> And the US could easily just keep destroying every asset in Iran
Could — and even more so: could easily — in an "if ifs and buts..." sense or materially? Wouldn't they run (weren't they running) out of resources? And having reached the point in which progressing with the destruction of assets requires killing the people encircling those buildings, standing on those bridges, wouldn't a new leadership be committed to revenge nevertheless?
Could — and even more so: could easily — in an "if ifs and buts..." sense or materially? Wouldn't they run (weren't they running) out of resources? And having reached the point in which progressing with the destruction of assets requires killing the people encircling those buildings, standing on those bridges, wouldn't a new leadership be committed to revenge nevertheless?