A U.S. intelligence assessment completed shortly before the United States and Israel launched a war in Iran had determined that American military intervention was not likely to lead to regime change in the Islamic Republic, according to two people familiar with the finding.

The National Intelligence Council’s assessment in February concluded that neither limited airstrikes nor a larger, prolonged military campaign would be likely to result in a new government taking over in Iran, even if the current leadership was killed, according to the two people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the classified report.

The determination undercuts the administration’s assertion that it can complete its objectives in Iran relatively quickly, perhaps in a matter of weeks. The administration has asserted that it was not seeking regime change in Iran, even as the strikes have taken out many figures in the Iranian leadership and President Donald Trump considers whom he would like to see lead the country.

  • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    That’s not what “change in leadership” means; it means different governments with different agendas coming into power. That will not happen as a result of this war.

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      That is however exactly what Donald Trump said leadership change in Venezuela meant.

      • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Very different situations. Maduro was dictator of a relatively smaller nation that would not be the same without him there, while Iran is larger, more powerful, and has a leadership structure less dependent on one person. Even then, kidnapping Maduro does not mean his more pro US replacement is a reliable ally. She could be overthrown and is limited in how much she can help them.

    • homes@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Just because you have your own special definition of the phrase doesn’t mean that “a change in leadership“ means the same for everyone else.

      A different person is now in leadership of Iran. That is a change of leadership,

      Stop being weird about this

      Edit: sorry not sorry that facts piss you off. Deal with it, assholes.

      • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Says the person who misses the bigger picture. The US and Israel don’t want to national build, they just want Iran’s military to be weaker. They know that installing a long lasting puppet would be next to impossible, so they instead want to disarm their enemy.

        • homes@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          How dare I take these people at their word! God forbid they lie!

          How stupid are you? Every turd I’ve ever flushed has 1 billion times more IQ than you.

          Don’t like these facts? Then tell your invisible wizard to come fix it for you. You fucking moron.

          It’s 2026. There’s no such thing as invisible sky wizards. You are mentally ill.

          • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Words mean whatever society agrees they mean. Sometimes the subtext is more important than the literal definition.

            Ad hominem attacks don’t help your case.