American writer Thomas Friedman states that bombing Iran and destroying it will not necessarily lead to a change in the regime or better future prospects for the country; rather, it could cause widespread chaos and render the nation ungovernable. In his column for The New York Times, he reminisces about a visit to Tehran in 1996, where he noted the 'death to America' slogan prominently displayed on a hotel wall, symbolizing the deep-rooted anti-American sentiment embedded within the Iranian regime.

Friedman expresses concern that despite hopes for a more economically open Iran driven by its youth, the regime is more resilient than he initially believed. He raises questions about the realities of the current conflict involving the U.S., Israel, and Iran, pondering whether what is needed for transformation is, in fact, unattainable. He suggests that while many criticize the war, they may fail to recognize the complexities involved in changing Iran, which might be even more difficult than understood by those planning the conflict.

He highlights that the Iranian regime, although unpopular among many citizens, is deeply entrenched in state institutions and society itself, impacting everything from municipal governance to education. The implications of this situation are significant; any military action might not only fail to achieve policy goals but could also exacerbate instability in the region, making it vital to consider alternative strategies for engagement with Iran that might lead to constructive outcomes without resorting to armed conflict.