Iran Action. Why Now?

If it hasn't already been plainly stated, I thought I would put my finger directly on it now. It's a question I believe many have. I believe it has also caused a certain consternation, even for people on the right. I'm referring to the joint US-Israel military action against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Yes, I do consider it a war — a pretty good word for when your military blows up the high brass of another country. I'm not so much into the euphemisms that get used a lot now. I'll also plainly state that I don't think many anticipated this type of war prior to Trump being re-elected or even during much of the last year. Though during the 12-Day War, I think there was a contingent that thought it a mistake to fall short of attacking the Islamic Regime directly in terms of holding power toward the end.

So, why now?

I'll offer a possible explanation that I think is rather simple and likely. However, before I do that, let me survey some responses I've seen so far. Some of these listed explanations range from totally zany to somewhat plausible.

(1) Epstein Files cover-up. The war was launched to deflect from the files that the Trump administration itself released. So launching a massive military action is just a false flag ruse. This view seems to strain one's grasp of reality, yet it's voiced all the same.

(2) Israel was going to act on its own. In reaction, the US, under the influence of the Jewish lobby, followed in line to back the attack. While it is certainly the case that Israel has more on the line in the current military action than the USA, I believe this idea drastically overestimates the Israeli influence over America. As for the theories about big Jewish money running the USA, well, Qatar and other Islamic countries also spend money in the USA. A bunch of groups lobby, and all sorts of organizations spend money in Washington, DC. Yes, some Jewish ones among them. So what? This is part of the way the system has worked. It's not smoking gun proof of anything. I think there's a contingent of folks who get carried away with exotic Jew-Israel world-control theories.

(3) Trump is simply crazy, a megalomaniac. His choosing to take out the Ayatollahs was just a way to boost himself up, and perhaps for a type of twisted amusement. This explanation might have a loyal following among those with TDS. This line of thinking might also have a rheostat dial on it, tunable to the extent one might buy into it. But the idea tends to make the Iran action mostly arbitrary. I suppose you could throw in the discussions about Iran allegedly wanting to assassinate Trump, too. If those reports were true, then it would personalize the actions to a degree.

(4) Iran posed an imminent threat. Iran has been working on nuclear weapons. Materials were still on hand to build a bomb. Working in partnership with China and Russia to build long-range missiles, Iran was closing in on arming a nuke. I'll say that the Iranian diplomatic group was rather idiotic in reportedly taunting the USA leading up to this war. Iranian officials opening with tough talk about having nuclear materials and being able to build a bomb, asserting that they would not budge on the issue, was a rather foolish thing to do as the B-side in a discussion. However, whatever opinion you might have about the recently departed Trump counter-terrorism official, he was probably correct in stating Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the USA. Many also cite the fact that a few months before, the USA hit an Iranian nuclear facility. Was the action then ineffectual? Iran was probably not a serious, direct threat to the security of the USA in the conventional sense, and Israel was probably not going to get it anytime soon. But Iran would be going into an intensive rebuilding stage.

(5) Iran killed its own citizens by the thousands in recent protests. The US-Israel response to attack the Islamic Republic of Iran was a justified action based on Just War Theory. Iran is an oppressive regime, and liberating it is a moral action. Protests have occurred in the past, and Iran has shot its own citizens in the past. No military actions were taken.

(6) The USA just wants to steal all of Iran's natural resources and install a puppet government. If they are still around, I suppose dust off the "No Blood for Oil" signs and go with a familiar chant at your local protest area.

You have probably heard some variation of the above explanations. Perhaps others along with them. I'd like to offer an alternative idea. I don't claim this explanation with certainty, but rather a likelihood of confidence. One that doesn't float well in public opinion, but nonetheless has practical opportunistic geopolitical reasons. So here it goes:

So why now? Because Iran is the weakest it has been in a long time, and it continues to be dedicated to its mission of violent Islamic Revolutionary expansion. The core idea is that you hit your committed enemy when he is weak, not when he is strong. This explanation is simple and could be obvious. It is also opportunistic and makes sense within a non-modern, Western politicized military framework. I get the idea of selling "imminent threat" PR to the modern westerner, rather than a preemptive action against an enemy that is just going to rebuild over a period of years and then come back trying stronger than before. This, I'd propose, is the best available explanation of why Trump and Netanyahu jointly launched the war. Both saw it as being in the national interest, informed by a cost-benefit analysis for timing. Iran is a big country with serious military capability. This was a serious and high-risk action taken. A certain logic says if it is going to come to pass, then why not do it when the odds are most in your favor?

Iran, with its proxy Hamas, hit Israel on October 7th during a period of weakness. There was a common sense Judicial reform that was heavily protested in Israel (easy to forget). From the outside, it looked like Israel was tearing itself apart — a good time to launch an attack. The attack was so severe that it resulted in a strong response. Iran and the proxies overestimated their ability to destroy Israel. The prolonged conflict wore down and attenuated all of Iran's proxies. Iran itself even took hits. In spectacular fashion the tables were turned on Iran and its proxies with novelties like beeper bombs. The capstone was the US Air Force bombing a major nuclear site. Then a few months passed. Observation was done. Restocking munitions and planning for military contingencies were conducted.

With the W. Bush era Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns, the political and high military brass seemed to be stuck in this mindset of creating so-called "green zones" from which to operate, then establish routine operations. This made the US military a stationary target. Also, predictable US movements could be made hazardous with IEDs and ambushes. Fake allies could pretend to support you, but really only exercise deception to spring a surprise "green-on-blue" event. You would have higher officials brag about how moral the war was being conducted by threatening their own servicemen with punishments, while at the same time crippling those servicemen with constraints on their ability to operate. We even saw peak Woke in the military, with General Modern Miley discussions on traditional members of the military being despicably white. Trump 2.0 has certainly switched gears on how the military conducts its operations. The US has now used misdirection to get the jump on the enemy — a certain dynamic element is present. They have also been rather coy as to what is planned or what may come next. That will create some anxious observers in the meantime. Energy markets have also started to surge.

The Maduro capture was partly so shocking because of how effective it was. But in Venezuela, we can rely on a corrupt government with people who want to save their own skins. Iran is a whole different ball game. The IRGC are hardened fanatics. I seriously doubt the Islamic Regime will ever surrender. It is not part of their makeup. Survival to them is "victory." I've heard numbers claiming the IRGC has 200,000 soldiers. Add to that the domestic police and so forth, that's a lot of people you need to take out or somehow miraculously convert. Iran has 92 million people, the country is the size of a big section of Europe, and you have to keep in mind that a portion of the population supports the Islamic Regime, too.

Currently this war in Iran doesn't appear to be a "Regime Change" war as much as it is a "Regime Destruction" war. Iran's oil money and electrical supply seem under threat now. Whether or not the Persians rise up to overthrow the government appears not to be within the scope of work Trump has assigned to himself. Iran could also descend into sectarian violence if the regime does fall.

But whatever does ultimately befall the Iranian Islamic Regime, one thing is clear: it has zealous supporters in the USA and other Western countries - this angle can't be overlooked.