10 questions about the war with Iran
As President Trump equivocates about his reasons for the war and what he hopes to accomplish, a retired Army officer who served in the region poses some pertinent questions.
President Donald Trump’s decision to wage war with Iran raises dozens of questions regarding necessity, war aims, and consequences in the region and beyond.
As a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army who has served in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and as a State Department strategic planner with the U.S. Embassy in Bagdad, these are some of the questions I have.
The road to war
1. The Iranian threat. What imminent threat did Iran pose to the U.S., particularly after the June 2025 Midnight Hammer strikes that “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program?
2. White House decision-making. What range of options did the National Security Council and the Joints Chiefs offer to the president?
3. Intelligence. What did our intelligence community assess in terms of the likelihood that U.S-Israeli airstrikes would prompt a popular uprising that would bring an end to the Islamic regime? Was there unanimity across the various intelligence agencies (CIA, DIA, NSA) in their estimates, to include how the Iranian forces would respond to a prolonged bombing campaign?
4. Diplomacy. Were the negotiations between Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Iranian representatives that ended shortly before the U.S. strikes a genuine effort to seek an agreement, or were they part of a deception plan to achieve military surprise and limit U.S. casualties?
Boots on the ground
5. Strait of Hormuz. Will the disruption of oil shipments compel the U.S. to conduct an incursion into Iran by parachute assault and/or Marine landings to seize key objectives near Bandar Abbas that control the strait?
6. Iran’s nuclear program. Will the U.S. insert special operations forces in locations throughout Iran to capture nuclear scientists and technicians and seize nuclear materials?
7. IRGC brutality. How will the U.S. respond should the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (190,000 strong) or the paramilitary Basij (estimated in the hundreds of thousands) murder thousands or tens of thousands of Iranians who “take to the street?”
If this war continues on its current path, hundreds — perhaps thousands — of U.S. troops will be on the ground in Iran within weeks. That is a certainty.
Consequences
8. Iranian actions. What capabilities do Iranian operatives and sleeper cells possess to conduct terrorist attacks targeting shipping, infrastructure, and U.S. service members, diplomats and citizens in the region, in Europe and on American soil?
9. Geostrategic risks. Might China take advantage of a prolonged war in Iran to put to the test our decades-long policy of “strategic ambiguity” and invade Taiwan? Given the previous airstrikes on Iran, military actions in the Caribbean and Venezuela, and now a sustained air campaign over Iran, would the American people support going to war with China? Might Russia take advantage of the war in Iran to escalate its war in Ukraine?
10. How does this end? Will the results — immediate and long-term — be worth the cost in terms of American military and Iranian civilian casualties?
Some thoughts
Revolutionary Iran has been a threat to regional and world security for over 40 years. The regime is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans.
The president had a wide range of options — short of war — to confront Iran, address the lethal threats it poses to the U.S. and its allies, and strengthen the prospects for peace and stability in the Middle East:
Build on the success of the Abraham Accords and strengthen relations with nations in the Gulf.
Support a genuine ceasefire in Gaza, help marshal the resources to rebuild and govern it, and convince Israel to embrace a two-state agreement with the Palestinians.
In cooperation with our allies in the region and globally, pursue a policy of long-term “kinetic containment” of Iran — containment in the broad, political-economic-military-Cold War sense but always with the option to conduct military strikes — preemptive or retaliatory, limited or sustained — when warranted and necessary.
The optimistic outcomes that the Trump administration projects — regime change among them — will not be achieved with air power alone. If this war continues on its current path, hundreds — perhaps thousands — of U.S. troops will be on the ground in Iran within weeks. That is a certainty.
In the short term, given the precipitous and confused way this war was launched, the most useful regime change might be among the president’s top advisers.
Thomas J. Raleigh is a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who served in the Infantry, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and as a State Department strategic planner with the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.