On the strategic situation of Iran
Clausewitz "War is the continuation of politics by other means" is one of the most misunderstood sentences in history
Most people (including the current U.S. government) think this implies that if you cannot reach a goal by political means, you just send in the marines.
What Clausewitz really stated is the primacy of politics. Military power is no miracle component of politics, but any use of military power must be based on a political concept.
As we see the preparation of ground troops being deployed, I want to point out the political and strategic considerations that should have be taken into account (and of which I am sure of that they were not happening in Trumps brain).
Iran has very little military power left. Air force and Air defense are virtually non-existent. Command and Control is spotty at best. Except for drones and rockets, military technology is at cold war levels (at best).But the country is huge and while the regime has no popular support, it's power base is (for autocratic regimes) rather broad. There are probably still hundred of thousands still willing to fight for it.For a significant part of the regime (even in the middle management), a regime change will imply they being killed. They have murdered ten thousands of protestors. If they lose power, there will be a bloody payback.So while the military in Iran is hundreds of times less powerful than that of the U.S., the regime will fight quite literally to the death.While Iran can do little to damage the U.S. directly, it can inflict tremendous damage on it's neighbors and therefore on the world economy.The damage done to the neighbors will be blamed on the U.S. and Israel. Any remaining prestige is currently being flushed down the drain.Even a quick and decisive victory of the U.S. forces would destabilize the region for decades. The infrastructure to feed the 90 millions Iranians was shaky before the war. There is a danger of huge masses of people being displaced.I don't believe there will be such a quick victory. I rather expect a drawn out conflict with disproportionate losses on the Iranian side (military and civilian).Ground operations will be similar to the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, but with more fighting in urban areas. The U.S. will win every pitched battle, but will get an endless supply of ambushes.Any newly established regime will only exist as long as the U.S. delivers military support. As much as the U.S. recently propped up the son of the last shah, they will most likely try to establish him as new leader.For the U.S. to "win" the conflict, they would have to eradicate the current regime and install a moderately stable new government that is not hostile towards them.
The U.S. have brought themselves into a situation, where any persistence of the current regime will be considered for the U.S. to have lost the war.
And that is what makes the current situation really dangerous.
Martin Seeger
Patrick Gerken