And Sometimes Why
In The New Yorker, Susan Glasser goes over some of the reasons we’ve been given that America launched the Iran war. “In the two and a half days since Donald Trump unleashed a new war in the Middle East, the President and his Administration have come up with an astonishing array of different, even contradictory, rationales for the American military attack on Iran. By my count, and I’m sure I’ve missed a few, these include outright regime change, assistance to the oppressed peoples of the Islamic Republic, stripping Iran of ‘the ability to project power outside its borders,’ stopping future Iranian-sponsored terrorist attacks while exacting revenge for past ones, preëmptive action against an imminent Iranian threat to attack U.S. forces, preëmptive action to block Iran from building ballistic missiles that could hit the U.S. mainland, and preëmptive action to stop the Iranian nuclear program that Trump had, as recently as last week, claimed was ‘obliterated.’ Many of these explanations are based on false premises; some already seem to have been abandoned.” Can Donald Trump Win a War with Iran If He Can’t Explain Why He Started It? I touched on this issue in yesterday’s edition where I argued that Epic Fury looks a little more like Blind Fury. Among the most preposterous reasons given for launching an attack when they did was served up by Marco Rubio, who explained that the US had to strike Iran before Israel did—because an Israeli pre-emptive strike would have put troops in the region in danger, so the U.S. was cornered into striking first. This could be one of the more gutless falsehoods ever spewed by buck-passing men famous for spewing them nonstop. Has Bibi been pushing for the US to strike and reduce the threat posed by a regime as determined to destroy Israel as it was to violently squelch dissent among its own citizens? Yes. Were there a lot of other voices across the region (including Saudi Arabia) lobbying Trump to make a move? Yes. But a government that spent months building up forces in the Middle East, changing its defense department name to the Department of War, and tough-talking its lethality, can hardly pass the buck and say, our ally made us do it (even though Let’s the blame the Jews can be a convenient reflex among this crowd). No, this is Trump’s war. Don’t take my word for it. Take his. He was none too pleased with Rubio’s assessment. “If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand. We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they [Iran] were going to attack first.”
+ The broader issue remains. It’s still unclear to everyone from the American public to top Congressional officials exactly why we attacked now and what our ultimate goals are. Just today, Trump told reporters: “I guess the worst case would be — we do this, and then somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person… That could happen.” Are we watching a war unfold or waging one? I suppose if you have no clearly defined goals, you can always claim any outcome as a victory. Maybe we can rephrase The New Yorker headline: Can Donald Trump Lose a War with Iran If He Refuses to Explain Why He Started It? Let’s hope that the actual outcome is something other than a worst case.
+ Apparently, a lot of different people have a lot of different motivations. According to indie journalist Jonathan Larsen: U.S. Troops Were Told Iran War Is for ‘Armageddon,’ Return of Jesus. “A combat-unit commander told non-commissioned officers at a briefing Monday that the Iran war is part of God’s plan and that Pres. Donald Trump was ‘anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,’ according to a complaint by a non-commissioned officer.” (Editor’s note: If true, holy shit…)
