I can see you are asking difficult questions that have no answers at this stage.  I just listened to Scott Ritter who was adamant that US lost the war on day 1 by making a martyr of the supreme constitutional leader.  
 
I asked this question to DeepSeek after GoogleAI refused to reply with an assessment 

See Scott Ritter’s explosive interview here 

https://www.youtube.com/live/8X7L1JIrR0g?si=nmo7uY…

DeepSeek

 Will the US-Israel attempt at regime change and revolution in iran be successful - what do the experts say?

Answer

Based on the consensus among regional experts, political scientists, and strategic analysts, the likelihood of the US-Israel campaign successfully achieving regime change in Iran is considered very low. Experts point to significant historical, political, and social obstacles that make a popular uprising or a collapse of the government an improbable outcome of the current military strikes .

Here is a summary of the key arguments experts are making against the likelihood of successful regime change:

Argument Expert Consensus / Supporting Evidence

Historical Precedent of Air Power Bombing campaigns have a terrible record of toppling governments. Experts like Robert Pape note that air power has never successfully incited a population to rise up and overthrow its leader . The 1991 Iraqi uprising, which was brutally crushed after US encouragement, is often cited as a cautionary tale .

Strength & Cohesion of Iranian Security Forces The Iranian state's repressive organs, particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) , remain powerful, heavily armed, and deeply committed to defending the regime. They have extensive experience in suppressing popular unrest and have dispersed their capabilities to withstand strikes .

Nationalism and the "Rally 'Round the Flag" Effect Foreign attacks often trigger nationalist sentiment. Experts suggest that even Iranians who despise the regime may resent an external power demanding they rise up, especially with rising civilian casualties. Siding with an attacking foreign power can be seen as treachery .
Lack of a Unified Opposition There is no recognized opposition movement with a credible leader or a coordinated plan to assume power . The political opposition, both inside Iran and in the diaspora, is described as disorganized, weak, and plagued by infighting, making it incapable of channeling any public anger into a cohesive alternative government .

Absence of Preconditions for Revolution Unlike in 1979, the current conditions for a revolution do not exist. There is no sustained, nationwide protest movement. While discontent is high, it has not translated into the kind of organized, mass mobilization needed to topple a government, especially one backed by a still-intact security apparatus .

🧠 The Experts' View: Why It's Unlikely to Work

· "Never. Bombings have never led people to take to the streets and topple their leader." - Robert Pape, political scientist at the University of Chicago . This quote encapsulates the view that the strategy is fundamentally flawed and ignores the lessons of history.

· "History shows external attack tends to consolidate regimes, not topple them." - Ali Vaez, Iran Project Director at the International Crisis Group . This highlights the concern that the strikes will have the opposite effect, strengthening the regime's narrative of an external enemy and making it harder for internal dissent to surface .

· "At this time, there is no recognized opposition movement. There is no recognized leader... If the current regime were to collapse, what would take its place? At this time, we have no idea." - James Davis, Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin–Madison . This underscores the dangerous political vacuum that could be created, even if the current government were to fall, with no viable alternative ready to step in .

💡 Important Nuances and Caveats

While the consensus is deeply skeptical, experts also acknowledge the extraordinary nature of the current moment:

· Unprecedented Escalation: The scale of the attack is notable, particularly the reported assassination of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and numerous top officials. This level of "decapitation strike" is unprecedented and creates a level of uncertainty about the future .

· A Transformed, Not Toppled, Regime: Some analysts, like Sanam Vakil of Chatham House, suggest that while the regime may not be toppled, it will be fundamentally transformed. "The regime as we know it is no longer going to exist," she said, meaning it will have to evolve into something else under immense pressure .

· Short-Term Celebrations vs. Long-Term Uprising: There are reports of some Iranians celebrating in the streets following the death of the Supreme Leader. However, experts caution that these clips are not proof of a pending revolution. Public displays of joy are different from the organized, sustained, and highly risky act of mass protest against a still-armed and active security state .

· Divergent US and Israeli Goals: Analysts note that while both countries want to see the end of the current regime, their motivations differ. Israel's goal is to completely eliminate the strategic threat from Iran, while the US, under President Trump, is seen as wanting to eliminate the nuclear threat but being unwilling to get bogged down in another protracted Middle Eastern conflict . This potential divergence in endgames could create further instability.

In summary, experts across the board view the US-Israel attempt at regime change as a high-risk gamble based on a fundamental misreading of history, Iranian society, and the nature of power in the Islamic Republic. While the strikes have created a moment of chaos, the structural and political obstacles to a successful uprising remain immense .

I hope this synthesis of expert analysis is helpful. Would you like a deeper look into the potential roles of specific actors, such as the IRGC or the exiled opposition, in the event of a government collapse?