← Back to context

Comment by markus_zhang

18 hours ago

You can’t be short, minimal lethal AND regime change. Gotta be pretty bloody to make that happen.

Unless like Venezuela. Or like 1953 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

  • Fomenting a coup is very different than toppling a regime through military force.

    My biggest concern has always been that US military action against Iran would undermine domestic factions pushing for democratic reforms, at best leading to the installation of a different autocratic regime more amenable to US interests, at worst leading to a wellspring of support for the existing regime both internally, and externally in the form of alliances with other nations who stand to benefit from a reshuffling of the existing world order.

    • "At best leading to the installation of a different autocratic regime more amenable to US interests" seems like a pretty fine outcome in US eyes, doesn't it? Outside of Israel, is democracy in the Middle East even realistic?

      An autocrat regime friendly to US interests, who we could do business with, who won't pursue nuclear weapons, and who won't imperil US allies or the Strait of Hormuz would be a drastic improvement over the current state of affairs.

      We don't need to nation-build to have a good outcome for the US: that's something we should've learned after Iraq and Afghanistan.

      1 reply →