’s hard to imagine a scenario that wouldn’t include boots on the ground. It would be very complicated and
could get very messy very quickly.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Define “many” as a percentage number
Proud American says
It is important to attack now. This can’t wait. The US Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain. It should go out to see an attack. As well as missiles and B-2 bombing runs from Diego Garcia. Special Forces on the ground are not needed. Israel accomplished devastation in Iran with the invisible Mossad directing the IAF. No special forces needed. Just intelligence driving surgical strikes. And collaboration with Mossad.
Proud American says
Typos from inaccurate Google voice typing: I meant the US 5th Fleet should go out to SEA AND attack.
OLD GUY says
Why is it that America always is expected to cure the woes of these other mismanaged countries? Most of the leaders of these other countries talk big but when it comes down to doing the job they run like hell the other way. Followed by blaming America for anything that goes wrong, fails or damages their interest. If you are not going to play the game shut up already.