Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Iran: The Power of Information

iWe
@iWe
Join to bookmark23likesJoin to like18comments

In times of crisis, what is makes almost no difference. What matters is what people think. We can see this in all violent revolutions in history - see Mao and Lenin, Washington and Hitler. Those who own the narrative can change history.

If the Iranian military or civil leaders think Iran is winning, they will fight on. But if they think the tide has turned, that it is time to embrace the new Shah, then the war can end in a day or two.

This is why there is so much surrounding access to information and the internet. It is why the Iranian regime has resorted to desperate hyperbole, why Israel bombed the TV broadcaster (moments after the anchor said, "Bombs cannot hurt us, because Allah protects us."), and why Iran has apparently turned off the internet across the country (except possibly Starlink and other satellite access).

And why America bringing forces to bear might do the job without any actual military engagement. The mere threat of bunker busters could shift mindsets.

At this point the pivotal piece may have little or nothing to do with Fordow, or any weapon or bomb. Israel simply needs the light switch to go off in the minds of anyone left in Iran who can make a decision. A single publicized military leader who publicly swears allegiance to someone besides Khameini, a civil politician who takes this opportunity to try to seize power for himself.

....will it happen?

Worth my prayers, at least.

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (18)

  • Percival@Percival

    What I find annoying are the people who insist that we not get involved with a "forever" war with Iran at this point. As far as the current Iranian government is concerned, we've been involved in a war for the last 47 years. How long does it have to have been going on before it counts as "forever?"

  • MiMac@MiMac
    ReplyingtoStad

    Stad (View Comment):

    I can see the military forcing out the mullahs and taking over . . .

    It is an open question as to whether the Ayatollah or the IRGC really runs the country. The military includes both the IRGC and regular army- as well as the Quds force. Like many dictatorships there is more than one army so as to make a coup more difficult (Hitler- Weirmacht & SS- not to mention Luftwaffe ground divisions, Saddam- army & Republican Guard, Stalin- Red Army & NKVD - which had 53 divisions in WW2).

  • Steven Seward@StevenSeward
    ReplyingtoPercival

    Percival (View Comment):

    What I find annoying are the people who insist that we not get involved with a “forever” war with Iran at this point. As far as the current Iranian government is concerned, we’ve been involved in a war for the last 47 years. How long does it have to have been going on before it counts as “forever?”

    The "Forever War" has become an automatic excuse for the U.S. to not do anything, anywhere. It is just an annoying sound byte that has little meaning unless expounded upon in great detail.

  • Subcomandante America@TheReticulator
    ReplyingtoSteven Seward

    Percival (View Comment):

    What I find annoying are the people who insist that we not get involved with a “forever” war with Iran at this point. As far as the current Iranian government is concerned, we’ve been involved in a war for the last 47 years. How long does it have to have been going on before it counts as “forever?”

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    The “Forever War” has become an automatic excuse for the U.S. to not do anything, anywhere. It is just an annoying sound byte that has little meaning unless expounded upon in great detail.

    Even a small amount of detail would help.

Scroll for later comments
+13 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of 18 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.