Yup, there is no tomorrow for the revolutionary government of the Iran if they lose hence why they spent 40 years getting ready for this. I did my own bar napkin math and I came up with a 1 million man fighting force to take, occupy and pacify Iran. Probably supported by another 1 million+ military members, 100+ CAPs, 3 carrier battle groups, etc… basically a doubling of the DOW budget, conscription required, the kitchen sink, etc… we can’t or won’t do that. We would end America as we know it, I’m not even opposed to military action against Iran to forestall nuclear weapons development but I know that if we decided that regime change is the only way to guarantee that the revolutionary Islamic government of Iran never acquires nuclear weapons, we would destroy our country in the process unless we as a country through a popular process decided this was worth it. One party making it their explicit policy, winning an election cycle and then executing it. I doubt that will happen so a lesser approach is likely required. My policy and strategy recommendations would be to consistently degrade conventional capabilities, factor and prioritize minimal collateral damage, deny economic resources to the regime; begin the diplomatic effects to isolate the regime; establish a new Iranian government in absentia that is a visible alternative to the revolutionary Islamic one and settle in for a multi year effort to collapse the regime. Did Israel trick us into attacking Iran? No. Did they encourage us to? Yes. The Venn diagram of Israel’s interests and America’s interests do overlap in Iran not having a nuclear weapons capability but Israel’s interest in this is much larger than ours, hence why they pulled every lever to get us to go kinetic. Others encouraged the administration to attack too, Israel was only part of the coalition. Totally neutral in that statement, I like the Israelis but don’t see them as infallible or without parochial interests either, they are a good ally mostly but not angels either, proceed accordingly. The Irony is the analogous behavior of President Trump and President Putin, both had successful military ops before that IMO encouraged them to try the big one. Putin had the successful operation taking Crimea and Trump had Midnight Hammer and Venezuela, they both misinterpreted the successes of those very different focused missions and thought they were indicators of likely success in a major conventional campaign. Nope, not unless you gear up and commit your country to a major military campaign, you’ll not lose what you start but you won’t win either. Putin has obviously gotten close to that total mobilization required if you want to win but even he thinks that is likely more than his nation will support. President Trump hasn’t even hinted at what would likely be required and/or doing that.