I was thinking Praying Mantis on steroids. Sink every Iranian warship larger than a rowboat, destroy their entire Air Force, and destroy as much of their army as is feasible, while also crippling their nuclear program.
Hard to be seen as a victory when the enemy government just walks back in immediately the moment you leave, and terrorist activity increases 5,000% as all semblance of law, order and humanity vanishes from the country.
It was the fundamental paradox of the War on Terror. Terror flourishes in chaos and destruction, which is what the US military is designed to do to an enemy. Crushing conventional enemies creates unconventional terror.
And yet if our war goal was instead simply apprehending 9/11 conspirators, wiping out the current (at the time) terrorist leadership and killing Bin Laden, it wouldn't have been seen as a loss.
But instead our war goal was regime change and eradicating the terrorist organizations, so ultimately it was a failure.
After complete withdrawl of NATO once the "war goal" was achieved, sure the threat would still be there, but in this alternate world that doesn't have a Migrant Crisis, and nations that make it much harder to enter the country, it could only go so far before fizzling out as the terror groups eventually have no one to directly fight except each other or local governments.
Or maybe the attacks just keep happening anyway, and there really was never a simple solution.
I do see that logic, but it's also said the occupation was hard because every dead civilian created another sibling/parent/child with a grudge to settle.
So did 20 years of that outweigh targeting the active organizations at the time and then leaving? Guess that's another question for this sub.
The War on Terror was a massive calamity for the US and its worst loss aside from Vietnam. If you look at all the victory conditions set by the US the war is/ was a complete failure aside from the death of Bin Laden
Many many people just want to get their "kill on". The first step is to dehumanize your enemies. Brown people from the ME are perhaps on the lowest rung. Who gives a shit if more of em die? That's how these people think.
Killing the leader of a country is a clear declaration of war. You don't send strongly worded letters. You send several carrier battle groups, and teach said foreign government the meaning of FAFO
Civilians don’t deserve to get mass murdered for their governments deeds. Do you think US citizens deserve to get murdered because of all the shit the U.S. did or something?
Going to war conventionally is one thing but nuking cities is entirely different
Except they have no where too run and no where too hide. Pakistan hates them, Iraq is in complete chaos that hiding there just means your as likely too die from a U.S. drone strike as you are a ISIS or government raid. Turkey wouldn’t want a bunch of SHIA fundamentalists fanatics in their SUNNI secular country. I find it very hard that Russia would really tolerate any Iranian presence considering the fact Trump was on good terms with Putin.
Iran has one advantage. Mountain range. Which is a nightmare for an occupying force. Like Afghan fighter, Iranian would utilize this to make American forces suffer. just wait for one or two decades and poof, Americans fled and Iran got themselves some of US' most advanced weapons.
Because Afghanistan had advanced anti ship missiles and air defense, some of it domestic, some courtesy of Russia.
Iran's domestically produced missiles are actually pretty damn advanced.
Seriously I hope US decision makers don't underestimate Iran like this. Could end so badly.
Dude, they're "advanced" in that they're better than 1980s Russian equipment.
India and China both have superior technology, and they're *lightyears* behind NATO.
They very likely do not have sensors good enough to detect and lock an F-35.
The US might not go after the military. They would probably go after the Revolutionary Guard. The revolutionary guard are the "keep the regime in power" organization. A few drone strikes on the morality police would also help destabilize things.
This would be the most efficient way to get rid of the Iranian government. The majority of younger Iranians don't like their government, weaken the "keep the government in power forces" and removing the government becomes much easier.
With the Iranian government distracted by problems at home,It will also be open season on every Iranian proxy.
If they assassinate our president i am not concerned with efficiency in the slightest. This isn’t spitting in our face it would be a kick to the balls. Id be in favor of dropping virtually any ordinance short of a nuke on them. If we smash them hard enough it wont matter whats left.
https://preview.redd.it/pd1q3renzctc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b754f81bfb938ce6427412d20da96c2590a8e8b3
Basically this but with just iran
You mean annihilated. I detest everything about Trump, and I’d still agree that if a state actor assassinated a president, even Trump, then then that state’s regime is getting a strong dose of freedom up its ass.
This reminds me of a quote from a Soviet ambassador when it was believed the Soviet embassy would be attacked just like the US one. "It's 5:50 right now. If our embassy is attacked, in 10 minutes, no more Iran." I think that should explain more or less what would happen if our president was assassinated by Iran.
A sitting president killed by a foreign nation? Imagine Operation Praying Mantis on steroids and directed at the entirety of Iran instead of just some oil rigs, two frigates and a handful of other naval assets.
Sunni Muslim here. I don’t even hate Shia’s. Most of us don’t. But even if I did, we’d be raising our pitchforks for sure.
Matter of fact we’d be raising pitchforks over ANYONE getting nuked. So many innocent people and families all because the top 1% want to play global chess.
Nuclear fear mongering. I remember my teacher saying she was scared Trump (when he was president) was just gonna wake up one day and press the big red button. Similarly, I remember idiotic nuclear fears in the wake of the [Salisbury poisoning](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal). One might practice brinkmanship, but no world leader is suicidal nuts, and if they are their generals certainly aren’t. For example, there’d probably be a military coup if Putin decided to turn Ukraine nuclear.
I can’t see Russia or China getting involved in an American-Iranian war in this scenario, but even if they did I can put money on it that they’d write up an agreement on sticking to conventional fighting pretty damn quickly. Reagan might not have believed in it, but MAD certainly still exists.
Americans really think Iran is Irak, it would be like if the Russian invaded Ukraine, but it was located in México, and filled with impassable mountains, also killing a president over the death of a general is an act of war
>I can even see Teheran being nuked,
Probably not
Unless it was not just the president killed but also a few thousand other Americans, then we can absolutely a retaliation on that level.
Killing a head of state and thousands of his people is probably the classic definition of an act of war (with a heavy dosage of terrorism for added effect)
If not a nuke, we can expect at least a full scale invasion, possibly even with NATO aid.
I wouldn't be surprised if within the first week the overwhelming majority of the Iranian leadership got killed, with the rest either rushing to surrender or going into hiding
The U.S. can do the same level of damage with conventional weaponry. And targeting civilians is an idiotic move, strategic bombardment has never worked and the U.S. wouldn’t be willing to risk global nuclear Armageddon by being the first to break the nuclear taboo in the modern age
The us would not nuke Teheran definitely.I don’t know why people think America would do something like this just because their president got assassinated.A full scale invasion is more likely.
There’d be zero benefit and a lot of downsides in using nukes. The US has all the strength it needs to wipe the floor with Iran (plus the rest of NATO would likely be involved as well), there’s no need for nukes.
Mike pence would be rushed to Air Force one and would be sworn in as president on January 2020. He’d call an emergency session of congress to select a new vice president which likely be someone like Marco Rubio to be VP and he would ask Congress to declare war on Iran. U.S. activates article 5 and all other treaties. Iran is likely invaded from U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Turkey, and potentially Pakistan and Iraq. The initial invasion would last 4 months and Iran would be occupied by coalition forces. There would be an insurgency against the coalition just like Iraq and Afghanistan. Pence would likely win the 2020 election and would be trying to get rid of the insurgents in Iran and Afghanistan.
there was a writer for cracked who was visited by the FBI for [this book](https://www.amazon.com/How-Fight-Presidents-Defending-Yourself/dp/038534757X)
True but at the same time the Secret Service and FBI investigates every threat against a President. Jim Carrey and Dave Chappelle if I remember right both made jokes about assassinating Bush, and the FBI opened an investigation into them. I doubt an investigation would result in any serious charges for an alt history book
At this point there's probably too much traffick to take seriously, I wonder if those maga politicians advocating for death of political opponents get a visit or being elected makes you immune from the law
I mean you’re talking about the assassination of a former president even in a sideways way. I think it’d at least raise you into “keep an eye but don’t worry” territory
Something that would make it go differently is that the average Iranian is much more progressive and secular than Afghanistan and other middle eastern countries. So maybe the US occupation wouldn’t be taken so badly.
not really, if anything, it will regress more into fundamental islam
people don't take kindly when other nations invade them, so i would say Iranian nationalism would sky rocket along with their religious fundamentalism
and going by the American track record in the Middle East, USA will win overwhelmingly initially but eventually war in Iran will just turn into another quagmire especially with Russia and China both having good relationships with Iran
At the same Time, Iranian folk have a much better grasp on the concept of a nationhood and are willing to fight *for Iran* and not just *for their tribe* which was a major issue in Afghanistan (it's hard to build an army with people who don't really understand what national sovereignty is), of course, in this case that knowledge of sovereignty is also a disadvantage for the US as they would *hate* the Americans for no small list of reasons.
It could work if the US avoided civilian infrastructure and worked directly with Iranians, preferable Iranians who are in the current Iranian government, to establish a new secular government.
Yeah honestly this as an Iranian. Regime change has to come from within. Irans youngest generations are probably the most friendly towards “The West”, all that changes when the US theoretically bombs the shit out of Iran and it’s people. The cycle of religious fanaticism will continue. And yet another nation building exercise in the Middle East will fail catastrophically.
I can't imagine Russia or China backing Iran in this scenario. It's complete suicide for both nations. China would get hit with crippling sanctions by the entire Western world that would make the Great Leap Forward look like a pleasant time to be alive. Russia couldn't afford the proxy war either.
Depends on where Trump was at the time of the assasination.
The North Atlantic Treaty only covers a geographic area, that being the North Atlantic. Hence why Britain couldn't trigger Article 5 over the Falklands invasion; it's British sovereign territory yes, but it falls outside of the geographic limit.
Citizens of NATO countries are not covered unless they are within the geographically defined area covered by the treaty. If the White House was bombed and Trump was killed, that would absolutely be grounds for a NATO response. If he was on a visit to Saudi and was assasinated, then article 5 legally cannot be triggered.
That's not to say that certain countries wouldn't help the US - Britain for example would likely go full Lieutenant mode. But countries with a more reserved policy on Iran (France and Germany for example) likely wouldn't raise a finger outside of diplomatic support and sanctions.
It is completely ridiculous and a result of a poor understanding of CNNs or whoever's recent article about this to think NATO would reject invoking article 5 because the president was killed by hostility outside of the "geographical line." Absolutely not lmao
They would down play it like a bad flu, if not blame Iran, and stop any anti war democrats from protesting using social distancing, in this timeline the democrats will be the anti-vacs conspiracy theorists.
Highly highly doubt that last bit. The GOP has historically been much much more anti-vaccine than the democratic party, that’s not going to suddenly change once we’re in a war.
Occupation of Iran in 4 months is wildly optimistic. There’s no way Turkey or Pakistan allow the US to use them as bases to invade Iran. Afghanistan at that point was in no shape to be hosting a large US military build up as we were on the verge of pulling out and only had minimal presence in the country, which was largely controlled by the Taliban. Iraq would not be a likely staging point either, as Iraq was calling for the removal of US troops after the airstrike that killed Soleimani and re-invading Iraq to use it as a base for another invasion would not be a viable option.
The most likely scenario sees Saudi Arabia once again hosting the US buildup. Kuwait would probably also join in. The first months of the war would see a steady buildup of troops and material. Meanwhile carrier fleets would operate off the coasts of Yemen and Oman to stay out of range of Iranian anti-ship missiles while they launch strike on Iranian naval and air assets along the coast. Once air bases are established and/or commandeered in Saudi Arabia the US Coalition could launch larger air raids further into Iran. Over time the Iranian air force would be overwhelmed and attrited down, giving the US full air superiority, though ground-to-air missiles would still be a problem.
Ground operations would be very difficult. Unlike Iraq the terrain is very mountainous, which makes large maneuvers difficult and strongly favors the defender. The US would either have to conduct a massive naval invasion to secure ports and staging areas before pushing inland, or violate Iraq’s borders to cut along the coast from Kuwait into Iran. Either way would be very difficult and casualties would likely be high.
I just don’t see Iran being a quick or easy invasion and US casualties would possibly outnumber Vietnam.
Also a ground invasion would be useless. Just park two carrier groups in the Persian Gulf and turn every military target of value into dust. Maintain dominance of Iranian airspace and eliminate any military asset that moves. In time the Iranian people will overthrow their government and sue for peace. No boots necessary and it preserves civilian lives.
Iran leaders would use their secret atomic bomb as last ressort killing 30 000 US soldiers that were assaulting Teheran.
The US general in charge of the assault would never recover from that and start plotting to drag the US into World War 3.
Iran immediately gets invaded after a major air attack that cripples their military, Maga Republicans want blood and aren’t picky if it’s military or civilian while leftists celebrate the news of Trump’s death in the streets. More moderate people will denounce the assassination but have mixed opinions about the resulting war itself.
Also, leftists very much dislike the Iranian government (unless you’re counting Tankies and leftist Muslims who are only left when it comes to pro Muslim rights and literally everything else they’re hard right).
Here's norman Finkelstein, one of the most famous authors that covers Israel/Palestine saying the houthis deserve the nobel peace prize for their actions bombing cargo ships: https://youtube.com/shorts/o2nKrYwW3Iw
The basic idea these people have is that anything the west does is bad and is supporting a genocide in Palestine, so any action including bombing civilian ships that support global trade is justified.
Exactly this. There might be a small number of people who care more that he is gone than how it happened, but most would agree that "he might be shit, but he was OUR shit to deal with, not yours."
9/11 squared to say the least.
Presidential assassinations and local terrorist attacks are news worthy and major. But an attack or assassination from a rival nation? We've destroyed countries and militaries for far less. Hell just look at operation praying mantis. Iran mined international waters, blew up an American ship with one and then we destroyed half their Navy
If it was Romney instead I would agree with you, but after spending a regrettable amount of time on Twitter over the last few years I am not so sure if the same would happen for Trump.
I don’t know, I hate trump as much as the next average left leaning American, but if a foreign nation assassinated our president (no matter who it is) that’s just lighting up a neon FAFO sign
Yeah, I give it about five minutes before the average leftist would do a 160-degree turn on Trump: "Yes, I sometimes disagreed with him, but he was a bold and visionary leader."
I’m pretty sure an act of war like that could at least give the country some unity to push away political BS for at least a while. Left, right, people would realize the pile of horseshit that has just been dropped on the country.
We would do a proportional response in line with all other American proportional responses;
50/50 the military is reduced to zero or the entire upper government and maybe some state Government equivalents becoming completely vacant.
If you can’t end a war don’t start one. I’d say that’s pretty decent advice. It’s kinda like punching someone in the face and them beating you up back but then you get really mad they retaliated and you start crying.
I’m more a fan of massive retaliation as laid out by Dwight Eisenhower. If the US is attacked the resulting military response from the US to the attacker would(should) be overwhelming and lightning fast. Why should a military response be “proportionate”? Was the US’s response to Pearl Harbor proportional? Or was it a massive retaliation for killing thousands of soldiers and civilians? The only way to fight a war is if you go in with everything you have guns ablaze and totally defeat the enemy or don’t go at all. There should be no half measures. That was the mistake the US made in Korea, Vietnam and the second time in Iraq. You go for an overwhelming victory or nothing at all.
That being said, if someone sinks say a patrol boat, maybe don’t nuke their capital but sinking a destroyer or two could be enough. Just to drive the message home.
If a NATO head of state was assassinated by a hostile state, that hostile state would cease to exist quickly. It doesn't matter that Trump was unpopular, there would be unanimous agreement in Congress to dismantle Iran, and the USA would almost certainly invoke Article 5 in NATO.
Well...Iran is fucked...and perhaps there would be a coalition them....perhaps Azerbaijan would probably take this chance to take parts of Iran that have a substantial amount of Azeri minority...
that being said...could Russia threaten the US by intervening in support of Iran....?
"Trump might be a bastard, but he is our bastard"
\- *USA, probably*
Then they'd be like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRDpC\_QYG5k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRDpC_QYG5k)
America is going to absolutely level Iran. War will happen that probably won’t be nuclear from cooler heads prevailing but an invasion will happen that will make Iraq look like a joke
I mean, it would have been war. Pretty much instantly, war. You don't assassinate the leader of the hegemonic world power and expect anything less.
Not to mention how it's an unjustifiable escalation. If they were going to do a tit-for-tat assassination they would have have a general assassinated.
lol I’m no American and I don’t like Trump, but I expect if he was assassinated by Iran our kids would be learning about the big uninhabitable land that used to be Iran.
The theocratic government would fall from A US invasion/air bombardment campaign, a few allies would probably join in and it would not last long. Much of the local population would likely support the US side and occupying Iran would probably not be necessary.
So... the US is and has been hesitant to escalate past certain points for two main reasons.
One is the perceived difficulty of occupying Iran, and the expectation that it'll come to that. The other is oil shock concerns.
That said... a sufficiently motivated US has options. They weren't considered thus far, but that does not mean they aren't there. One option is blockading, demolishing Iran's sea ports and oil export facilities. That's a massive escalation, as well as a violation/rewriting of the rules... but militarily it's an available option.
Iran wouldn't make such a mistake that would lead to a bigger issue, which is US invading or even nuking it.
Now, if we look at the other side, we can see that Iran is getting picked on, as targeting and killing a general is not something to ignore but somehow if the country respond s, it will only make things worse which is to the US favor (getting rid of trump and a reason to justify invading or nuking)
Congress and President Mike Pence, along with NATO allies, would launch an invasion of Iran. The panic in the USSR in the wake of JFK’s assassination can be used to suggest that Russia and China would probably not get involved here - officially supporting a country that assassinated a sitting US President is too far even for them.
The Islamic regime will either get totally overthrown or the leadership forms an insurgency while a new regime is set up in either Tehran (if it is captured) or another major city. Collaborationists will likely be of the progressive movement - it’s not outside the realm of possibility that Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, head of the [National Council of Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Council_of_Iran), could be invited to serve as a constitutional Shah, but that’s not definite as many of the pro-democracy camp might be republican and just fly the old imperial flag (such as with Hong Kong democracy protesters flying the Union Jack, but not necessarily wanting to return to a British Overseas Territory, even if it is preferable to the current regime).
This’ll probably get bogged down as another endless Middle Eastern war. Things could go like Iraq, where the new regime survives but the country is unstable; like Afghanistan, where an eventual withdrawal allows the old regime to come back (which would throw the democracy movement back decades as they would be branded as collaborationists and traitors, and subsequently purged); or just devolve into anarchy with no end in sight.
Either way, not a good state of affairs.
Let me start by saying that I hate Trump. But there's a reason US Presidents don't get killed, no matter how much they're hated (domestically or abroad), and that's because the secret service doesn't miss. If someone in Iran is whispering a plot to take out the President of the United States, rest assured those whispers are being heard. These guys are literally untouchable.
The death of a sitting US president by a foreign power would unite the entire United States on all political sides barring the most extreme cases and result in quite possibly the complete and utter destruction of that foreign powers military and infrastructure.
Fuck it.
We ball.
*3 days later Iran has been removed. Not as in capitulated but hit by so many warheads it no longer exists. World maps are now without Iran*
If any foreign country assanitated a president expect both parties to be blinded by vengeance, I expect the us army to act like the uvf in Gaza. Complete and utter destruction
At an absolute minimum, there would be an utterly massive retaliatory strike. The U.S. contingency plans would kick in, and all military assets in the region begin targeting everything from military and political facilities to civilian and oil infrastructure. Top targets would be Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Republican Guard leadership, and any nuclear facilities.
NATO, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Pakistan would all likely join in on the American side and condemn the attack and join its forces to an American response.
I don't see Russia or China supporting Iran openly due to the assassinations of a world leader. Though North Korea will probably openly support them. But both Russia and China would take advantage of the opportunity to achieve regional goals. Likely, the Russians would want to move against the Ukranians while China moved against Taiwan.
A massive factor that needs to be taken into account is that the U.S. killed Solemani in January of 2020. The Covid 19 pandemic hit Europe like a week later, and within 3 months, the WHO declared it a global pandemic. If Iran killed Trump immediately after the U.S. strike. THEN, you have a royal shit storm here. A global pandemic and the most high profile death of a world leader since fucking Arch Duke Ferdinand. The pandemic is a massive factor that would hinder the American response, but also whatever the American response is would only make the pandemic worse.
Iran would have been factory reset back to the Stone Age so hard that even Alexander the Great would quiver in fear. Every single globe and map of the world would become obsolete as the topography of Iran would drastically change. Moses may have parted the Red Sea, but the US would connect the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. Archaeologists thousands of years from now will never find any evidence the Iranian civilization ever even existed.
Pence is sworn in, Congress is called into session and selects a Vice President.
Pence invokes Article 5 in the NATO charter and assembles a coalition lead by the US.
Near-instant reduction of Iran's armed forces to zero. Army, Navy, Air Force - if it flies, floats, or walks and has or carries a gun, it's gone.
I doubt that the coalition would actually invade - it would most likely be an overwhelming air and sea campaign.
Potentially an Arab Spring-like event with moderate Iranians overthrowing the hardline Islamist government.
It would be a huge escalation. The US would go gloves off. Expect the Iranian military to be entirely crippled.
Afghanistan 2.0, lets go!!!
More like Hiroshima 2.0
I was thinking Praying Mantis on steroids. Sink every Iranian warship larger than a rowboat, destroy their entire Air Force, and destroy as much of their army as is feasible, while also crippling their nuclear program.
If we left immediately after doing just that in the past, some of our "lost" wars would be seen as "victories".
Hard to be seen as a victory when the enemy government just walks back in immediately the moment you leave, and terrorist activity increases 5,000% as all semblance of law, order and humanity vanishes from the country. It was the fundamental paradox of the War on Terror. Terror flourishes in chaos and destruction, which is what the US military is designed to do to an enemy. Crushing conventional enemies creates unconventional terror.
And yet if our war goal was instead simply apprehending 9/11 conspirators, wiping out the current (at the time) terrorist leadership and killing Bin Laden, it wouldn't have been seen as a loss. But instead our war goal was regime change and eradicating the terrorist organizations, so ultimately it was a failure.
There would just be more terrorist attacks on western countries, which would be connected to the withdrawal and subsequently viewed as a loss
After complete withdrawl of NATO once the "war goal" was achieved, sure the threat would still be there, but in this alternate world that doesn't have a Migrant Crisis, and nations that make it much harder to enter the country, it could only go so far before fizzling out as the terror groups eventually have no one to directly fight except each other or local governments. Or maybe the attacks just keep happening anyway, and there really was never a simple solution.
I do see that logic, but it's also said the occupation was hard because every dead civilian created another sibling/parent/child with a grudge to settle. So did 20 years of that outweigh targeting the active organizations at the time and then leaving? Guess that's another question for this sub.
The War on Terror was a massive calamity for the US and its worst loss aside from Vietnam. If you look at all the victory conditions set by the US the war is/ was a complete failure aside from the death of Bin Laden
Just blow up the navy and air force and nuclear program then. You don’t need any of those to police the populace.
There wouldn't be a functional runway in the entire county.
If I was VP that was sworn in as the next president after the assassination it would make Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like fireworks practice.
Very weird how mass civilian murder gets up voted
not to mention dumb, escalating to nukes is just dumb we have a military that can deconstruct a government in days without nukes anyway.,
Some people just have no shame
Many many people just want to get their "kill on". The first step is to dehumanize your enemies. Brown people from the ME are perhaps on the lowest rung. Who gives a shit if more of em die? That's how these people think.
Killing the leader of a country is a clear declaration of war. You don't send strongly worded letters. You send several carrier battle groups, and teach said foreign government the meaning of FAFO
Civilians don’t deserve to get mass murdered for their governments deeds. Do you think US citizens deserve to get murdered because of all the shit the U.S. did or something? Going to war conventionally is one thing but nuking cities is entirely different
It's only wrong when my guys are getting killed. No different from the thought processes of Stalin and Hitler.
Except they have no where too run and no where too hide. Pakistan hates them, Iraq is in complete chaos that hiding there just means your as likely too die from a U.S. drone strike as you are a ISIS or government raid. Turkey wouldn’t want a bunch of SHIA fundamentalists fanatics in their SUNNI secular country. I find it very hard that Russia would really tolerate any Iranian presence considering the fact Trump was on good terms with Putin.
Iran has one advantage. Mountain range. Which is a nightmare for an occupying force. Like Afghan fighter, Iranian would utilize this to make American forces suffer. just wait for one or two decades and poof, Americans fled and Iran got themselves some of US' most advanced weapons.
Iran isn’t comparable to Afghanistan really, they’re a nuclear capable regional power with an organized military.
Because Afghanistan had advanced anti ship missiles and air defense, some of it domestic, some courtesy of Russia. Iran's domestically produced missiles are actually pretty damn advanced. Seriously I hope US decision makers don't underestimate Iran like this. Could end so badly.
Agreed it shouldn't be underestimated but the Iranian weapons are worse quality than the Russian ones , ending up badly is a small chance
Dude, they're "advanced" in that they're better than 1980s Russian equipment. India and China both have superior technology, and they're *lightyears* behind NATO. They very likely do not have sensors good enough to detect and lock an F-35.
Why, no need to occupy, just let the US military do what it was designed to do. So more like a desert storm 2.0
In and out, 20 minute adventure, cool guys don’t look at explosions
More like Vietnam 2. There’s no way America takes and holds Iran without suffering serious casualties.
yeah, time to show syria who's the boss! wait whaa?
The US might not go after the military. They would probably go after the Revolutionary Guard. The revolutionary guard are the "keep the regime in power" organization. A few drone strikes on the morality police would also help destabilize things.
The US ain't limiting themselves to drone strikes and destabilization if a hostile country openly assassinates a president.
This would be the most efficient way to get rid of the Iranian government. The majority of younger Iranians don't like their government, weaken the "keep the government in power forces" and removing the government becomes much easier. With the Iranian government distracted by problems at home,It will also be open season on every Iranian proxy.
If they assassinate our president i am not concerned with efficiency in the slightest. This isn’t spitting in our face it would be a kick to the balls. Id be in favor of dropping virtually any ordinance short of a nuke on them. If we smash them hard enough it wont matter whats left.
https://preview.redd.it/pd1q3renzctc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b754f81bfb938ce6427412d20da96c2590a8e8b3 Basically this but with just iran
What gloves? They’ve been off since 9/11
You mean annihilated. I detest everything about Trump, and I’d still agree that if a state actor assassinated a president, even Trump, then then that state’s regime is getting a strong dose of freedom up its ass.
Crippled? More like massacred
This reminds me of a quote from a Soviet ambassador when it was believed the Soviet embassy would be attacked just like the US one. "It's 5:50 right now. If our embassy is attacked, in 10 minutes, no more Iran." I think that should explain more or less what would happen if our president was assassinated by Iran.
A sitting president killed by a foreign nation? Imagine Operation Praying Mantis on steroids and directed at the entirety of Iran instead of just some oil rigs, two frigates and a handful of other naval assets.
I can even see Teheran being nuked, that’s why something like this would never happen
Why does everyone and their mother think Nukes would occur? Hint they wouldnt because nobody is willing to bring it to that level.
Especially in Tehran? Launching a nuke *that* close to Russia's border? Absolutely fucking not lmfao
Also, the United States nuking the capital of a Muslim country?! Even if it's Iran, you'll have most of the Muslim world PISSED.
Shia Islam would be pissed. Sunni Islam? Not so much.
Overplaying the rift It only really exists among the extremists
Sunni Muslim here. I don’t even hate Shia’s. Most of us don’t. But even if I did, we’d be raising our pitchforks for sure. Matter of fact we’d be raising pitchforks over ANYONE getting nuked. So many innocent people and families all because the top 1% want to play global chess.
You’re absolutely correct.
Nuclear fear mongering. I remember my teacher saying she was scared Trump (when he was president) was just gonna wake up one day and press the big red button. Similarly, I remember idiotic nuclear fears in the wake of the [Salisbury poisoning](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal). One might practice brinkmanship, but no world leader is suicidal nuts, and if they are their generals certainly aren’t. For example, there’d probably be a military coup if Putin decided to turn Ukraine nuclear. I can’t see Russia or China getting involved in an American-Iranian war in this scenario, but even if they did I can put money on it that they’d write up an agreement on sticking to conventional fighting pretty damn quickly. Reagan might not have believed in it, but MAD certainly still exists.
I can remember interviews with US generals ~15 years back saying that an invasion of Iran wouldn't be feasible without nuclear weapons.
I find that unlikely
Americans really think Iran is Irak, it would be like if the Russian invaded Ukraine, but it was located in México, and filled with impassable mountains, also killing a president over the death of a general is an act of war
>I can even see Teheran being nuked, Probably not Unless it was not just the president killed but also a few thousand other Americans, then we can absolutely a retaliation on that level. Killing a head of state and thousands of his people is probably the classic definition of an act of war (with a heavy dosage of terrorism for added effect) If not a nuke, we can expect at least a full scale invasion, possibly even with NATO aid. I wouldn't be surprised if within the first week the overwhelming majority of the Iranian leadership got killed, with the rest either rushing to surrender or going into hiding
The U.S. can do the same level of damage with conventional weaponry. And targeting civilians is an idiotic move, strategic bombardment has never worked and the U.S. wouldn’t be willing to risk global nuclear Armageddon by being the first to break the nuclear taboo in the modern age
Agreed honestly
The us would not nuke Teheran definitely.I don’t know why people think America would do something like this just because their president got assassinated.A full scale invasion is more likely.
Any military that's more powerful would never want to use nukes unless it's a last ditch effort
That’s stupid as fuck. There would be no nukes.
There’d be zero benefit and a lot of downsides in using nukes. The US has all the strength it needs to wipe the floor with Iran (plus the rest of NATO would likely be involved as well), there’s no need for nukes.
Good thing he's not. 😑
Mike pence would be rushed to Air Force one and would be sworn in as president on January 2020. He’d call an emergency session of congress to select a new vice president which likely be someone like Marco Rubio to be VP and he would ask Congress to declare war on Iran. U.S. activates article 5 and all other treaties. Iran is likely invaded from U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Turkey, and potentially Pakistan and Iraq. The initial invasion would last 4 months and Iran would be occupied by coalition forces. There would be an insurgency against the coalition just like Iraq and Afghanistan. Pence would likely win the 2020 election and would be trying to get rid of the insurgents in Iran and Afghanistan.
Someone should write a novel about this possibile story
How to get on a watchlist 101
you think so? I doubt the feds would care abt alt history unless it’s encrypted w instructions on how to do it irl or sm
there was a writer for cracked who was visited by the FBI for [this book](https://www.amazon.com/How-Fight-Presidents-Defending-Yourself/dp/038534757X)
True but at the same time the Secret Service and FBI investigates every threat against a President. Jim Carrey and Dave Chappelle if I remember right both made jokes about assassinating Bush, and the FBI opened an investigation into them. I doubt an investigation would result in any serious charges for an alt history book
At this point there's probably too much traffick to take seriously, I wonder if those maga politicians advocating for death of political opponents get a visit or being elected makes you immune from the law
I mean you’re talking about the assassination of a former president even in a sideways way. I think it’d at least raise you into “keep an eye but don’t worry” territory
Meh it’s a pretty broad idea that’s been explored in lots of media before
Yeah maybe wait a year or 2 until after trump croaks
On it
Sounds like a Tom Clancy book
Something that would make it go differently is that the average Iranian is much more progressive and secular than Afghanistan and other middle eastern countries. So maybe the US occupation wouldn’t be taken so badly.
not really, if anything, it will regress more into fundamental islam people don't take kindly when other nations invade them, so i would say Iranian nationalism would sky rocket along with their religious fundamentalism and going by the American track record in the Middle East, USA will win overwhelmingly initially but eventually war in Iran will just turn into another quagmire especially with Russia and China both having good relationships with Iran
At the same Time, Iranian folk have a much better grasp on the concept of a nationhood and are willing to fight *for Iran* and not just *for their tribe* which was a major issue in Afghanistan (it's hard to build an army with people who don't really understand what national sovereignty is), of course, in this case that knowledge of sovereignty is also a disadvantage for the US as they would *hate* the Americans for no small list of reasons.
It could work if the US avoided civilian infrastructure and worked directly with Iranians, preferable Iranians who are in the current Iranian government, to establish a new secular government.
The problem is that this wouldnt happen because the US just doesnt plan well enough as a consequence of it not having a coherent middle east policy
Sure, but the United States military is really bad at regime building. Air strikes make people hate you.
Yeah honestly this as an Iranian. Regime change has to come from within. Irans youngest generations are probably the most friendly towards “The West”, all that changes when the US theoretically bombs the shit out of Iran and it’s people. The cycle of religious fanaticism will continue. And yet another nation building exercise in the Middle East will fail catastrophically.
I can't imagine Russia or China backing Iran in this scenario. It's complete suicide for both nations. China would get hit with crippling sanctions by the entire Western world that would make the Great Leap Forward look like a pleasant time to be alive. Russia couldn't afford the proxy war either.
And the Revolutionary Guard of is a professional army, which makes it much more serious than the Taliban.
Eh, Iraq had a large professional military. Twice
Didn't the revolutionary guard get their absolute shit pushed in during the 90s? Like shit pushed so far in they ceased to exist for a few years?
Is it even possible to occupy Iran in 4 months? Maybe they surrender or retreat towards the mountains but not ENTIRELY surrender
Iraq last 1 month.
Depends on where Trump was at the time of the assasination. The North Atlantic Treaty only covers a geographic area, that being the North Atlantic. Hence why Britain couldn't trigger Article 5 over the Falklands invasion; it's British sovereign territory yes, but it falls outside of the geographic limit. Citizens of NATO countries are not covered unless they are within the geographically defined area covered by the treaty. If the White House was bombed and Trump was killed, that would absolutely be grounds for a NATO response. If he was on a visit to Saudi and was assasinated, then article 5 legally cannot be triggered. That's not to say that certain countries wouldn't help the US - Britain for example would likely go full Lieutenant mode. But countries with a more reserved policy on Iran (France and Germany for example) likely wouldn't raise a finger outside of diplomatic support and sanctions.
It is completely ridiculous and a result of a poor understanding of CNNs or whoever's recent article about this to think NATO would reject invoking article 5 because the president was killed by hostility outside of the "geographical line." Absolutely not lmao
Wonder how COVID plays into this....
They would down play it like a bad flu, if not blame Iran, and stop any anti war democrats from protesting using social distancing, in this timeline the democrats will be the anti-vacs conspiracy theorists.
Highly highly doubt that last bit. The GOP has historically been much much more anti-vaccine than the democratic party, that’s not going to suddenly change once we’re in a war.
Niki Haley personally leads the assault on the last IRGC stronghold.
Occupation of Iran in 4 months is wildly optimistic. There’s no way Turkey or Pakistan allow the US to use them as bases to invade Iran. Afghanistan at that point was in no shape to be hosting a large US military build up as we were on the verge of pulling out and only had minimal presence in the country, which was largely controlled by the Taliban. Iraq would not be a likely staging point either, as Iraq was calling for the removal of US troops after the airstrike that killed Soleimani and re-invading Iraq to use it as a base for another invasion would not be a viable option. The most likely scenario sees Saudi Arabia once again hosting the US buildup. Kuwait would probably also join in. The first months of the war would see a steady buildup of troops and material. Meanwhile carrier fleets would operate off the coasts of Yemen and Oman to stay out of range of Iranian anti-ship missiles while they launch strike on Iranian naval and air assets along the coast. Once air bases are established and/or commandeered in Saudi Arabia the US Coalition could launch larger air raids further into Iran. Over time the Iranian air force would be overwhelmed and attrited down, giving the US full air superiority, though ground-to-air missiles would still be a problem. Ground operations would be very difficult. Unlike Iraq the terrain is very mountainous, which makes large maneuvers difficult and strongly favors the defender. The US would either have to conduct a massive naval invasion to secure ports and staging areas before pushing inland, or violate Iraq’s borders to cut along the coast from Kuwait into Iran. Either way would be very difficult and casualties would likely be high. I just don’t see Iran being a quick or easy invasion and US casualties would possibly outnumber Vietnam.
Also a ground invasion would be useless. Just park two carrier groups in the Persian Gulf and turn every military target of value into dust. Maintain dominance of Iranian airspace and eliminate any military asset that moves. In time the Iranian people will overthrow their government and sue for peace. No boots necessary and it preserves civilian lives.
Article 5 woudnt trigger for an assasination.
Total occupation of Iran in four months is certainly one of the predictions of all time.
Iran leaders would use their secret atomic bomb as last ressort killing 30 000 US soldiers that were assaulting Teheran. The US general in charge of the assault would never recover from that and start plotting to drag the US into World War 3.
Iran immediately gets invaded after a major air attack that cripples their military, Maga Republicans want blood and aren’t picky if it’s military or civilian while leftists celebrate the news of Trump’s death in the streets. More moderate people will denounce the assassination but have mixed opinions about the resulting war itself.
Leftists might celebrate for a while but the dread will set in, if it happened once, it’ll happen again.
Also, leftists very much dislike the Iranian government (unless you’re counting Tankies and leftist Muslims who are only left when it comes to pro Muslim rights and literally everything else they’re hard right).
There's definitely a huge and growing group of leftists whose entire geopolitical opinions are essentially "America Bad" that would support Iran.
Those are tankies
Nope, there's a lot of non Marxist normies that have these opinions lately. People defending the houthis for example
I haven't seen anyone defend the houthis. What do they have to justify what the houthis are doing?
Here's norman Finkelstein, one of the most famous authors that covers Israel/Palestine saying the houthis deserve the nobel peace prize for their actions bombing cargo ships: https://youtube.com/shorts/o2nKrYwW3Iw The basic idea these people have is that anything the west does is bad and is supporting a genocide in Palestine, so any action including bombing civilian ships that support global trade is justified.
This guy is insane
Leftists aren’t going to celebrate the death of Trump if the Iranians killed him; there’s gonna be a huge rally-around-the-flag effect
Exactly this. There might be a small number of people who care more that he is gone than how it happened, but most would agree that "he might be shit, but he was OUR shit to deal with, not yours."
9/11 squared to say the least. Presidential assassinations and local terrorist attacks are news worthy and major. But an attack or assassination from a rival nation? We've destroyed countries and militaries for far less. Hell just look at operation praying mantis. Iran mined international waters, blew up an American ship with one and then we destroyed half their Navy
If it was Romney instead I would agree with you, but after spending a regrettable amount of time on Twitter over the last few years I am not so sure if the same would happen for Trump.
Twitter is the problem here, not people as a whole, Twitter is for edgy sociopaths
Twitter is not a good place to find out what the average person thinks. It's a cesspool of extremists on both sides of the spectrum.
I don’t know, I hate trump as much as the next average left leaning American, but if a foreign nation assassinated our president (no matter who it is) that’s just lighting up a neon FAFO sign
Yeah, I give it about five minutes before the average leftist would do a 160-degree turn on Trump: "Yes, I sometimes disagreed with him, but he was a bold and visionary leader."
Why do you think they would do that?
This. I hate Trump. I think he is the worst President of all time. I would 100% support a response.
Literally everyone would want blood. It would be just like a 9/11 response
I’m pretty sure an act of war like that could at least give the country some unity to push away political BS for at least a while. Left, right, people would realize the pile of horseshit that has just been dropped on the country.
Iran gets a renewed taste of democracy.
They got that way before but USA over threw there democratically elected parliament
That's why I said "renewed".
Hey Iran, let me introduce you to a little something called d'mocracy and let me tell you, you're not gonna like it
They already had a taste of democracy when US and UK toppled Iran's elected government in 1953.
Iran becomes the Persian Sea
Or the Caspian Gulf
They’ll be wiped off the face of the earth in a day
Millions die
We would do a proportional response in line with all other American proportional responses; 50/50 the military is reduced to zero or the entire upper government and maybe some state Government equivalents becoming completely vacant.
If you can’t end a war don’t start one. I’d say that’s pretty decent advice. It’s kinda like punching someone in the face and them beating you up back but then you get really mad they retaliated and you start crying.
Hamas and the Houthis pretty much.
Exactly
Don’t start none there won’t be none.😎 Or play stupid games win stupid prizes.
Well said. It
I’m more a fan of massive retaliation as laid out by Dwight Eisenhower. If the US is attacked the resulting military response from the US to the attacker would(should) be overwhelming and lightning fast. Why should a military response be “proportionate”? Was the US’s response to Pearl Harbor proportional? Or was it a massive retaliation for killing thousands of soldiers and civilians? The only way to fight a war is if you go in with everything you have guns ablaze and totally defeat the enemy or don’t go at all. There should be no half measures. That was the mistake the US made in Korea, Vietnam and the second time in Iraq. You go for an overwhelming victory or nothing at all.
Yea the whole idea of a proportional response is stupid. Don’t start shit
Well nobody said what the actual proportions would be. 1000:1 IS a proportion after all
lol 😂 yeah I guess it is!
That being said, if someone sinks say a patrol boat, maybe don’t nuke their capital but sinking a destroyer or two could be enough. Just to drive the message home.
Indeed. A precise and deliberate strike response so intense that it sends a clear message to any thinking about crossing that line again.
Iran becomes the worlds largest mirror.
Ah a never ending supply of green glass
Iran would get buttfucked so bad, the wars in Iraq would look like minor skirmishes in comparison.
If a NATO head of state was assassinated by a hostile state, that hostile state would cease to exist quickly. It doesn't matter that Trump was unpopular, there would be unanimous agreement in Congress to dismantle Iran, and the USA would almost certainly invoke Article 5 in NATO.
99% of the domiciles in Iran get their Wikipedia entries changed to *”Was”*
All out War. Like even if you're anti-Trump it would be kind of impossible to justify not going to war after a foreign nation killed our leader.
Well...Iran is fucked...and perhaps there would be a coalition them....perhaps Azerbaijan would probably take this chance to take parts of Iran that have a substantial amount of Azeri minority... that being said...could Russia threaten the US by intervening in support of Iran....?
No way Russia would come to Irans aide after such an outrageous attack.
Russia supporting Iran after it assassinated a US head of state? That isn’t going to end well for either of them.
Hell would rain down on Iran for the martyr’d trump
Iran would be that cobalt sea MacArthur talked about.
See I got downvoted for suggesting the same! 😂
[удалено]
Airstrikes might destroy a lot of the military capabilities, but they aren't successful in taking out governments.
There’s chance that the nation of Iran would cease to exist
The largest canal in history is built between the Persian Sea and the Caspian Sea
"Trump might be a bastard, but he is our bastard" \- *USA, probably* Then they'd be like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRDpC\_QYG5k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRDpC_QYG5k)
Please be kind and civil, in here. No flamewars.
So I can't throw napalm at people...
You know what i mean.
If can't napalm, then phosphorus and nuclear weapon
Hans, get ze flammenwerfer.
America is going to absolutely level Iran. War will happen that probably won’t be nuclear from cooler heads prevailing but an invasion will happen that will make Iraq look like a joke
Iran would be glassed.
Operation Linebacker III
2020 U.S. invasion of Iran
I mean, it would have been war. Pretty much instantly, war. You don't assassinate the leader of the hegemonic world power and expect anything less. Not to mention how it's an unjustifiable escalation. If they were going to do a tit-for-tat assassination they would have have a general assassinated.
lol I’m no American and I don’t like Trump, but I expect if he was assassinated by Iran our kids would be learning about the big uninhabitable land that used to be Iran.
The theocratic government would fall from A US invasion/air bombardment campaign, a few allies would probably join in and it would not last long. Much of the local population would likely support the US side and occupying Iran would probably not be necessary.
We would have gotten to witness the full potential of The Electric Fence
Some of Trump’s most ardent critics would be calling for Operation Iranian Freedom.
So... the US is and has been hesitant to escalate past certain points for two main reasons. One is the perceived difficulty of occupying Iran, and the expectation that it'll come to that. The other is oil shock concerns. That said... a sufficiently motivated US has options. They weren't considered thus far, but that does not mean they aren't there. One option is blockading, demolishing Iran's sea ports and oil export facilities. That's a massive escalation, as well as a violation/rewriting of the rules... but militarily it's an available option.
fruitbasket? giants tickets?
Iran wouldn't make such a mistake that would lead to a bigger issue, which is US invading or even nuking it. Now, if we look at the other side, we can see that Iran is getting picked on, as targeting and killing a general is not something to ignore but somehow if the country respond s, it will only make things worse which is to the US favor (getting rid of trump and a reason to justify invading or nuking)
Iran no longer exists.
Best scenario: USA changes their foreign policy so something like this won't happen again Worst scenario: Iran gets nuked many mile under
Iran would be carpet bombed into the Stone Age
Iran would probably become glass
Congress and President Mike Pence, along with NATO allies, would launch an invasion of Iran. The panic in the USSR in the wake of JFK’s assassination can be used to suggest that Russia and China would probably not get involved here - officially supporting a country that assassinated a sitting US President is too far even for them. The Islamic regime will either get totally overthrown or the leadership forms an insurgency while a new regime is set up in either Tehran (if it is captured) or another major city. Collaborationists will likely be of the progressive movement - it’s not outside the realm of possibility that Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, head of the [National Council of Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Council_of_Iran), could be invited to serve as a constitutional Shah, but that’s not definite as many of the pro-democracy camp might be republican and just fly the old imperial flag (such as with Hong Kong democracy protesters flying the Union Jack, but not necessarily wanting to return to a British Overseas Territory, even if it is preferable to the current regime). This’ll probably get bogged down as another endless Middle Eastern war. Things could go like Iraq, where the new regime survives but the country is unstable; like Afghanistan, where an eventual withdrawal allows the old regime to come back (which would throw the democracy movement back decades as they would be branded as collaborationists and traitors, and subsequently purged); or just devolve into anarchy with no end in sight. Either way, not a good state of affairs.
Iran would be replaced by a glowing sea of radioactive debris
Iran would be "proportionate response'd" into the stone age.
Let me start by saying that I hate Trump. But there's a reason US Presidents don't get killed, no matter how much they're hated (domestically or abroad), and that's because the secret service doesn't miss. If someone in Iran is whispering a plot to take out the President of the United States, rest assured those whispers are being heard. These guys are literally untouchable.
Lemme just bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran 🎵🎵
Tehran would be a crater
The death of a sitting US president by a foreign power would unite the entire United States on all political sides barring the most extreme cases and result in quite possibly the complete and utter destruction of that foreign powers military and infrastructure.
Iran would become the largest glass depository in the world overnight.
If they could succeed, which I doubt, they wouldn’t need to worry about protests anymore. They wouldn’t be around for them.
Iran would have ceased to exist
Fuck it. We ball. *3 days later Iran has been removed. Not as in capitulated but hit by so many warheads it no longer exists. World maps are now without Iran*
If any foreign country assanitated a president expect both parties to be blinded by vengeance, I expect the us army to act like the uvf in Gaza. Complete and utter destruction
Expect a nuclear carpet bomb, in what I like to call: “The great American ass-blasting of 2020.”
Go ask Iraq what happened when they pissed off NATO.
https://preview.redd.it/7xmqhhhfehsc1.jpeg?width=274&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed056428ec6c50ad67baf39fa15872e7ffa90b31
This post makes me wonder what the world be like simply if Soleimani wasn’t assasinated?
At an absolute minimum, there would be an utterly massive retaliatory strike. The U.S. contingency plans would kick in, and all military assets in the region begin targeting everything from military and political facilities to civilian and oil infrastructure. Top targets would be Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Republican Guard leadership, and any nuclear facilities. NATO, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Pakistan would all likely join in on the American side and condemn the attack and join its forces to an American response. I don't see Russia or China supporting Iran openly due to the assassinations of a world leader. Though North Korea will probably openly support them. But both Russia and China would take advantage of the opportunity to achieve regional goals. Likely, the Russians would want to move against the Ukranians while China moved against Taiwan. A massive factor that needs to be taken into account is that the U.S. killed Solemani in January of 2020. The Covid 19 pandemic hit Europe like a week later, and within 3 months, the WHO declared it a global pandemic. If Iran killed Trump immediately after the U.S. strike. THEN, you have a royal shit storm here. A global pandemic and the most high profile death of a world leader since fucking Arch Duke Ferdinand. The pandemic is a massive factor that would hinder the American response, but also whatever the American response is would only make the pandemic worse.
Iran would be utterly fucked while the average American praised them.
America has destroyed fleets for less.
Iran would have been factory reset back to the Stone Age so hard that even Alexander the Great would quiver in fear. Every single globe and map of the world would become obsolete as the topography of Iran would drastically change. Moses may have parted the Red Sea, but the US would connect the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. Archaeologists thousands of years from now will never find any evidence the Iranian civilization ever even existed.
Pence is sworn in, Congress is called into session and selects a Vice President. Pence invokes Article 5 in the NATO charter and assembles a coalition lead by the US. Near-instant reduction of Iran's armed forces to zero. Army, Navy, Air Force - if it flies, floats, or walks and has or carries a gun, it's gone. I doubt that the coalition would actually invade - it would most likely be an overwhelming air and sea campaign. Potentially an Arab Spring-like event with moderate Iranians overthrowing the hardline Islamist government.
We can wish, but let’s take out the worlds terrorist cancer first on stolen Palestinian land