Trump's War with Iran

When you put clowns in charge of your government, you should not be surprised that you get a circus. But when that circus is a war, it is far from enjoyable. There is no doubt that the United States military is technically competent. However, the political leadership is beyond amateurish. Six days ago, I wrote a blog post about a potential U.S. war with Iran. In that post, referring to cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump, I said that "It is under the leadership of this dimwitted, brain-addled candidate for an assisted living facility that we are apparently about to go to war with Iran." Friday evening, this came to pass. We now have a war for which nobody can explain the reasons, delineate the goals, or explain the hoped-for outcome. This is a war led by a mad king.

The most striking characteristic of this war is that nobody knows why Trump launched it. Not even Trump. One justification that has been offered is Iran's nuclear weapons program. But, according to a statement issued by Trump and posted on the White House website, "Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News". According to that document, it would "take years for Iran to reconstitute the capabilities it lost at these facilities." Less than a week ago, during his State of the Union address, Trump again stated that "the United States military obliterated Iran’s nuclear weapons program". But if Iran's nuclear program was a concern, Trump has nobody but himself to blame. Former President Barack Obama successfully concluded a deal with Iran to halt its nuclear weapons program. In his first term, Trump ripped up that agreement. According to Omani negotiators who were mediating discussions between the U.S. and Iran right up until the launch of the war, Iran had already agreed to terms of an even stronger agreement. Iran's nuclear program being a justification for the war just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

A second justification touted by Trump was to obtain freedom for the Iranian people. However, nothing in the U.S. war operation so far indicates that this is a goal. There are suggestions that the U.S. and Israel are destroying government institutions and targeting police and other local security forces. That could have the impact of making the country ungovernable, but the most likely result would be a civil war rather than a transition to an opposition-led government. Moreover, some of the accepted outcomes that Trump has mentioned directly contradict a desire to empower the Iranian masses. Again, this justification does not stand up to scrutiny.

CNN commentator Scott Jennings briefly floated the allegation that "Iran planned preemptive missile strikes against US military targets in the region, and against civilian targets as well". Virtually nobody believes this, and Democrats who have been briefed on the available intelligence say that they have seen no such suggestions. According to several media reports, Trump officials who briefed congressional staff conceded that "there was no intelligence indicating Iran was preparing to attack U.S. forces first".

Perhaps the most believable explanation is one reportedly offered by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Israeli journalist Noga Tarnopolsky posted on X that "Speaking to the Gang of Eight, Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated that the mission’s timing and goals were shaped by the fact that Israel was going to attack with or without the United States." Shortly after the war was launched, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the press that attacking Iran was "What I Have Longed To Do For 40 Years". It is entirely possible that Netanyahu forced Trump's hand.

It is not surprising that an American public that has no idea why the U.S. is suddenly in a war is not supportive of the conflict. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, only 27% of U.S. adults support the war. Meanwhile, 43% oppose it. This is astonishing given that Americans traditionally rally around the flag at the beginning of a conflict. But to prepare the public, it is necessary to have a justification for a war and, hopefully, clear-cut objectives. Trump has neither.

Now that we are in the war, what does Trump hope to accomplish? Again, he appears to have no clue. In a conversation with the New York Times, Trump suggested two contradictory outcomes. On the one hand, Trump said one possibility is "an outcome similar to what he engineered in Venezuela, in which only the top leader was removed during an American military strike and much of the rest of the government remained in place". This would be a betrayal of the Iranian protesters who took to the streets recently, as well as of those demonstrating in support of Trump in the United States. Such an outcome would do nothing for the freedom of the Iranian people. While I was writing this post, Trump called Fox News' Brent Briar and reiterated that his plan "points to Venezuela as a template," meaning removing the leader but keeping the rest of the regime in place. Those currently celebrating Trump's war will be deeply disappointed if this is what comes to pass.

Trump also told the New York Times that "he hoped Iran’s elite military forces — including hardened officers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who have held substantial influence and profited from the existing regime — would simply turn over their weapons to the Iranian populace." Trump is delusional if he thinks that this will happen. Turning over their guns to the mob would be instant death for anyone stupid enough to do it. Moreover, this suggestion directly contradicts Trump's "plan" to follow the Venezuela model.

Another suggestion has been returning Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last shah of Iran, to power. I don't know enough about Iran to know how feasible this is, but I suspect that it is not likely to be successful. It reminds me very much of the plan to install Ahmed Chalabi as the Iraqi leader when former President George W. Bush launched that war. Does anyone remember how that worked out? Spoiler, it didn't.

Both last evening and so far today, Trump has been on a whirlwind of telephone calls to the press. Trump's inability to articulate a consistent idea was captured in an X post by The Economist’s Middle East Correspondent Gregg Carlstrom. As Carlstrom wrote, Trump told the Washington Post that the aim of the war is "freedom for the people" of Iran. He told Axios that the war could end "in two or three days". He told the New York Times that the war might last "four to five weeks" and that he has "three very good choices" for who might take control of Iran. But Trump also told ABC News that all of the candidates that he had identified had been killed in the attacks. So where does that leave us?

As I started out in this post saying, Trump is not mentally competent. He should have been removed from office long ago. His neurological shortcomings were illustrated this morning during a press conference he held at the White House. Commenting on the potential length of the conflict, Trump said four to five weeks had been projected and then began rambling on about concerns that he might get bored of a long conflict. "I don't get bored. There's nothing boring about this," Trump said. But then he immediately got distracted by the curtains behind him, saying "See that nice drape? When that comes down right now you see a very, very deep hole, but in about a year and a half you're gonna see a very, very beautiful building. In fact, it looks so nice I think I'll leave it and save money on the doors. I believe it will be the most beautiful ballroom." There is no disputing that Trump is far more interested in his new ballroom than he is in the war.

The United States is really in unchartered territory. The country is led by a mentally incompetent buffoon who has no idea why he started the war or how he hopes for it to end. In the meantime, the conflict presents a number of threats. Iran is interfering with the supply of petroleum from the Gulf, which will have a major impact on gas prices. Iran could collapse into a failed state similar to Libya or Afghanistan, sites of previous U.S. interventions that left behind unstable and dangerous situations. Trump is clearly flailing at the moment, frustrated that things are not going how he would want and angry that he cannot simply bend reality to his wishes. I suspect that we are about a week away from Trump blaming the entire conflict on Netanyahu, a person that Trump will claim to have never met or of whom he has barely heard. Trump has installed an administration of incompetents, and as a result, incompetence is exactly what we are getting.