Key Points – A direct US military strike on Iran, which President Trump is reportedly considering, raises the critical question of “what comes next?”
-Drawing parallels to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, analysts warn that while the US can likely win the initial conflict, there is no clear plan for “winning the peace.”
-Potential “day after” scenarios are grim, including a wider regional war, Iran attempting to shut down the Strait of Hormuz to trigger a global energy crisis, and mass cyberattacks.
-Iranian officials have warned that any US intervention would lead to “all-out war” with “irreparable damage,” leaving the US facing a potential quagmire with no guaranteed positive outcome.
What Happens After Trump Attacks Iran?
Before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, one question was asked often, which turned out to be an important one: The U.S. can almost certainly win the war, but can it win the peace?
In the case of Iraq, the U.S. won the initial phase of the war decisively and toppled Saddam Hussein, with President George W. Bush declaring “Mission Accomplished” just weeks after the war began. But then an insurgency rose, the war dragged on for years, and the planned widespread flowering of democracy across the Middle East failed to materialize.
And now, we’re in a similar place with Iran.
After a 2024 campaign in which Donald Trump repeatedly vowed not to get into any new wars and implied that his opponent would get into them — and a decade after Trump rose in GOP politics in part as a rebuke to the Bush Administration and its foreign wars —Trump is talking openly about getting directly involved in Israel’s attacks on Iran.
In Truth Social posts this week, Trump has demanded “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!,” while also appearing to threaten the life of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Now, the same question should be asked about Iran that was asked about Iraq two decades ago: How does this all end?
No Way Out
In a CNN analysis published Wednesday, Stephen Collinson drew a similar comparison.
“A president is being driven – by events, fear of proliferating weapons of mass destruction and the need to back up his own words – toward a shock-and-awe entry into a Middle East conflict with no guaranteed way out,” Collinson wrote.
Citing earlier CNN reporting, the president has been “warming to the idea of using US military assets to strike Iranian nuclear sites and was souring on his previous unsuccessful attempt to settle the issue through talks with Iran.”
Indeed, if Trump directly intervenes in Iraq, most likely by using American bunker-buster bombs to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, it’s not clear what would happen after that.
Would the U.S. attempt to push for regime change in Iran, which is already a stated goal for Israel in the conflict? How will it be determined who will emerge as the new leadership in Iran, should the Islamic Republic fall? After all, the U.S. has intervened in Iran before, and it hasn’t usually ended well.
Beyond other risks, large segments of Trump’s base are dead-set against any escalation of foreign wars.
“Anyone who is cheerleading the United States into a war with Iran has very quickly forgotten the disasters of the Iraq war and the Afghanistan war,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said on CNN this week. The senator went on to describe the Bush-era “forever wars” as “a quagmire that ultimately got thousands of Americans killed and created new insurgencies against US interests and against our allies in the region.”
Trump would probably love it if an Iran intervention destroyed Iran’s nuclear program and resulted in the fall of the current regime, and the rise of a pro-Western democracy in its place. But historically, especially in that part of the world, results are seldom that neat.
More likely, it would be much uglier than that.
“It’s easy to draw up nightmare scenarios. Iran might shut down the Strait of Hormuz to choke the flow of oil to trigger a global energy crisis,” Collinson writes. “Or it might target oil fields of its regional rivals, such as Saudi Arabia. Only one nation could lead a response: the United States, as it got sucked deeper into a regional war. Then there’s the possibility of mass Iranian cyber-attacks that could bring war to the homeland.”
“All-Out War”
Meanwhile, an Iranian official has warned that U.S. involvement in the conflict would to “all-out war.”
“I think any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region with very, very bad consequences for the whole international community,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told Al Jazeera English on Wednesday, as cited by CBS News.
The Ayatollah himself said on state TV that the U.S. “should know that any military intervention will undoubtedly result in irreparable damage.”
About the Author:
Stephen Silver is an award-winning journalist, essayist and film critic, and contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. For over a decade, Stephen has authored thousands of articles that focus on politics, technology, and the economy. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @StephenSilver, and subscribe to his Substack newsletter.
Fighter Jet Fails
Russia’s Su-57 Felon Stealth Fighter Is a Waste of Rubles
