>Decapitating the regime and degrading their military capabilities was the primary objective.

Those are tactical objectives, not strategic aims. The US is very good at winning tactically, but losing strategically. This is yet another example.

Yeah that’s a good point. I don’t disagree with that. I just think the US administration’s strategy is something totally different than anyone is talking about.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence US aggression towards Venezuela, Cuba & Iran are all happening at the same time. These things are all connected and nobody’s really talking about it.

I don’t think regime change was the strategy, I think they were happy with just a “reset” of the top leaders, same as in Venezuela.

If they did get full regime change it would have just been a side effect. They were hoping the Iranians would seize the opportunity and rise up, but that didn’t happen. And I don’t blame them, that’s a big ask when they are getting gunned down in the streets or executed for dissent on a daily basis.

They were probably also riding off the “high” of how shockingly easy Venezuela went. But Iran is much more complex obviously