Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
Since at least March 11—more than six months ago—President Trump has repeatedly declared that the United States has already won the Iran War.
“Let me tell you, we’ve won. You know, you never like to say too early you won. We won.”
Yet this "won" war drags on, with no obvious end in sight.
The administration has since made plenty of threats—taking Kharg Island, destroying Iran's power grid, crippling the IRGC, and escalating military pressure. Some significant military and economic damage has certainly been inflicted. But none of it appears to have fundamentally changed the condition of either side, nor has it brought the war appreciably closer to an end.
And that's the question I keep coming back to: What is the endgame?
If the ultimate objective is to change the Iranian regime, are we sure the United States is actually willing to do what might be required to accomplish that? And if regime change isn't the objective, what does “winning” actually mean?
Iran doesn't necessarily have to win the war. It may only have to outlast us.
Negotiations with bad actors can drag on indefinitely. Escalation carries enormous risks, particularly if it further disrupts movement through the Strait of Hormuz. And unless the United States is willing to apply enough force to fundamentally change Iran's calculus, why should the Tehran regime—immune to pressure from its own people and the world—believe that simply waiting us out won't work?
Which leads to an even more basic question: Did anyone in the administration have a credible endgame before starting this war in February? That's particularly important for a president who promised in 2024 that the United States would stop getting involved in endless wars. Six months in, I'd like to hear something more concrete than “we've won” or "we're on the verge of winning."
I'd be interested in others' thoughts on how this thing ends. This seems like one of the most consequential questions facing the country, yet oddly it doesn't seem to get much attention on Ricochet these days. The midterms and the 2028 election likely hang in the balance.
Discussion (161)
CONTRIBUTOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Perhaps? It seems like not a terrible assumption that, once we'd destroyed their ability to make war, they'd be willing to negotiate in earnest. Probably would have worked if we hadn't spent twenty years showing that we can't actually wipe anyone out. Whether or not that was a credible assumption going in, it certainly wasn't one for long.
The primary battlefield of this war is how much the American people can stand, and how much they will countenance. If I had my druthers we'd have done terrible things to Iran's oil infrastructure, then pulled out and let the rest of the world worry about keeping the Straits of Hormuz open. But whether or not the American Public at large is willing to accept such an outcome, it's clear the Trump administration thinks it isn't.
I don't see a way of credibly salvaging this mess and also the midterms.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I think the hope was to delay Iran getting Nuclear Weapons. Trump has won that.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I think that’s now the fallback position. I’m speculating of course but I genuinely think the Trump Admin thought they could quickly engineer regime change … probably through enabling the Iranian citizenry … and they’d get a reliable no-nuke deal with a new regime. That ain’t happening. So now they are going to have to be content with having degraded Iranian nuclear anti aircraft defense capability such that what will have to be future repeat visits to their nuclear program will be much less risky.
We had better hope and pray for a Repub victory in 2028. Because a Dem admin will apologize to Iran…pay reparations … cut off military aid to Israel…sign some meaningless deal with the Iranians and wake up in 2032 (or sooner) to a nuclear armed Iran.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Not a great victory but the American people will destroy Trump if he takes Karg Island. This about the best we can get.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
He is starvng them economically. It takes longer but is cheaper and saves lives.
Endgames are nice. When dealing with irrational demons, endgames are hard to plan. Sometimes it is better to call audibles. What’ the rush? Every day he is starving Iran and blockading China’s source of cheap oil.
I wish our voters had more patience and less Daddy, are we there, yet? How much longer until we get there? Economic and job numbers looking good. Our military picks off what it wants like a turkey shoot. Pilots are getting live target practice.
You're seeing five of 161 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.