Can Bombing Iran Achieve War Objectives?

The threat of bombing Iran back to the 'stone ages' by US President Donald Trump has raised concerns about the morality, legality, and utility of such a campaign. In 2006, Israel bombed Lebanon's Jiyeh power station, causing a massive oil spill and significant damage. However, this did not prevent Hezbollah from rearming and continuing to fight.

Similarly, Russia's sustained bombardment of Ukraine has not forced the country to concede. History has shown that bombing campaigns, including the British 'area bombing' of Germany in World War II and the US Rolling Thunder campaign against North Vietnam, have not always achieved their desired outcomes.

Experts argue that bombing Iran's infrastructure would not change the regime's strategic calculus and would likely give the Iranian government a powerful propaganda tool. The US lacks a credible military option to force Iran into submission, and pressure alone may not be enough to break Tehran.

The effectiveness of bombing campaigns in achieving war objectives is highly contested. The article cites the example of the British bomber command's promise to bring about the collapse of Germany within four months, which ultimately proved unsuccessful.

Trump's threat to bomb Iran's infrastructure has been met with skepticism by experts, who argue that it is unlikely to achieve its desired outcome and may instead escalate the situation.