it is not my lack of understanding of " irregular warfare".
it is my understanding of seeing what is happening and seeing what is being said and NOT happening.
lol, it's hilarious because you actually still believe that NOTHING IS HAPPENING!!!
Yes, this is a WAR against RADICAL TERRORISTS who will FIGHT to their DEATH!!!
LOL, if you understand Irregular Warfare - it DOES NOT APEAR that you UNDERSTAND a viable STRATEGY to DEFEAT such a Global DIABOLIC ENEMY?
lol, quite the OPPOSITE - your naive/ignorant understanding of this type of Warfare was to CONCEDE and withdraw to such Global TERANICAL EVIL...
LOL, your statements definitely validates that you have more than a BLINDSPOT for how to fight such an Enemy while FAILING to GRASP the CRITICAL/ESSENTIAL TIMING of this FIGHT to DEFEAT them!!!
If NOT NOW - it will NEVER HAPPEN and the DS REIN will continue to achieve their Global NWO!!! FULL STOP!!!
lol, the fact that you FAIL to acknowledge who has the STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE in what is HAPPENING via this WHOLE of GOVERNMENT Applications in this Irregular Warfare validates a DERANGED lopsided view from the lens of the DS Globalists Talking Points and perspective...
lol, you consistently IGNORE the entire BODY of WORK of what the Warfighters contributing to this Whole of Government Strategic Fight are doing and have accomplished along with being able to CONNECT the DOTS with everything that the White Hats have been projecting all along!!!
IMHO (Professional Expert in these types of Warfare) - all indications are that the entire body of work is the formula for creating the perfect conditions for a COUP from WITHIN along with the Support from the Growing Alliance of Neighboring Countries...
Key Elements of the Strategy
- Military (CENTCOM-led): Operation Epic Fury involved ~38 days of major combat operations coordinated with Israel (and references to related efforts like Midnight Hammer on nuclear sites). It included over 10,200 sorties and 13,500+ strikes targeting Iran’s ability to project power—air defenses, naval assets, missile/drone storage and launch sites, command-and-control, conventional forces, and defense industrial base. Follow-on limited strikes have continued in response to Iranian actions (e.g., against shipping or residual capabilities). Posture prioritizes homeland defense against terror threats, deterring Iran and proxies, and maintaining relative advantage vs. China. US forces have escorted shipping and maintained options for further responses.
- Economic/Financial (Treasury-led “siege”): Operation Economic Outcast (announced ~late August 2026 by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent) is explicitly described as a whole-of-government campaign to “sever every economic lifeline.” It expands sanctions to additional sectors (digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, shipping), designates entities/individuals/vessels in shadow networks, targets facilitators (e.g., UAE bank branches processing Iranian-linked funds), and pressures third parties (including Gulf institutions) that enable evasion. It is linked to maritime pressure around the Strait of Hormuz, with warnings against compliance with Iranian demands and efforts to control or disrupt Iranian oil flows and access to the US financial system.
- Diplomatic and broader tools: An MOU was signed ~17 June 2026 (mediated elements involving Pakistan/Qatar noted in some accounts) aiming at temporary cessation, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz for commercial traffic, limited sanctions relief/oil sales, asset releases, and a path to further talks on nuclear issues and a larger reconstruction package (figures like $300 billion from Gulf states referenced in reporting). Implementation has been incomplete and contested, with continued strikes, Iranian attacks on shipping, and mutual accusations of violations. Broader efforts include isolating Iran from partners, countering proxies, and leveraging alliances (Israel, Gulf states). Regime change was not a consistent primary objective.
This builds on earlier maximum-pressure concepts (sanctions, oil export disruption) but escalated into direct large-scale combat after Iranian domestic crackdowns and regional tensions.
Achievements and Outcomes So Far (as of early September 2026)
Military successes (US/Israeli assessments and some independent reporting):
- Significant degradation of Iran’s conventional power projection, air defenses (high percentage knocked out in some reports), navy (large numbers of ships destroyed), missile and drone stockpiles/industry (set back by years; large numbers intercepted or destroyed), and defense industrial base.
- Heavy damage to nuclear infrastructure (centrifuges destroyed, enrichment sites damaged; assessments that Iran cannot currently resume enrichment at prior levels, though stockpiles and residual capabilities remain and full verification is limited). Leadership losses included Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other senior figures; the regime survived under successors.
- Proxies (Hezbollah, Houthis, etc.) and regional networks substantially weakened over the broader multi-year context culminating in 2026 operations. Iran assessed as no longer able to project power across the region as before.
Limitations and incomplete results:
- Regime intact (no successful overthrow). Nuclear program damaged but not eliminated; breakout timelines and residual highly enriched material remain concerns, with issues deferred to diplomacy. Missile capabilities reduced but not fully destroyed; Iran has retained some ability to launch attacks.
- Strait of Hormuz became a central flashpoint (Iran effectively disrupted/closed it for periods, raising global energy prices). US goals shifted toward reopening it and freedom of navigation. The June MOU partially addressed this with temporary relief but broke down amid mutual violations, leading to resumed limited strikes and economic escalation.
- Economic damage to Iran is severe (hundreds of billions in estimated wartime costs, hyperinflation risks, GDP contraction), but full isolation is incomplete due to third-party facilitation (China, UAE networks, etc.). US costs include munitions stockpile drawdowns, ~18 US killed and hundreds wounded (reported figures), and broader economic impacts from energy disruption.
Overall assessments differ: some view it as a US/partner win on points (Iran at weakest since 1979, reduced threat), others as a strategic stalemate or incomplete success with reversed fortunes on the diplomatic/economic front and persistent Hormuz leverage for Tehran.
Strategic Projections
Current trajectory centers on sustained dual pressure (economic siege + credible military deterrence/limited strikes) rather than large-scale renewed invasion or rapid diplomatic resolution. Analysts and policy voices outline paths such as:
- Prolonged stalemate/blockade as least-bad option: Maintain and gradually intensify the economic and maritime pressure while preventing Iranian reconstitution of capabilities or major escalation. This aims to erode regime strength over time, force better terms, or create internal pressure without full-scale war. Risks include Iranian escalation (shipping attacks, proxies, cyber), higher energy prices, and munitions/diplomatic costs.
- Negotiated off-ramp or refined deal: Draw out or renegotiate around the MOU framework for verifiable nuclear limits, missile constraints, proxy curtailment, and sustainable Hormuz access in exchange for structured sanctions relief and reconstruction. Skepticism is high given past compliance issues and mutual distrust; success would require stronger verification and multilateral buy-in.
- Containment + resilience measures: Reduce Hormuz centrality long-term (diversify energy production/routes, strategic reserves, alternative energy, pipelines); harden partner infrastructure against drones/missiles/cyber; strengthen Gulf/Israeli partnerships and deterrence posture (carrier presence, etc.); counter Chinese/Russian facilitation. Support Iranian civil society aspirations without direct military regime-change focus.
- Risks of renewed kinetic phases or worse outcomes: Iranian retaliation cycles, nuclear reconstitution incentives, regional spillover, or (less likely under current US preferences) deeper ground involvement. Long-term, a weakened but surviving Iran could still pursue asymmetric recovery; a collapsed regime carries chaos risks.
Near-term focus appears to be economic isolation plus selective strikes to “mow the grass” on residual threats while managing oil market and domestic political pressures (e.g., midterms). Longer-term success depends on sustaining coalition pressure, preventing Iranian recovery of key capabilities, and reducing structural leverage points like the Strait—while avoiding open-ended high-cost commitments. Outcomes remain fluid and contested across sources.