Trump Administration officials continue to talk up the idea of a war
with Iran at every opportunity. In the past few days, talk of the
“Iranian threat” has grown, even though there is no question the US
would be the one to attack, not Iran. Still, officials try to make it
appear an inevitability.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo continues talk of the war during his
visit to India, saying that if there is a war it would be Iran’s fault,
and that he believes the US has “done everything it could” to avoid the conflict.
To be clear, the US doing everything it could, as Pompeo is claiming,
involved months of US threats to attack, and Pompeo taking point on
trying to drum up support for a US attack.
President Trump called off an attack on Iran at the last minute just a
week ago. This week, however, he has repeatedly threatened “overwhelming
force” against Iran, and “obliteration” of large parts of the country. Iranian officials say they view that comment as a threat to nuclear strike Iran, which is the only way they could “obliterate” anything the way Trump is talking.
But Trump talks a lot, too, which means his promises of apocalyptic
destruction, and a quick decisive war with no troops involved are likely
just more of his tirades that aren’t meant to be seen as policy
proclamations.
Iranian FM Javad Zarif was quick to reject Trump’s comments, saying it
was “an illusion” to suggest the he could launch a short war between
Iran and the US. US officials seem keen to advance this idea, likely as a
way to present a huge war with Iran as so inconsequential as to not be
worth serious debate.
President Trump has, whether he’s on a day where he’s inclined to start a
war or not, consistently argued that he can unilaterally attack Iran
whenever he wants, and that not only doesn’t he need Congressional
authorization, the choice to even inform Congress that a war is starting
would be entirely his. This has been a matter of some debate in
Congress, but it’s not clear a serious legislative effort will happen to
preclude Trump from carrying out this unilateral war, should the mood
strike him.
Here’s hoping Iran will then use overwhelming missile swarms against every American, Saudi and Gulfi ship in the Persian Gulf and send them all to the bottom of the sea. It’s what we deserve.
Overwhelming force employed by those of underwhelming intellegence.
The weakest link in the chain of the status quo in the Gulf is the monarchies, not Iran. They sit atop restive populations, and they take huge risks, and they are largely incompetent without massive Western help for everything and foreign workers to do it.
If anything is swept away in new chaos, it is more likely to be US friends than US enemies.
Do not assume that any monarchy is ready for war with Iran — they simply mouthed of US mantra, getting what they saw as a good deal from US. Protection, arms, trade. But everything changed after Russia entered ME and Islamic projects were given a blow. Trump had no choice but to brag of destroying ISIS — a last straw for Kingdom. June 2017 saw the removal of US allied Crown Prince, and the beginning of diversification of Saudi politics. UAE already has separated from US plans. What we see is Israel only politics. Period. US is in this alone.
Overwhelming force, and then what? Another Libya?
A war in part of the world that’s awash with oil , oil refineries, oil tankers , oil storage fascilities etc. would have devastating effects on global greenhouse emissions.
The talk of war seems more a smoke screen than trying to destroying Iran with sanctions. That is not to say war isn’t a possibility. War over oil will certainly send our economy into the abyss.
Here is a good article about this.
http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=121033
Those US drones that were testing Iran defense reaction are huge, probably big enough to carry nukes, so is it any wonder one got shot down, especially when our beloved President is constantly threatening to wipe whole nations out. The US is confused, no longer knows right from wrong.
War appears to be inevitable.
I supported Trump in 2016, not because I thought he would be a great leaders, but because, compared to Killary, he was almost an antiwar choir boy.
Now, I don’t see any difference between the two of them.
If Trumps starts a was there’s no way I can 1) support Trump in 2020 and 2) I can support any of the lousy Democrats but perhaps Tusli Gabbard, if she’s nominated.
I guess I’ll just stay home on election day.
You clearly ignored Trump’s pro-war machismo rhetoric. “I’m the most militaristic person on that stage,” Trump said during the 2016 GOP debates. You also ignored the extreme influence that the wackadoodle rabidly pro-Israeli funders have on him, Adelson et al.
But his people ran a successful campaign. They managed to vilify their opponents to such a degree that you missed about ten thousand warning signs that Trump would use the office for his own public gains. Why else did he try to unConstitutionally declare a fake emergency to sell arms to his personal business buddies, the Saudis, to use in a war that the American people want no part of? Have no doubt that the Trump ‘business’ will be reaping some windfall down the road if that goes through.
There’s some truth to your post.
Best,
David
Trump is recklessly disregarding the welfare of thousands of American service men and women deployed on surface ships in the ME with no defense against Iranian ballistic missiles. Who would govern Iran after a US strike? How would Trump recover US POW’s? What would be the strategic objective of Trump’s war? What happens the day after? Trump has no plan. But more important, he has no love of his country nor any commitment to the lives or well being of the service men and women he commands and he has placed in harm’s way for no good reason. Trump truly cares about nothing but himself and is unfit to be President.
“overwhelming force”…is there another kind ?
“US Continues to Talk Up Attacking Iran With ‘Overwhelming Force’”
And what is antiwar.com doing about it Mr. Ditz? Just reporting it!
What else do you expect a news-aggregation site with some guest columnists to do?
Overwhelming farce.
“aren’t meant to be seen as policy
proclamations.”
Trump doesn’t “make policy”. He just runs his mouth and everyone wastes time analyzing his tweets and random press comments. Policy is made by the neocons, the military-industrial complex (despite what Colonel Pat Lang claims), the oil companies, and the banks.
Everyone else, including Trump and especially including the electorate, can take a walk.
But Jason’s comment quoted above strikes me as still some expression of forlorn hope that there won’t be an Iran war because somehow Trump will stop it.
That’s a fantasy. The Iran war is a done deal. The only question is how and when it will be started. And nothing and no one can stop it – not even Trump, because the neocons know he isn’t “reliable” so they will start it in such a way that even he or Congress can’t stop it.