Israel has bombed Iran

[EndtheMadnessNow]

The mullahs have no shortage of rhetoric & fantasies.


https://x.com/Truthtellerftm/status/1935032555805491505





The media is focusing on the gee-whiz bunker buster ordnance, but the most depressing thing for the Islamic Republic is how totally compromised the IRGC is by the Mossad. "All your secrets are belong to us."


Underground Halls at Iranian Nuclear Site Suffered ‘Direct Impacts’ From Israel Strikes

If Israel (or the US for that matter) takes out Kharg Island, it's as good as a blockade for China. Even so, I bet it keeps the CCP up at night.


LOL, Iran does the same style of warnings, posting in Hebrew.




Iran's Revolutionary Guard claims they used Fattah-1 "hypersonic" missiles in their attacks on Israel tonight. Watched it live and amounted to not much but that was only from one camera overlooking Tel-Aviv.



The only off ramp now for Israel, and to a lesser extent the US is Iranian regime change. Anything less and they'll be stuck in the same limbo in which Putin is projecting.


Just 4 AI fun: What is the end game in the Israel/Iran war?

The "end game" of the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict, which escalated into open warfare in June 2025, remains uncertain and highly contested, with multiple possible outcomes depending on the strategic goals, actions, and responses of both nations, as well as external actors like the United States and regional powers. Based on available information, here are the key perspectives on potential end games, drawing from Israeli objectives, Iranian responses, and broader geopolitical dynamics:

Israeli Objectives and Potential End Game

Israel's primary stated goal, as articulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is to neutralize Iran's nuclear program, which Israel views as an existential threat. Operation Rising Lion, launched on June 12, 2025, targeted Iran's nuclear facilities (e.g., Natanz and Esfahan), military infrastructure, and key commanders to degrade Iran's capacity to develop nuclear weapons. Beyond this, some sources suggest Israel may be pursuing a broader, more ambitious end game: regime change in Iran.

Nuclear Program Dismantlement: Israel aims to set back Iran's nuclear capabilities significantly, with Netanyahu claiming the strikes have delayed Iran's program "a very, very long time." Success would mean preventing Iran from achieving nuclear weaponization for years, potentially through sustained military pressure or a diplomatic deal enforcing strict limits on Iran's nuclear activities.

[All it is likely to do is just kick the can down the road and in 10 or so years we'll be right back to air strikes.]

Regime Change or Weakening: Netanyahu's public appeals to the Iranian people to rise against their "evil and oppressive regime" suggest an aspiration to destabilize or topple the Islamic Republic. This could involve leveraging internal discontent—evidenced by past protests like the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" movement—through military and psychological pressure, such as targeting key figures like IRGC commanders and nuclear scientists. However, analysts warn that regime change is a gamble, as Iranian opposition groups are fragmented, and a collapse could lead to chaos rather than a pro-Israel government.

Regional Hegemony: By weakening Iran and its "Axis of Resistance" (Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian allies, and Houthis), Israel seeks to cement its dominance in the Middle East. The dismantling of Iran's proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria since 2023 has already shifted the regional balance, enabling Israel’s direct strikes on Iran. A successful end game could see Iran isolated, its regional influence curtailed, and Israel unchallenged as the dominant military power.

Iranian Objectives and Potential End Game

Iran's response has focused on retaliation and deterrence, launching missile and drone attacks on Israeli cities like Tel Aviv and Haifa under Operation True Promise III. Iran's end game appears to prioritize regime survival, maintaining regional influence, and avoiding a broader war that could involve the U.S.

Tit-for-Tat Retaliation: Iran aims to demonstrate resilience by striking back, causing significant damage in Israel (e.g., hitting residential areas and oil infrastructure). This signals to Israel and domestic audiences that Iran can impose costs, potentially deterring further escalation. However, Iran's weakened proxies limit its ability to sustain a prolonged conflict.

Diplomatic Off-Ramp: Iran has signaled openness to de-escalation if Israeli strikes cease, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stating Iran would reciprocate a halt in hostilities. Returning to nuclear talks with the U.S. could be a face-saving way to end the conflict, though this risks appearing as capitulation.

Nuclear Weaponization as Deterrence: Some analysts warn that Israel's strikes could push Iran to accelerate its nuclear program, aiming for a bomb as a deterrent against future attacks. This is risky, as it could provoke further Israeli or U.S. intervention, but it aligns with Iran’s long-term goal of strategic self-sufficiency.

Broader Scenarios for the Conflict’s Resolution

The conflict’s trajectory depends on several factors, including the extent of damage to Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities, Iran’s retaliatory effectiveness, and international pressure. Possible end games include:

Israeli Victory and Iranian Concession: Israel achieves significant degradation of Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, forcing Iran into a diplomatic deal with the U.S. to limit its nuclear program. This could stabilize the region temporarily but risks long-term Iranian resentment and rearmament.

Stalemate and Ceasefire: Both sides exhaust their immediate military options, leading to a U.S.-brokered ceasefire or tacit de-escalation. This preserves the status quo, with Iran’s nuclear program delayed but not eliminated, and both nations continuing their rivalry through proxies.

Regime Collapse in Iran: Israel’s strikes trigger internal unrest, leading to the fall of the Islamic Republic. This is unlikely in the short term, as Iranians may rally against external aggression, and opposition groups lack cohesion. Chaos or a harder-line regime could emerge, potentially worsening regional instability.

Regional War: Escalation draws in the U.S., Arab states, or other actors, leading to a broader conflict. This is the least desired outcome, as it could disrupt global energy markets and cause massive casualties. U.S. reluctance to engage militarily and Iran’s weakened proxies reduce this risk, but miscalculations could spiral.

Iranian Nuclear Breakout: Iran responds by racing toward a nuclear weapon, prompting preemptive U.S. or Israeli strikes. This could lead to a prolonged war of attrition or a negotiated settlement under extreme pressure.

Critical Uncertainties

U.S. Role: President Trump’s mixed signals—praising Israel’s strikes while pushing for a deal—create ambiguity. The U.S. has provided defensive support (e.g., intercepting Iranian missiles) but vetoed extreme Israeli plans like assassinating Ayatollah Khamenei. Trump’s leverage over Israel and willingness to pressure Netanyahu are unclear.

Iranian Resilience: The loss of key commanders (e.g., IRGC chief Hossein Salami and Mohammad Bagheri) and damage to nuclear sites (e.g., Natanz’s centrifuges) weaken Iran, but its ability to sustain missile attacks and rebuild remains uncertain.

Public Reaction in Iran: While economic hardship and repression fuel discontent, Israeli attacks may rally Iranians around the regime out of nationalism.

International Pressure: G7 leaders and the UN urge de-escalation, but their influence is limited. Arab states quietly support Israel’s actions against Iran but fear regional fallout.

Conclusion

Israel’s end game likely combines destroying Iran’s nuclear capabilities with weakening or toppling its regime, aiming for long-term regional dominance. Iran seeks to survive, retaliate, and preserve its regional influence, potentially through diplomacy or nuclear escalation. The most probable near-term outcome is a stalemate with a fragile ceasefire, as neither side can sustain indefinite warfare, and external actors like the U.S. push for de-escalation. However, without a clear exit strategy, the conflict risks becoming a war of attrition, with devastating consequences for both nations and the region.

Given the complexity and ongoing nature of the conflict, no single end game is guaranteed, and miscalculations could shift the outcome toward broader war or unexpected political shifts in Iran. For the latest developments, monitoring credible sources like Reuters, BBC, or the Institute for the Study of War is advisable.

What it leaves out is the unexpected. Easy to start a war, much harder to end.


The clock is ticking.




Ready to gamble? All in...