Iranian hardliners, like myself, have been critical of President Donald Trump's leadership in the war against Iran, arguing that he lacks a plan to control the situation. The Wall Street Journal editorial board, along with other hawks, has warned that there is a significant pessimism about the U.S. bombing campaign against Iran. However, the hawks' posture suggests that the war is not separate from the people directing it. They argue that the regime is one of the most dangerous and repressive on the planet and that the region would be better off without the mullahs in charge. They also question whether there is any evidence that a bombing campaign led by an impulsive narcissist can achieve this goal. The author argues that previous presidents have always avoided attacking Iran due to the risks of doing so, not fecklessness but consideration of the cost of the war.