The United States’ recent military actions against Iran have sparked a heated debate about the effectiveness of the approach and the potential consequences. Tony Katz delves into the complexities of the situation, featuring a conversation with Major Mike Lyons, a retired US Army military analyst.

Proportional Response

The discussion centers around the concept of “proportional response,” which has been touted as a key objective in the US’s dealings with Iran. However, Major Lyons argues that this idea is “nonsensical” and that the objective should be to “win” and end the regime.

He notes, “If proportional response was the objective, have we crossed the line from proportional response into not so proportional?” The conversation also touches on the recent announcement of the US taking control of Iranian oil, with Major Lyons suggesting that this move is part of a “siege” strategy aimed at crippling Iran’s economy.

Role of the IRGC

Major Lyons notes that the IRGC, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, is the dominant force in Iran, and that the US needs to find a way to negotiate with them. However, he believes that the IRGC is not a viable negotiating partner, as they are “true believers” who see the US as the “Great Satan.”

The conversation also touches on the potential role of other countries in the region, such as Turkey and India, in mediating the conflict. Major Lyons suggests that these countries could potentially be the “indispensable country” that helps to bring the Iranians to the negotiating table.

Original reporting: 93.1 WIBC (Indianapolis) — read the source article.