"When you set out to take Vienna," Napoleon advised, "take Vienna."
When President Donald Trump initiated the current round of hostilities in the 47-year-old Iran War on February 28, observers had no way to tell whether Trump had merely ordered U.S. forces to inflict more heavy damage to the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions, or if he was determined to force regime change.
Lately, it looks like neither.
As PJ Media's own Robert Spencer noted on Sunday, "There is no scenario in Islamic law in which a Muslim force and a non-Muslim one sign a treaty for a lasting peace, lay down their arms, and coexist." There comes a point where even Trump's so-much-winning art-of-the-deal negotiating tactics come up against this hard reality, and it looks increasingly like that's where we are.
Look, I love the idea of Trump doing to Tehran what he did to Caracas back in January, and removing the problem leader, then making peace with the much more pliable survivors. But it's clear by now that either no such people exist in the Islamic Republic, or the government is too fractured or leaderless to comply. Either way, the fiery-but-mostly-peaceful ceasefire may have run its course.
The man himself said on Sunday that the regime "will be laughing no longer!" at the U.S., but that's not the way it looks to those of us watching from the outside.
This exchange between my Red State colleague Bonchie and another X user explains where I arrived over the weekend:
At the end of the day Iran will never negotiate in good faith. Whatever Trump plans to do, he just needs to do it.
— LittleOne 🇺🇸✝️ (@RealLittleOne) May 10, 2026
In the interest of fairness, let's look at the flip side, because there's also the global picture that Oil Price analyst Irina Slav reported on this weekend. The short version is that China is hurt more by the growing oil crisis than the U.S. is. If temporarily higher gas prices are the price of ending the Islamic Republic and hurting the CCP, too, then I'd think of them as a worthwhile investment.
Then again, midterm voters are likely less sanguine about gas prices than I am, and political considerations are real. Or as another X user put it, "We either prove we can open the straits now or deal with it being closed in October."
It may well be that Trump is simply running out the clock on Tehran's finances and oil storage issues that could go critical as soon as this week. If that's the ploy, and it works, then please forgive my itchy trigger finger. But the more I think about what desperate actions the regime might take in either one of those circumstances, the more convinced I become that waiting them out could prove to be a huge mistake.
There are two clocks ticking. One on the Islamic Republic, the other on America's patience with the war's economic fallout. It's always looked like Tehran's clock will run out first, but after 10 weeks, the time might have come to force a decision instead.
Did Trump set out to take out the regime? He's been typically coy about his actual endgame, but whatever the goal was on February 28, maybe now Trump needs to finish the job.
Recommended: Um... Did the GOP Just Win the Midterms?
You want more?
PJ Media VIP members get so much more, including exclusive podcasts and video live chats with your favorite writers. You can support alternative conservative news and save 60% with promo code FIGHT.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member