Some might argue that the US's (or the POTUS's) objective was simply to disrupt the financial markets.

This sounds like goalpost moving. Like if you fail to acheive regime change, just say whateber the consequences of your failure were had been your objectives from the start. According to "some" who might "say"

	▲	selcuka 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You speak like you and I discussed this before, and you remember where the original goalposts were. Many analysts suggested that the attack was a smoke-and-mirrors, and the actual goal has always been financial. Similar to the tariffs story. According to that opinion the outcome of the attempt is irrelevant. Regardless of whether the regime have changed or not, the goal is still achieved.

▲

MisterMower 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And that benefits them… how?

	▲	selcuka 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not sure, but any event, positive or negative, will benefit those who know the exact timing in advance.