Trump's Vietnam

We already know the background of Israel - Iran relations. So, let's start from June 2025, when Israel - US attacked Iran. The attack was famous as the B2 bombers flew all the way from Whiteman AFB, located in the middle of US to bomb a couple of sites in Iran. Furdow & Isfahan.

Though initially it was claimed that the sites were "destroyed", US & Israel later realised, it wasn't the case. So, next round needed. So, US went into negotiations and slowly, the negotiations started to fall apart, as usual amidst a lot of drama. Fast forward February 2026 US & Iran were into negotiations. And we're about to reach a deal next meeting, within a day, per Oman FM. Few hours later, US started bombing Iran. Mind you, US started bombing while Israel joined later. Strategy What strategy? US didn't have one. All they knew was that this is going to be a swift in & out operation. But, did it have the means to do it? Well, nope. To conduct a military strike on someone, you need to have two key things. A set of allies who'll stand by you through thick & thin. And, a robust supply chain. Without ensuring the two, US went and attacked Iran with a quick in & out strategy. 1. It was GCC Countries asking US to not attack Iran. (Will come to the reasons they said so.) 2. Once Khamenei is removed, people would revolt. 3. Their allies who were supposed to join the alliance refused to simply put up a fight. 4. They thought it is wise to use only air force jets and missiles. And, an aircraft carrier in Arabian Sea would be enough to 'scare' Iran. So, to sum up the above points: US went into a conflict without allies, no ground troops and limited capabilities, in the middle of Indian Ocean - where everything is closer only on online maps when you zoom out. You get the drift? One led to another. Miscalculation? A lot more than acceptable levels. Actually, a spectacular one at that. Let us look at the depth of miscalculation by Washington planners. Political miscalculation Looking back, may be, they thought, all we need to do is a decapitation strike on Iran & once it is done, people would rise up against the radical regime. Well, NO! We are on 8th day AFTER the strike which took out Khamenei. Yet, there's not a single news from Iran, which says, Iranians are rising up against the regime. They know something Americans don't. That said, did they have an alternative - to the regime itself, in the form of a face for the "change"? Well, they had one - Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi. Launched and re-lauched multiple times in past 12 months. Ultimately, there is no alternative even after two uprisings as reported widely in media. Hence, it is safe to say, there is a political miscalculation. Militia (not military!) miscalculation Now, military. US planners thought it is brilliant strategy to go and strike Iran without a proper exit strategy. They thought, once they bomb from the skies, regime will fall. The infantry / ground troops part of the campaign, would be handled by Iraqi militias, Kurds or someone 'less moderate' from within the government / opposition or ruling regime itself. So, no need to plan long-term logistics planning. Now, it is perfectly backfiring. With no political takeover, no militias willing to fight by itself either. They are not conventional army. Playing role of regular infantry troops is a different game altogether. So, ISIS prisoners were released from where they were sent to hide - Turkey & Syrian Kurdish prisons. Plan was to push them into Iraq through Rojava / Kurdish controlled areas of Syria. Failed to push in a big way. The only ones that reached Iraq was in that ICRC buses escorted by US forces into Iraq. They are allegedly being moved to Iraq to aide in operations in the coming months. Hence, we saw news of Iraq-Iran border is seeing lot of movements. Kurds question Kurds were being targeted by Turkey & Syria's Sharara. US surprisingly said that it is not their job to fight for Kurds. And, went on to call Kurds a separatist / terror group. Thanks to Tom Barrack for making US Government say such things. What US missed is that, this same 'terror group' sacrificed 15,000 of its sons & daughters to get rid of ISIS few years ago. Even then, US stuck a deal with Turkey to have most of the ISIS fighters in Turkey, until another day comes to use them in some proxy war. So, point is, Kurds were treated badly in January in Syria when they asked for US help. US refused. In February, US wanted them to fight against Iraqi Government. Kurds refuse. In March, since there is no ISIS easily available in Turkey / Syria / Iraq - you turn to Kurds again. Kurds clearly mentioned this time, they are not mercenaries to fight others' wars. Now, Trump is calling them names. Typical Trumpism! Military strategy Having failed in political & militia strategy, US turned to give full throttle on using its military directly. Allies of US in the region clearly warned US to not to start a war with Iran. They in fact warned US of consequences and loss of life & property. When US is in no mood to listen, they had to shut their borders for any US operation on Iran. US thought Iran is like some random 3rd world country which can be bombed at will. Only to be met with hundreds of missiles out of Iran by IRGC to Iran's neighbours (allies of USA) in the region. Turning it into a regional conflict. Now, the situation is so bad, that they didn't even plan for replenishments as it is going to be a quick war. Now that there's no end in horizon, arises a new problem. Where will the supplies come from? (Look at the map below.) In GCC. Strait of Hormuz is out of bounds for US Ships. Horn of Africa is not an option. Madagascar, Diego Garcia are 7+ days away - one way!! US had a bitter trade war with India and they are in no mood to get themselves involved in the conflict. Worse, you can't arm twist them either. US can't even stop them from buying crude from Russia! Even if they do, one option away from range is Kochi. But, that's where an Iranian ship IRIS Lavan is docked. Pakistan is the only option. But, they already played victim with the US Consulate violent attack few days ago. So, they'll also cite a middle path. Of course, they have about 25% Shia population. After taking out Khamenei, it is not going to be easy for them too. Another option is Sri Lanka. Colombo & Hambantota are under Chinese. Trincomalee is an option. But, that's where IRIS Bushehr is docked due to engine failure. With reports of US threatening Sri Lankan government over Iranian sailors in the country, don't think they are going to get a favourable response. If they still don't want to go to Diego Garcia, last option is Mauritius. Which has announced it'd get oil from India. Even otherwise, Trump regime has had a bitter war of words over Sovereignty of Chagos. May be, there is a reason why they didn't get too many ships to this side of Suez but stationed it all at Cyprus / near to Israeli coast.

Geopolitical situation What is surprising is that, even after getting hit, none of Iran's neighbours retaliated. Mainly because, very less of their own properties were damaged. Most targeted by Iran are US interests in those countries. Be it military installations or data centres. There's a method to the strikes from Iran. It has been precise in striking targets, which would have long term repercussions. Say for example, refineries are targeted. Fine print is, those targeted are most likely supplying huge share of the products to Europe. More they strike these, more Europe would become dependent on Russia for oil / gas. Likewise, striking refineries also means, there won't be a quick fix within a few days. Some of the damages that are caused, will take a year or more to complete. There's a more fatal option with Iran. It is as worse as nuclear option. For GCC, their "Water desalination plants" are very precious jewel. They depend complete on those for their survival. Moment combat drones start arriving to destroy those plants, those nations would do abject & unconditional surrender. On economy, lesser the oil / gas from GCC, lesser the Petro-dollar. Lesser the Petro-dollar, impact is going back to US. It is second degree impact on US.

Politically, people within the countries that Iran struck, would want to retaliate. Not doing so would have serious consequences within the country, for its rulers. That said, Bahrain - with significant Shia population, people are on the streets protesting against the ruler, in favour of Iran. Saudi Arabia wants to retaliate. Can't do it by itself. Need UAE's support and Pakistan's military. But, Pakistan must have said, until there's ceasefire with Afghanistan, no question of sending troops to Saudi Arabia. So, Saudi Arabia & Qatar are now negotiating peace between Afghanistan & Pakistan. Maybe, the rulers of these countries knew this beforehand. May be that is the reason, all of US partners in the region have simply walked away from alliance in this conflict. Iran is yet to unleash its infantry. With most population still not uprising against the regime, lets assume there'd be at least a million volunteer ready to join - if a call was made. In that case, the proposed (see pic below) deployment of 100,000 paratroopers and army to Iran, is nothing short of madness. Trump should ask himself three questions: 1. Have we taken into account that there'd be casualties? 2. How much body bags would be too much for US? 3. How would you maintain supply chain / contact with them for food and ammunition? That is all is needed to do a logical analysis of the mayhem that awaits them. When Iranian FM said "We are waiting for US to put boots on ground" - he is not lying. He means it. Nobody can fight them in this terrain that easily.

If US wants to use NATO, Turkey won't support as it prefers not to be part of the conflict. (Turkey, is NATO's second largest military). If Turkey gets involved, Greece & Cyprus would object. If Ukraine supports US in this war, Russia's allies Hungary, Belarus and Slovakia would go for Ukraine over stopping gas. That means, legitimacy of EU would be in trouble too. So, more you stress on Iran, US will spend most of its resources in the region. That means, support to war in Ukraine would be weakened. That also means, North Korea would be emboldened to target South Korea. In a week or two, the scenario would be very different.

Best exit strategy

Option 1: Bestest option is to stop abruptly and claim victory - "We took out head of snake - Khamenei" Anything other than this is between bad to worser. Option 2: Seek an off-ramp. Restart peace talks. Exit permanently. Option 3: Continue fighting for more than a few weeks. Get stuck for arms & fuel replenishments. Beg for help. Get frustrated to no end. Nuke Iran. Now, that would turn entire world against US, permanently.

Conclusion Anyone telling you that US is winning fantastically, is not just lying. But, bereft of facts. Point blank, this war is very badly planned with the largest & most powerful militaries involved. Trump should have, by now, known that he is being finished by his own military & intelligence. He'll not just be the political casualty. But, he is handing over a "quiet end" (as Pete Hegseth said) to US as we know it. There'd be no recovery from this - forever. US Domestic politics would change forever too. Ultimately, we are in uncharted waters. New powers will rise to fill in the vacuum. Let us see where we find ourselves in say, 6th week of war. That is, mid of April 2026. Disclaimer: - This is not against the US people. This is just a military strategy commentary. - Leaving Israel in this entire article, because, the major problem is for US. Israel must have prepared for the worst anyways. US isn't there yet. Note: Original post link. Reproduced with permission for wider audience.