Close Menu
    Welt

    Amerika wird im Iran Bodentruppen brauchen, damit Trump den nächsten Anführer bestimmen kann, sagt Großbritannien


    Amerika wird im Iran Bodentruppen brauchen, damit Trump den nächsten Anführer bestimmen kann, sagt Großbritannien

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/us-deploy-troops-iran-donald-trump-choose-new-supreme-leader-b1273737.html

    Share.
    View 25 Comments

    25 Kommentare

    1. T_Shurt on

      From the article:

      With little or no clarity about who will run Iran after the conflict ends, Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy told Sky News: “The challenge has always been that whilst Ali Khamenei may have gone, there are other who are pretty hardline or could be worse.”

      He continued, “In the end this will be for the Iranian people themselves when this intense period is over unless there is any suggestion of putting boots on the ground and I haven’t heard that at this stage.”

      He later told BBC Radio: “Clearly regime change I don’t think has been succeeded from the air anywhere in the world.”

    2. GringottsWizardBank on

      What a disaster. Regime change in a country of 93 million people bigger than the size of Texas will not go well. Particularly when we are all in this echo chamber of thinking everyone outside of IRGC hardliners wants regime change. It’s particularly ironic because residents of urban areas are more likely to be pro regime change and they are being bombed on a daily basis. I wonder if feelings on the ground have shifted somewhat.

    4. Brilliant_Version344 on

      If you send boots on the ground you are sending them to certain death Iran geography makes it a nightmare for a invading force the zargos mountain would be hell Iran has been blessed with everything apart from good leadership and countries meddling in its affairs

    5. Zlimness on

      Boots on the ground and they don’t leave until the system has been entirely reformed and strong enough to stand on its own. It couldn’t be done in Afghanistan despite two decades of US presence. The jury is still out on Iraq since they’re still there.

      I’m not an expert on Iran, so I welcome more insight. Is there any reason to believe it will be easier to change the regime in Iran to something more democratic and stable compared to other neighbours? I understand there are a lot of smart people in Iran who want change, but is there an organized opposition able to challenge the regime?

    7. bubbasass on

      Well no shit. Boots on the ground was inevitable if regime change was the goal. You can’t force a regime change from the air. 

      That said, good luck, all those soldiers will die for nothing. There’s no objective or end goal in Iran. Last major war, Iraq lost a million soldiers trying to invade Iran and couldn’t do so successfully. 

      Trump is absolutely right, the military (especially under his command) is for suckers and losers. 

    9. Mormegil71 on

      Boots on the ground in a mountainous country in Asia… That sounds familiar.

    10. meglobob on

      Trumps already backing down on that, said its pointless sending US troops into Iran.

      In fact he is already talking about Cuba.

      They are just going to declare victory at some point, using some bs and leave the middle east in a mess.

      This is why UK & Europe did exactly the right move and not get involved.

      Goldfish have a longer attention span then Trump.

    12. Gentle_Snail on

      This is literally why the UK refused to join, as they said they’d only join if there was a clear end game plan and legal basis:

      >”We all remember the mistakes of Iraq, and we have learned those lessons. Any U.K. actions must always have a lawful basis and a viable thought-through plan,” Starmer said, referencing the 2003 invasion of Iraq 

    14. anlaggy on

      Look at a map of Iran. You see in a second why it is a very very very bad idea to invade with ground forces.

    15. schu4KSU on

      They’ll need boots on the ground to open the Strait of Hormuz a lot sooner than that.

    16. Sargent_Duck85 on

      The Iraqi people initially (for the most part) welcomed the US toppling Sadam Hussein. Then America fucked up the occupation.

      I can only imagine how badly trump is gonna fuck this up.

    17. Jaideco on

      I’m pretty sure that this is the last thing on their minds…

      Hegseth said “No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy-building exercise, no politically-correct wars. We fight to win,”

      There is no reasoning or justification here. This isn’t about regime change. They just want to annihilate another country because then think that they can, because cruelty is all they know and because they think that it will scare their critics into submission. That’s the whole story.

    19. Getherer on

      So orange turd will send troops to iran, there will be a total shit show and a lot of casualties and pedo decides to use a nuke? Sounds like something shitpants would do.

    20. Captcha_Imagination on

      They already picked a new leader. It’s his son. USA killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and he is being replaced by his son Mojtaba Khamenei, who is 56 and more dangerous and conservative than his dad.

      His dad had actually declared a fatwa against nuclear weapons and WMD’s in 2003. Experts say his son thinks that his father’s strategy failed and is way more likely to pursue clandestine nuclear activities.

      And this war was not started in 1979, as Trump says. It started in 1953’s Operation Ajax where the USA and UK overthrew their democratically elected PM, who was trying to nationalize oil profits. It’s been chaos since.

    23. BulldogMoose on

      Which we will have to hold for 10 to 15 years, spending trillions of dollars, only for that group to be kicked out after we leave. They talk about Hollywood, but Jesus! Washington sure has run out of scripts.

    25. Obvious_Cookie1812 on

      No problem; give baron and Kushner some boots and send them in to Tehran.

    Leave A Reply