Okay, "tangible advantage or benefit for anyone other than Trump." But what tangible advantage or benefit would Trump derive from boots-on-ground in Iran? He's not a man of firm philosophical standing, but "isolationist" is something he gets called a lot more than "imperialist." There would be heavy political cost to deploying troops anywhere they aren't needed for humanitarian aims and considering how sclerotic and ineffectual the Iranian regime is, why fucking bother?

Do we expect retaliation? As I said, I expected retaliation after Soleimani and it effectively never came. Shit, I think the world expected retaliation after Nimr al-Nimr and it came in the form of memes. There was a time when the Iranians were enthusiastic and skillful practitioners of terrorism but that time is clearly past. If they were gonna pop off they woulda done long since.

As far as workshopping a regime change, it serves the same purpose as "bombing is good tho", something they definitely need to do considering Trump ran on isolationism. Besides which the right-wing think tanks have long been at "wall it off and it will collapse on its own" with Iran, even before the Soviet Union did exactly that (and long, LONG before Syria did exactly that). The argument is basically that the tree is about to fall anyway, why rush at it with an axe when you can sit back, crack open a Busch Light and watch it fall.

Operation Enduring Freedom cost about $2.3T. Trump ain't big on numbers or statistics but he definitely listens to prices. I guarantee you he asked how much a MOAB cost.