All Hell Set to Break Loose? IRGC Promises Historic Devastation After Khamenei Confirmed Killed by Israeli-US Strikes
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has ruled Iran since 1989, has been killed by Israeli-US strikes on his compound in Tehran, as announced by Iranian TV—1:23 mark of the video below:
The US and Israel have launched what is reported as “Israel’s largest strikes ever” against Iran:
The Israeli Defense Force has published information regarding today’s joint attack stating that the operation consisted of over 200 fighter jets attacking 500 targets in the largest attack in Israeli Air Force history.
The main reason for the “odd” daytime attack is reported to be due to the rare opportunity of an Iranian leadership gathering which was taking place:
It’s also well known that the strikes kicked off just as Iran appeared to be making major concessions during the talks with the US, with announcements of a potential deal coming just hours prior. This has led to the logical conclusion that the attack was launched in order to kill the deal which appeared to be close to fruition.
Another far more tenuous explanation was that Iran was allegedly preparing preemptive strikes against the US, which the US simply ‘preempted’ itself:
“We had indicators that they intended to use it potentially, preemptively, but if not, if not simultaneous, against with any actions against them, immediately against us,” the senior administration official added.
However, a source familiar with the intelligence contradicted that assertion to CNN, saying that there were no indications that the Iranians planned to strike US forces or assets first — unless they were attacked by Israel or the US.
Rubio even reportedly used the excuse that Israel was going to attack anyway, so the US might as well join now rather than later:
BREAKING: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers on Tuesday that Israel was going to attack Iran "with or without" the US so the question was when, not if, the US would get involved
You can decide which of these explanations is the more likely.
Trump announced the Iranian Supreme Leader’s death with his usual ‘flair’:
The strikes were allegedly delegated as such:
Also from Israeli sources:
There is a clear division of labor with US & Israel:
US is targeting nuclear and military infrastructure.
Israel is targeting top regime leaders and missiles.
That’s the division today. Tomorrow could bring a different strategy.
NYT’s David Sanger makes an interesting point that the Iranian “war of choice” was chosen by Trump not because Iran was becoming ‘dangerously’ strong, but rather precisely the opposite reason: that Iran was at its historic weakest point politically, and was judged to be vulnerable enough to be ‘finished off’—a kind of crime of opportunity.
The US itself claims to have launched 900 strikes within the first 12 hours alone, which roughly matches the ‘shock and awe’ opening of the Iraq war, which was said to have somewhere around 1,000 strikes in the first day. Iran itself allegedly responded with its largest opening barrage as well, according to unverified claims:
However now, BBC and other outlets report an official statement from the IRGC promises the largest attack on US-Israel in Iran’s history, which “will begin shortly”:
In short, all hell may break loose.
But recall that the motive for such attacks is often to pacify the populace and buoy morale. Iran may attempt to make a big showing so as to signal strength to its own people in the wake of this loss, so that the martyrdom of Khamenei was “not in vain”. In reality, both parties could begin looking for off-ramps to what is likely an unsustainable exchange for both:
CNN: A senior U.S. official says Washington has planned an escalating series of strikes with built-in off-ramps. Each round would last one to two days, followed by pauses to assess damage and recalibrate.
This plan has completely failed.Iran understood the death spiral & defected
Earlier, an Iranian IRGC general had already promised long-term resistance:
Iran will soon unveil weapons ‘you have never seen before’ — IRGC General Ebrahim Jabbari
As of this writing, Trump himself had just signaled a potential off-ramp in accordance with what I had written last time—that if he were to take out Khamenei he may immediately plant the victory flag and seek de-escalation:
President Donald J. Trump has told CBS News that he believes today’s attacks by Israel and the United States against Iran, which resulted in the death Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have been effective and could create a pathway to diplomacy, stating that negotiations could be, “Much easier now than it was a day ago, obviously - because they are getting beat up badly.”
But of course the big elephant in the room is the fact that the Ayatollah is a figurehead who had already ceded control over military matters to the Supreme Council of the IRGC in the wake of last summer’s US strikes. On top of that, Iran is said to be readying a replacement, who may end up being a much bigger hardliner than Khamenei ever was.
That is all to say that his death could obviously mean very little in the grand scheme of things, and all the celebrations from the neocon peanut gallery on social media are premature. The death of Iran’s president Raisi two years ago didn’t lead to the country’s collapse, or any turmoil at all. The strikes have so far done very little in actually attriting Iranian capabilities and a leader can and likely will be swiftly replaced—the potential for a long drawn out resistance still remains on the table. But it is in both sides’ interests to de-escalate and seek an off-ramp at the earliest opportunity which presents favorable optics.
Bloomberg is already writing about US missile stocks’ depletion:
And the missiles that remain haven’t been doing a great job of intercepting Iran’s first volley. A video showed three separate Patriot interceptors missing their attempt to down an Iranian ballistic missile over American Al-Udayd base in Qatar:
Also, note how in the midst of real war—not phony staged “exchange”—American “invisible” stealth B-2 wunderwaffen are no where to be seen. They “so effortlessly” soared over Tehran’s airspace last summer, bombing whatever they saw fit with impunity. In today’s strikes they were AWOL, and in fact no Israeli or American manned assets entered Iran at all, as was confirmed by the usual trace of Israeli missile casings (Blue Sparrow, etc.) found in eastern Iraq, from whence they were launched. Sure, some unmanned drones reportedly entered Iran, but were also shot down as at least one unverified image of a downed Israeli Hermes drone appeared to show.
This only further confirms the fraud of last summer’s strikes because the B-2s were made to “knock the door down” in precisely this type of opening volley. It is only now that we’re hearing some unconfirmed reports that the US “may use B-2s tomorrow” after attriting Iranian AD—but don’t hold your breath on that. At best they might only be used to fire stand-off munitions (JASSM, etc.) from well outside Iranian airspace because in a real shooting war the US appears to know they’re sitting ducks to AD.
Either way, something feels different about this one—a kind of hesitancy from both sides. Even as of this writing, there are no ongoing strikes, with the US appearing to “wait its turn”. Despite claims of “the largest salvos ever fired” from both sides, it feels more like each side is being more intentional and limited in its aggression as if playing specifically for off-ramps. In US’s case: take out as much of the leadership as possible in the hopes of a quick off-ramp and “victory declaration”. In Iran’s case, hit a bunch of Gulf states in the hopes the economic damage causes them to panic and pressure the US to pull the plug. Some believe this is why Iran limited its strikes on Israel proper, and focused elsewhere in its opening salvo—which is part of the feeling of a “different tone” to the present exchange compared to that of ‘Operation True Promise 2.0’ over a year ago.
But this could all change, of course, if the IRGC’s promise of the “most powerful ever” retaliatory attack actually comes to pass, and in as “devastating” fashion as claimed. There’s always the possibility of another “hand shake agreement”, though it’s less likely in this case, with the death of Khamenei being a serious blow. But recall that it has often been Trump’s style previously to offer a retaliatory sop to Iran after killing an important leader, like in the case of Soleimani.
Of course, the stakes now are different. Both sides are trying to play for keeps—but at the same time, logistical realities force them each to consider the long-term outlooks. In other words, Trump may “want” a decisive victory this time around but, if Iran should double down on resistance and show no signs of faltering, he will know there’s very little long-term prospect of victory happening before US runs out of munitions.
Recall that Israel views this as their last chance before Trump is muffled for good by the midterm bloodbath likely to ensue, particularly now that Democrats are already paving the way for ‘Civil War’-style threats about Trump trying to “steal the election” and become “dictator” by taking control of the election process via executive order; that is to say, things could get ugly there.
As such, this one’s for all the marbles and Iran appears to be biding its time, playing this one more smartly, evidenced by latest claims of Trump’s “surprise” that Iran’s attacks have been “limited” so far. On one hand, this could be explained by the earlier theory that Iran is seeking an off-ramp, but at the same time Iran could simply be digging in for the long haul this time, and does not want to blow its load too early; these aren’t mutually exclusive.
That means early celebrations of Iran’s demise based on Khamenei’s death could be futile gestures as this thing may only be just starting. But certainly political upheaval or overthrow of the “Iranian regime” via some “popular uprising” (read: color revolution) does not appear a realistic prospect. As an IRGC leader just said on Iranian TV: Imam Ali Khamenei lived his entire life for martyrdom and infact fulfilled his lifelong mission in many respects, there is nothing surprising in this. Now everything depends on who takes his place, with rumors already pointing to his son Mojtaba Khamenei amongst a short list of others.
Share your thoughts, is the conflict now “over”, or just beginning?
With Khamenei's death, the conflict is:
Over, Iran will soon kneel
Just beginning, long resistance
Both will seek offramp, de-escalate
1323 VOTES · 2 DAYS REMAINING
Your support is invaluable. If you enjoyed the read, I would greatly appreciate if you subscribed to a monthly/yearly pledge to support my work, so that I may continue providing you with detailed, incisive reports like this one.
Alternatively, you can tip here: buymeacoffee.com/Simplicius