Iran: we are in too deep
The Iran war cannot be simultaneously contained and won.
The point when you take a dare to walk into a bank with a note reading “this is a robbery” hits hard is when it falls out of your pocket and the manager picks it up. That’s the point where you’re in too deep, and “it’s a joke!” may not keep you out of prison. Our mini-war in Iran made good press at the end of February, when our “shock and awe” decapitated the Islamic Republic and the world waited for Iranian liberating troops to march into Tehran like Gen. Philippe LeClerc did in Paris, while the U.S. 4th Division did the fighting to make that happen. In the middle of July, the airstrikes ring hollow and foolish.
Experts have known for years that dislodging Iran from the grip of the Islamic Republic would take far more than decapitation. It would take something on the order of the Iraq War, but the battlefield will be far more perilous. But like the foolish dare-taker, we have walked into a situation where now it’s deep enough where our options become limited.
It is now in Iran’s interest to keep the war going, and widen it, by pounding its Arab and Gulf neighbors. The United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia cannot defeat Iran on their best day. They also cannot stop missile and drone attacks indefinitely. At some point—sooner rather than later—they, and by extension, the United States, will run out of PAC-3 Patriot interceptors. And we can’t just snap our fingers to make more.
It takes two years and $4 million to manufacture a single PAC-3. Though the Defense Department committed to 2,000 PAC-3 MSE missiles a year from Lockheed-Martin, that volume will not be delivered until around 2030, and no amount of cajoling or even the Defense Production Act will meaningfully compress the timeline. These missiles are among the world’s most sophisticated weapons ever produced, if not the most sophisticated. They are extremely effective, but when they’re gone, that’s it.
The situation has become a stark choice: keep playing footsie with the “war” by claiming it’s “contained” while Iran demonstrates its unfettered ability to close the Strait of Hormuz at will, signaling the world that it, not the United States, will be the force to be dealt with if the world economy doesn’t want to slide into a resources-induced depression. Or, win.
There is no third option to contain the war and win. There is no option to make a deal with Iran. The Islamic Republic is our sworn enemy. They have inculcated their Revolutionary Guard and Basij members since birth that we are the “Great Satan” and Israel is the “Little Satan.” Now they’ve taken tremendous punches from both, and they still survive. It’s a powerful message. There is no way Iran will give up, hold to a deal (if we can even figure out who makes these decisions now), or agree to give up its power.
So far, all our dealing has resulted in humiliation as our president appears weak and his bombast empty. Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz. Strikes by the U.S., though damaging to infrastructure, harm the civilian population of Iran more than the regime. This means in order to actually win, we are making our task harder.
In order to win, we will need to put boots on the ground. A lot of boots. At the end of March, I wrote that we must win. I had thought that maybe 100,000 troops, including 20,000 Marines and a couple of Army divisions, could take and hold Bandar Abbas and the strait islands, and open the Strait of Hormuz. However, we cannot take and hold Bandar Abbas forever. The regime is not afraid to attack its own city, sacrificing citizens, to kill Americans.
If we tried to limit the war to holding the strait, we would be in for a high body count. Iran still has thousands of drones, including small killer drones that pick off individual ground soldiers. The terror of fighting in a drone-infested battlefield has to be somewhere around the World War I “no-man’s land” trench warfare level. The average survival time of a newly-trained Russian soldier on the Ukraine front line is said to be 20 minutes.
Even Israel, with its advanced techniques and Iron Beam lasers, suffers casualties from killer drones. The U.S. could expect a much higher casualty rate holding Bandar Abbas and the strait islands, that is unless we poured in enough forces to win the whole war. That would require several hundred thousands soldiers, a large logistical train, enormous airborne operations not seen since World War II, and the recruitment of Iranians, including the Artesh, the Iranian Army, which is not part of the regime’s IRGC or Basij.
But the cooperation of regular Iranians, at one time something to be expected, is no longer a shoe-in. Though 80 percent of Iranians either hate the Islamic Republic regime, or at least would rather not live under it, these people may not be so eager to cooperate with the United States, either. A large part of that reason is due to our own stupid actions. Can they count on the U.S. not to stop the war before we overthrow the regime? No. We could leave them all exposed to mass execution.
Can they count on America to support them even if we do “win” and manage to expel the ayatollahs? No. The war would become a guerrilla war of insurgency which would need to be cleaned up, and that would take several years. Why would they trust us after we betrayed them in March?
Any effort to win the war would require our full commitment, to demonstrate to the Iranians, the Gulf states, and the world that we’re in it to win it.
Otherwise, we’re just wasting time and money. The Gulf states and Arab neighbors will cut their own deals with Tehran. Tehran will require them to abandon any effort to normalize relations with Israel, or to reverse what has been done. The Abraham Accords will fall apart. Israel’s enemies, Hezbollah and Hamas, will be enriched and made more powerful. Israel will go it alone.
Or possibly, we will make a deal along with the gulf states, in order for our government to save face. That will mean America will recognize Tehran as the power in the Middle East, and we will be forced to turn from Israel.
All the worst-case scenarios seem to bubble to the surface.
I think, personally, it’s in our interest to win the war. I think Secretary of State Marco Rubio has the right approach. This is a civilizational battle, not just a power play. Iran can make deals, but “their behavior has to change.” The problem here is that we’ve given Iran no reason to change its behavior. We’ve only encouraged them to keep behaving badly.
If this really is a civilizational war, any course except winning puts America on the side against civilization. Is that what we want?
What we really want is to contain the war and defeat the Iranian regime’s plans. Well, that has failed. Like the would-be prankster-turned-bank robber, we are in too deep. It’s win or go home. If we are unable to win, we should go home. At least we will not be party to the bad deals we’ve enabled. However, I have no confidence this administration is willing to take the loss.
That’s a shame.
Steve, I only disagree with your use of the word appears. DJT is weak and his bombast has been empty. He snatched a prolonged war and possible defeat from the jaws of victory. His antisemitic VP Vance can go on all he wants about Israel being responsible for the conflict or having too much influence on their decisions but the bottom line is that DJT, Vance and a far too high percentage of the US do not have the nerve or stomach required to defeat the regime and their proxies. Allowing the big lie about Israeli atrocities is mind boggling. The American people need to hang their heads in shame while becoming more aware of the dolts that we elect to lead this country. Obama, Trump and Biden have all proven to be not what the worlds needs in leading our country.
Dang Steve, my Monday started out so well... I truly hate the stuff you force me to face. Keep saying it, though. I'm like the clueless person calmly strolling down the street, unaware of the assassin 4 steps behind them. I guess I'd rather be informed, even if it sucks.