Definitely not advocating anything here but just thinking aloud...
It seems to be coming down to the question of the underground centrifuge enrichment installation at Fordow. That might be disabled by the US with the 30,000 lb "bunker buster" bombs. Another option would be some sort of land-based assault operation by Israel.
Iran might be severely weakened with respect to external operations right now, but isn't it likely that they would be able to make a land-based assault on Fordow so expensive in Israeli casualties as to be unacceptable?
Unless some other state decides to ally itself militarily with Iran, isn't it just a matter of time until...
• Israel gradually eliminates virtually all of Iran's long-range offensive capability?
• Wouldn't that would remove major concern about Iran effectively retaliating against any state assisting Israel?
• Wouldn't that pretty much allow the US to effectively take out Fordow without much fear of retaliation?
I do prefer that Iran does not acquire atomic weapon capability, whatever it takes to accomplish that. Their widespread aggressive military conduct over the past twenty or so years, coupled with an inherently fanatic religious/political perspective makes their leaders unacceptably unstable and dangerous.
I've not seen anything that suggests that the present U.S. administration was an active party or accomplice to Israel's "preemptive" attack on Iran. However I do believe that Netanyahu "played" Trump beautifully, guiding him and the U.S. to this almost inevitable very point.
I do believe that with the possible exception of Korea, virtually every major military operation that the United States has engaged in after WW2 has been both unnecessary and morally and financially destructive to the United States. We have been financially weakened to the point where we no longer even have adequate reserve capacity to help defend Ukraine against the Russian aggression.
The last thing that we need is another war. But Iran with atomic weapons? I don't think so.
Comments
I agree with every thing that you wrote though.
...But militant, fundamentalist Islam is just utterly smelly. They've made it their mission, somehow, some way, to destroy Israel. Never going to happen, particularly with the U.S. offering carte blanche to Israel, no matter what sort of heinous shit they do. And there's really not much popular support for that current ultra-Rightist, Zionist regime led by Bibi. That bunch deserves a place in the dustbin of history.
I think the general population in Iran would be happy with a more secular, open-minded, even-handed gummint, one that is willing to behave and join the world of civilized nations. The vast majority of the population in quite young, still. They lost so many, in that long war vs. Iraq.
Regime change, history teaches me, only comes when things become as dire as they can be. "They have no bread? Let them eat cake!" Right now in the US, there is a coup d'etat from within going on under our noses. The reaction has been popular protests, but nothing's been done to stop the bleeding. The Orange regime uses the courts to delay and prevaricate, while good-faith cases are brought against it. And by now, half the judges are owned. The Russians were losing in WW I and freezing to death on the battlefront before the 1917 revolt took hold and spread to the military. ....Regime change forced upon people only creates more terrorists, in our day. Standard wars of country vs. country in uniforms almost seems like the exception anymore, not the norm. (Vietcong.)
The U.S. needs to get its shit together. Hopefully, there will be actual, legitimate elections in '26 which could help to slow down the egregious internal destruction being brought upon our public institutions. And our allies no longer trust us, either. The Orange One just doesn't care about anything but the Benjamins. About anything else, he just lets Project 2025 run the show. Can you spell "s-h-i-t-h-o-l-e country?"
Ya, Iran must not get an atomic weapon. But what I see in the news tells me they were not very close, anyhow.
Russia fears Iran’s destabilisation, would work to prevent ‘regime change:’
Israel’s attacks on Iran, from the Russian perspective, “is a clear attempt to initiate regime change in Iran”, says Nikolay Surkov, a Russian political scientist.
“This is what Russia would do its best to prevent, because we fear very serious destabilisation, not only in the Middle East, not only in the Gulf, but also in the South Caucasus and in the Caspian region, because Iran is an important partner in many areas and in many regions,” Surkov told Al Jazeera, speaking from Moscow.
Destabilistion of Iran could mean that some strategic projects for Russia will be abandoned, he added.
“For example, Russia was investing heavily in the North-South corridor, which was supposed to connect Russia to the Gulf States, and to the ports in the Persian Gulf, and at the Sea of Arabia,” Surkov said.
Russia could play a role mediating between Iran and the US, the analyst added.
“From the Russian perspective, without the active US participation in this campaign, Israel will not be able to achieve regime change”, he said.
@Derf, don’t think Iran his reach the stage where they can make their first nuclear bomb. Trump’s cry of Iranian nuclear bomb is a pretend so to justify to drop Bunker buster munitions for destroying the underground enrichment plant.
S. Hersh, 19 June, 2025:
EXCERPT:
...The assumption is that Iran still has some missile and air force capability that will be on US bombing lists. “This is a chance to do away with this regime once and for all,” an informed official told me today, “and so we might as well go big.” He said, however, “that it will not be carpet bombing.”
The planned weekend bombing will also have new targets: the bases of the Republican Guards, which have countered those campaigning against the revolutionary leadership since the violent overthrow of the shah of Iran in early 1979.
The Israeli leadership under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hopes that the bombings will provide “the means of creating an uprising” against Iran’s current regime, which has shown little tolerance for those who defy the religious leadership and its edicts. Iranian police stations will be struck. Government offices that house files on suspected dissenters in Iran will also be attacked.
The Israelis apparently also hope, so I gather, that Khamenei will flee the country and not make a stand until the end. I was told that his personal plane left Tehran airport headed for Oman early Wednesday morning, accompanied by two fighter planes, but it is not known whether he was aboard.
Only two thirds of Iran’s population of 90 million are Persians. The largest minority groups include Azeris, many of whom have long-standing covert ties to the Central Intelligence Agency, Kurds, Arabs, and Baluchis. Jews make up a small minority group there, too.
(Azerbaijan is the site of a large secret CIA base for operations in Iran.)
Bringing back the shah’s son, now living in exile in near Washington, has never been considered by the American and Israeli planners, I was told. But there has been talk among the White House planning group that includes Vice President J.D. Vance, of installing a moderate religious leader to run the country if Khamenei is deposed.
The Israelis bitterly objected to the idea. “They don’t give a shit on the religious issue, but demand a political puppet to control,” the longtime US official said.
“We are split with the Izzies on this. Result would be permanent hostility and future conflict in perpetuity, Bibi desperately trying to draw US in as their ally against all things Muslim, using the plight of the citizens as propaganda bait.”
There is the hope in the American and Israeli intelligence communities, I was told, that elements of the Azeri community will join in a popular revolt against the ruling regime, should one develop during the continued Israeli bombing.
There also is the thought that some members of the Revolutionary Guard would join in what I was told might be “a democratic uprising against the ayatollahs”—a long-held aspiration of the US government. The sudden and successful overthrow of Bashar al-Assad in Syria was cited as a potential model, although Assad’s demise came after a long civil war.
It is possible that the result of the massive Israeli and US bombing attack could leave Iran in a state of permanent failure, as happened after the Western intervention in Libya in 2011. That revolt resulted in the brutal murder of Muammar Gaddafi, who had kept the disparate tribes there under control. The futures of Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, all victims of repeated outside attacks, are far from settled.
Donald Trump clearly wants an international win he can market. To accomplish that, he and Netanyahu are taking America to places it has never been.
Trump cares not about casualties or any other human consideration. He just wants to be able to brag about a win. I think there will be no general uprising. Look at Germany toward the end of WW II. Until totally defeated, they were totally adamant, eh? The Argentine "liberators" in the Falklands were rejected and resisted. And on and on....
If you look at all of this closely there is conflation (deliberate or otherwise) between the time needed to convert existing uranium to 90% weapons-grade purity (probably just weeks) and the time needed to manufacture the bombs and delivery systems required to use those weapons (likely around a year or so).
Gabbard and the intelligence community are talking "usable weapon", Trump has no idea at all what he is talking about.
Yet, no other non-nuclear state has enriched uranium to 60% as Iran has done.
Before the recent Israeli attacks, it could take days to several weeks for Iran to produce
weapons-grade uranium (~90% enriched) according to various analyst estimates.
U.S. intelligence assessments indicate it could take several months to a year
for Iran to make a nuclear-capable weapon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz1wan5oZQk