I'm a smart azz on these threads. I acknowledge that. However, they should have given DJT the Nobel peace prize. Because regime change is what happens when you don't give DJT the Nobel Peace Prize.

MORE: The regime will likely succeed in quelling this resistance if it can retain the loyalty of security forces and prevent those who are resisting the regime from acquiring the wherewithal to challenge the regime’s ability and willingness to sustain its crackdown.

- The extent… https://t.co/NZ6FWgIPed pic.twitter.com/hcJ6MjzmaY

— Institute for the Study of War (@TheStudyofWar) January 15, 2026

Quote:

---

MORE: The regime will likely succeed in quelling this resistance if it can retain the loyalty of security forces and prevent those who are resisting the regime from acquiring the wherewithal to challenge the regime's ability and willingness to sustain its crackdown.

- The extent and extremity of the regime's use of violence to quell the protests further demonstrate that the regime views the protests as a proto-revolution.

- CTP-ISW recorded zero protests on January 14, but the regime is sustaining repressive measures that impose a significant cost on the regime. This suggests that the regime does not perceive that the threat from protests has subsided.

- Some Iranians are resisting the regime's efforts to contain protests, which further indicates that the regime has not regained control over the security situation.

Deaths of Protesters in Iran: Iranian regime officials have leaked various protester death counts to Western media. The leak of high protester death counts by some regime officials indicates that these officials may be disaffected by the regime's brutal crackdown on the protests.

Anti-Regime Kurdish Militant Group Activity: The Iranian regime's concern about cross-border Kurdish militant activity will likely cause the regime to divert resources to address this threat, which would stretch the bandwidth of Iranian security forces that are suppressing protests.

---

The regime has not indicated any intention to stop using lethal force and brutality to quell the current unrest. The most likely way for protesters to be successful would be through the defection of security forces because protesters are unlikely to degrade the regime’s ability…

— Critical Threats (@criticalthreats) January 15, 2026

To summarize what happened today. The US was in the process of evacuating the ME air bases of non-essential personnel. The Israelis deployed their ground based air defenses. Airlines began diverting flights in the Middle East and several carriers canceled flights to Israel. The Iranians shut down their airspace overnight. Then nothing happened.

They stopped those evacuations and are standing tight. US is moving an aircraft carrier group into the area. It's possible there may have been plans for a strike that were canceled or Trump decided after more consultation that they needed a carrier group in the area for more firepower. Now they are calling a UN meeting.

If they divert resources to the Kurd front I wonder how exposed those forces would be to air superiority?

Search says Mountains and forest so maybe not all that exposed

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

In 1979 before the Shah left Iran, he instructed his military not to get violent with the protestors. The military not having a leader anymore, gave up. Khomeni also promised that they'd be ok. And that's how quickly the region fell. Khomeni then got hostile trying to consolidate power and then Sadaam invaded Iran and all the different factions unified under Khomeni to defend Iran.

The IRGC is not going to fall or give up power unless Khamenei leaves or dies.

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

If this is the case, Trump won't have to worry about being compared to Obama. He'll be in Jimmy Carter territory. No plan. No strategy. Paper Tiger who invites seedlings of freedom to sacrifice themselves for Trump's sick reality show masquerading as coherent foreign policy.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

To summarize what happened today. The US was in the process of evacuating the ME air bases of non-essential personnel. The Israelis deployed their ground based air defenses. Airlines began diverting flights in the Middle East and several carriers canceled flights to Israel. The Iranians shut down their airspace overnight. Then nothing happened.

They stopped those evacuations and are standing tight. US is moving an aircraft carrier group into the area. It's possible there may have been plans for a strike that were canceled or Trump decided after more consultation that they needed a carrier group in the area for more firepower. Now they are calling a UN meeting.

---

I just do not understand the need to have a carrier group in the area in order to conduct strikes. Hell, you could move an entire carrier air wing to a land base in the area and have the same firepower. The Growlers (EA-18G's) can operate from local airbases. In this situation I would think they are the critical player here.

If it is strategically or tactically true that we need CBG's in the proximity of a strike, then we should not hear the old troupe of "Carriers are useless in today's battlespace." We should be building more carriers and expanding the fleet to more than 11 if this is the case. (When you have 11 you really only have 5-6 due to workups and refurbishment) We should also be increasing the number of carrier air wings as well.

I am a supporter of a strong and expanded carrier/Naval aviation component, but I do not understand how a CBG not being in place is a limiting factor here. Unless we are concerned with ballistic missile attacks on the "local" bases.

Dan Scott said:

---

The IRGC is not going to fall or give up power unless Khamenei leaves or dies.

---

Or an other bank or two fails like Ayandeh.

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

txwxman said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

If this is the case, Trump won't have to worry about being compared to Obama. He'll be in Jimmy Carter territory. No plan. No strategy. Paper Tiger who invites seedlings of freedom to sacrifice themselves for Trump's sick reality show masquerading as coherent foreign policy.

---

Sounds more like JFK than Carter. Bay of Pigs all over again.

Teslag said:

---

txwxman said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

If this is the case, Trump won't have to worry about being compared to Obama. He'll be in Jimmy Carter territory. No plan. No strategy. Paper Tiger who invites seedlings of freedom to sacrifice themselves for Trump's sick reality show masquerading as coherent foreign policy.

---

Sounds more like JFK than Carter. Bay of Pigs all over again.

---

This will be a defining moment for me if he lets this opportunity pass and he fails these people after having lied to them.

Dan Scott said:

---

The IRGC is not going to fall or give up power unless Khamenei leaves or dies.

---

We can help with that.

Should've taken care of it in June.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

txwxman said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

If this is the case, Trump won't have to worry about being compared to Obama. He'll be in Jimmy Carter territory. No plan. No strategy. Paper Tiger who invites seedlings of freedom to sacrifice themselves for Trump's sick reality show masquerading as coherent foreign policy.

---

Sounds more like JFK than Carter. Bay of Pigs all over again.

---

This will be a defining moment for me if he lets this opportunity pass and he fails these people after having lied to them.

---

100%

JB!98 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

To summarize what happened today. The US was in the process of evacuating the ME air bases of non-essential personnel. The Israelis deployed their ground based air defenses. Airlines began diverting flights in the Middle East and several carriers canceled flights to Israel. The Iranians shut down their airspace overnight. Then nothing happened.

They stopped those evacuations and are standing tight. US is moving an aircraft carrier group into the area. It's possible there may have been plans for a strike that were canceled or Trump decided after more consultation that they needed a carrier group in the area for more firepower. Now they are calling a UN meeting.

---

I just do not understand the need to have a carrier group in the area in order to conduct strikes. Hell, you could move an entire carrier air wing to a land base in the area and have the same firepower. The Growlers (EA-18G's) can operate from local airbases. In this situation I would think they are the critical player here.

If it is strategically or tactically true that we need CBG's in the proximity of a strike, then we should not hear the old troupe of "Carriers are useless in today's battlespace." We should be building more carriers and expanding the fleet to more than 11 if this is the case. (When you have 11 you really only have 5-6 due to workups and refurbishment) We should also be increasing the number of carrier air wings as well.

I am a supporter of a strong and expanded carrier/Naval aviation component, but I do not understand how a CBG not being in place is a limiting factor here. Unless we are concerned with ballistic missile attacks on the "local" bases.

---

There are expeditionary Growler squadrons that could be deployed that way, but sending a carrier air wing to a land base seems unrealistic. First of all, which are at the readiness needed? Those already deployed and to some degree maybe two either getting ready or that just got back and in CONUS, squadrons at their various air stations. Second, they are meant to operate from a carrier and their logistics, equipment, manning, etc reflects that.

Having said all that, I don't see how one carrier would make or break this. We aren't invading Iran, and if degrading/decapitating the regime is the goal we can do that with cruise missiles, bombers, and other stuff already in theater.

GAC06 said:

---

JB!98 said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

To summarize what happened today. The US was in the process of evacuating the ME air bases of non-essential personnel. The Israelis deployed their ground based air defenses. Airlines began diverting flights in the Middle East and several carriers canceled flights to Israel. The Iranians shut down their airspace overnight. Then nothing happened.

They stopped those evacuations and are standing tight. US is moving an aircraft carrier group into the area. It's possible there may have been plans for a strike that were canceled or Trump decided after more consultation that they needed a carrier group in the area for more firepower. Now they are calling a UN meeting.

---

I just do not understand the need to have a carrier group in the area in order to conduct strikes. Hell, you could move an entire carrier air wing to a land base in the area and have the same firepower. The Growlers (EA-18G's) can operate from local airbases. In this situation I would think they are the critical player here.

If it is strategically or tactically true that we need CBG's in the proximity of a strike, then we should not hear the old troupe of "Carriers are useless in today's battlespace." We should be building more carriers and expanding the fleet to more than 11 if this is the case. (When you have 11 you really only have 5-6 due to workups and refurbishment) We should also be increasing the number of carrier air wings as well.

I am a supporter of a strong and expanded carrier/Naval aviation component, but I do not understand how a CBG not being in place is a limiting factor here. Unless we are concerned with ballistic missile attacks on the "local" bases.

---

There are expeditionary Growler squadrons that could be deployed that way, but sending a carrier air wing to a land base seems unrealistic. First of all, which are at the readiness needed? Those already deployed and to some degree maybe two either getting ready or that just got back and in CONUS, squadrons at their various air stations. Second, they are meant to operate from a carrier and their logistics, equipment, manning, etc reflects that.

Having said all that, I don't see how one carrier would make or break this. We aren't invading Iran, and if degrading/decapitating the regime is the goal we can do that with cruise missiles, bombers, and other stuff already in theater.

---

You would know a hell of a lot more about this than I would! Never thought about the logistics aspect of moving airwing off of a carrier.

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

---

I have no idea if the protestors have any guns. If not get some from someone you kill with a knife. Surely they have guns. Somewhere…

My point is, it's like these people are waiting for someone else to come fight For them. If they vastly outnumber the police and security, overtake them yourselves. But no American soldiers in Iran. Enough of getting involved with our troops in the Middle East.

Mas89 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

---

I have no idea if the protestors have any guns. If not get some from someone you kill with a knife. Surely they have guns. Somewhere…

My point is, it's like these people are waiting for someone else to come fight For them. If they vastly outnumber the police and security, overtake them yourselves. But no American soldiers in Iran. Enough of getting involved with our troops in the Middle East.

---

This is the whole point of why we have the 2nd Amendment...

They DIDN'T. They don't HAVE guns. The government took them away...

4 said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

The IRGC is not going to fall or give up power unless Khamenei leaves or dies.

---

Israel can help with that.

Should've taken care of it in June.

---

Fixed. Israel operates with impunity in Iran.

Mas89 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

---

I have no idea if the protestors have any guns. If not get some from someone you kill with a knife. Surely they have guns. Somewhere…

My point is, it's like these people are waiting for someone else to come fight For them. If they vastly outnumber the police and security, overtake them yourselves. But no American soldiers in Iran. Enough of getting involved with our troops in the Middle East.

---

This is a really shorted sighted post.

Maybe. I don't believe they don't have guns. The Persians that fled in 1979 had the country and guns but wouldn't fight. Let's drop them a bunch of guns instead of American soldiers. You guys can go help them.

I agree 100 percent as well. Not sure what will stop the collapse that is happening though. I again think there are pushes behind the scenes we don't know anything about officially, too (not an excuse for inaction/failure to support).

Why would Saudi Arabia this morning allegedly refuse to allow US military aircraft to overfly their country on the way to Iran?

On paper, Saudi Arabia (Sunni) and Iran (Shia) are mortal enemies.

The reality is that in the 2026 oil market, the Saudis need the Ayatollah to stay.…

— Morgan Downey (@morgan_downey) January 14, 2026

Quote:

---

If Saudi cuts, they just hand market share to the class of 2026. New, cheap oil that break even at $40.

The Class of 2026 (The Wall of Supply) in barrels per day and their breakeven prices:

Brazil: +400k ($35)
Guyana: +200k ($35-45)
Canada: +200k ($45)
US/Others: +200k bpd ($40)

Total new 2026 supply: 1 Million bpd. This new supply soaks up all 2026 oil demand growth and does is much cheaper than Saudi can.

So, how does Riyadh survive 2026 with oil at $60 and a $44 billion deficit?

They are doing three things:

Max out credit cards They issued $12B in bonds in Jan 2026 alone.

Pawn the jewelry: Selling more shares of Aramco to pay the bills.

Cancel the renovation: Neom is shrinking. "The Line" was supposed to be 170km. It is now just 2.4km.

So Saudi Arabia doesn't want an Iran war. But they also don't want an Iran peace. They need Iran to stay sanctioned, isolated, and offline.

It has nothing to do with Shia vs. Sunni. It has everything to do with solvency vs. bankruptcy.

---

I don't know if that math is roughly correct or not, but it's 'close enough' for me to buy into.

That does make a lot of sense. But, man, we can't keep putting U.S. credibility on the line by saying we'll help and then doing nothing. It also makes Trump look like he's not mentally on his game.

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

---

I have no idea if the protestors have any guns. If not get some from someone you kill with a knife. Surely they have guns. Somewhere…

My point is, it's like these people are waiting for someone else to come fight For them. If they vastly outnumber the police and security, overtake them yourselves. But no American soldiers in Iran. Enough of getting involved with our troops in the Middle East.

---

This is the whole point of why we have the 2nd Amendment...

They DIDN'T. They don't HAVE guns. The government took them away...

---

Very true.

Americans are all but spoiled with riches when it comes to guns, and all thanks to the 2nd amendment.

BBRex said:

---

That does make a lot of sense. But, man, we can't keep putting U.S. credibility on the line by saying we'll help and then doing nothing. It also makes Trump look like he's not mentally on his game.

---

Or that he's all bluff and bluster, which might be why TACO was given to him last year.

Regardless, hopefully he acts more like W than Biden with Iran, for the sake of all the people putting their lives literally on the line for a better country.

BBRex said:

---

That does make a lot of sense. But, man, we can't keep putting U.S. credibility on the line by saying we'll help and then doing nothing. It also makes Trump look like he's not mentally on his game.

---

You do know the protests only started about a week ago, right?

Anyone have thoughts on getting congressional approval, or not?

Dave Robicheaux said:

---

Anyone have thoughts on getting congressional approval, or not?

---

Does Trump need it to do what he's said he would?

Like with Venezuela, we're not putting boots on the ground so why would they be needed?

Mas89 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Mas89 said:

---

The Fall Guy said:

---

Now those that rose up will be slaughtered like sheep. Dont tell them help is coming and act all big and mighty and then say F it.

---

You never answered my question. Why don't these protesters take up weapons and fight?
They mostly wouldnt fight in 1979 when the minority Muslims took over their country.
So after 47 years they will now protest but not fight?

---

What weapons?

---

I have no idea if the protestors have any guns. If not get some from someone you kill with a knife. Surely they have guns. Somewhere…

My point is, it's like these people are waiting for someone else to come fight For them. If they vastly outnumber the police and security, overtake them yourselves. But no American soldiers in Iran. Enough of getting involved with our troops in the Middle East.

---

There are some small tribal arab areas along the borders that have been having some armed resistance for years, but the government has been able to keep them in check. It has almost no chance of spreading because the government does a good job at border control and smuggling weapons in further to the country could be near impossible. There are no guns for the Persians. Your suggestion is taking a table knife to a sophisticated military gun fight? This isn't some third world African government that loses power because they can't afford to keep paying the military. The Iranian security forces are set up to keep power in the event of an uprising. There are multiple of them and they overlap in responsibilities in case one of them turns. And if you think all of them will turn, I suggest looking into the IRGC. They will never turn.

There's also spies everywhere. It would be like getting an uprising going here. You'd have multiple spies in your group from the start like we have FBI agents infiltrating groups. Even if you started a group there would be no where to organize and grow. The cities are heavily surveilled. The IRGC controls the mountains. Deserts wouldn't work because supply lines would be easily detected and destroyed.

A revolution really needs the army to defect, the state to collapse economically, or foreign military involvement to succeed and right now none of those have happened in Iran.

Your hope that no American troops get involved is very valid, but I'd suggest you'd do just a little research before posting your proposed solution again.

You realize we've heard a different take from the president just about every day of the protests, right? Is today keep protesting and we're going help, is it talks with Iranian leadership, is it we'll intervene if the government keeps shooting protesters, is it we're concerned about our troops in the region if we act? I forget.

Dave Robicheaux said:

---

Anyone have thoughts on getting congressional approval, or not?

---

The moment he asked for it, some weasel would leak it to the press and you lose all sense of surprise. They're all crooked. I wish that wasn't the case. Hell, you have 18 RINO's apparently against the SAVE act which is about fair elections. We're doomed. Sorry for derail.

I would say the Iranian state has collapsed economically. I don't know how they can possibly sustain the government with a currency that is essentially worthless.
Of course the IRGC can hold on for a long time because they have all the guns. It would seem like that without air strikes or something to tip the balance the IRGC could hang on to power. The problem is the IRGC will run out of money eventually; nobody's working, nobody is doing anything, the economy of Iran is at a stand still.

It would give a global media spotlight to senators Tillis, Murkowski, Collins, Paul, and who knows who else to cry for two weeks to the cameras about how worried they are about any action against the mullahs, only to then vote against it. Zero chance that would go well for Iranians/Americans alike.

NEW: Reuters reports the security alert at the U.S. Al Udeid air base in Qatar has been lowered, and U.S. aircraft that were moved out earlier this week are now gradually returning.

— Clash Report (@clashreport) January 15, 2026

Trump looks exactly like the weak and feckless Barack Obama

even worse - because Trump literally told the protestors to come out and get murdered and that the USA would help them!