I want to take exception with Marc Thiessen’s recent Washington Post column. In the column Mr. Thiessen asserts that President Trump is 14 days from victory in Iran:
Here is the bottom line: The Iran war must end with a decisive victory. And that victory can only be achieved in one of two ways: either Iran capitulates or the U.S. launches a final flurry of military strikes.
Trump has given the regime every opportunity to sue for peace, and it has rejected his overtures. It is admirable that Trump is taking his time. He understands that what he is doing is important and cannot be rushed. But it is also true that he cannot declare victory until either Iran cries uncle — or he finishes the job.
He contends that the “job will be finished” in two weeks.
It was about a century ago that the philosopher George Santayana wrote that only the dead have seen an end to war. I suspect that is particularly true of the war against Iran. I think Mr. Thiessen is making two errors.
First, who in Iran would surrender to us? How would that surrender be made to hold? At this point there does not appear to be any unitary leadership in the country. One faction might surrender but that would leave the others.
Second, I think he’s expressing a grave misunderstanding of religion. Some Iranian actors operate within a framework where martyrdom and resistance have intrinsic value. That does not make them irrational but it does mean that the cost-benefit calculus Thiessen assumes may not apply in the way he suggests.
About twenty years ago a unit of time, roughly six months, called “the Friedman unit” was proposed in jocular reaction to columnist Tom Frieman’s repeated assertions, over a multi-year period, whether a decent outcome would be forthcoming in the war in Iraq. If Mr. Thiessen continues his assertions we may need a “Thiessen unit”. There would be 12 Thiessen units in a Friedman unit.
Has Mr. Thiessen admitted that the Iraq invasion was a mistake?
Not to my knowledge. He advocates hitting the Iranian regime more and harder. He insists it will only take two weeks to bring them to their knees.
Well, the Iraqis welcomed us with “open arms”. Unfortunately, those open arms were carrying weapons, but what is a few trillion for stupid wars. We got rid of those WMDs they were hiding.
I guess Trump was wrong. Spending trillions on stupid wars is not stupid.
Was NOT fruitless.
The Iranian regime cannot now or in the near future attack the US with a nuclear tipped missile.
If we simply enforce a no fly zone over the country as we did for 12 years in Iraq we could extend that safety window for a quarter century.
So, Iran had nuclear tipped ICBMs, with targeting capabilities to strike the US. Interesting.
Question: Has Trump completely eradicate Iran’s nuclear capabilities this time? I am still waiting for the wall.
You’re smarter than that.
Intelligence and the Iranian government themselves have made clear they were actively pursuing nuclear weapons.
We can’t know what part of their rhetoric is a symptom of their Islamic Tourette’s habit and how much it actually means,
But when someone spends a lifetime threatening you with death and you see them actively pursuing weapons?
The fact that they have been reduced to a nuisance rather than a nuclear threat looks like a win to me.
@Grey Shambler
Is that the same Intelligence that assured us Saddam Hussein had WMDs and that Iraq was also pursuing nukes? What about N. Korea? Are they next?
Mr. Thiessen is correct. It will be over in two weeks, but it will be because Trump has moved on.
Iran was no threat to the US. Iran does not have ICBMs, and Iran does not have targeting capabilities. If Iran is able to obtain those, the Golden Dome will protect us.
@Grey Shambler
Since you place so much trust in government Intelligence agencies, do you believe Trump is a Russian spy? Was the “deep state” a hoax? Or, do you only trust the government when it is convenient?
Iran had enough enriched material since at least the early 2000s to build a nuke if they wanted. They are easier to build than the missiles they make. We have always been at close to zero risk of a nuclear attack by Iran.
I guess with a no fly zone we could fly the oil safely around the Strait of Hormuz. That would be a huge win for us for which Trump should get all of the credit.
Steve
I’ve been fascinated by the tenor of commentary – “isn’t it over yet? Reminds me of the Babylon Bee quip: “February 7, 1942. CNN is shocked that the Japanese have not yet surrendered.”
There is no need to be hysterical, Tasty. Iran was, and would, finalize a nuke missile, and stockpile enough missiles to vastly strengthen their Straights grip. And arguing money shows no perspective. Current expenditures are $30B, which pales in comparison to govt fraud in just MN and CA. And yet we get something for the expenditure: a non-scorched Israel, Paris and London survive, Iran doesn’t dictate $15/gal gas, and ultimately NYC doesn’t get nuked. Steve may want to believe that Iran doesn’t really want a bomb, but we aren’t in Kansas anymore. They do. And they would use it in a heartbeat.
Dave makes the salient point, and this drives all else. Islam is not a religion of peace; the religious regime is driven not by any sense of rationality, but by the Koran. Either you are with them, spreading and enforcing the word, or you are an infidel, and murder is justified. Anything is justified. There is no room in between. Sharia law governs.
Yes, there are peaceful, loving Muslims, but they are best thought of as not really practicing. Like a Catholic who uses contraception and only attends church at Christmas and Easter. The Iranian regime are the devout…………..and in control. You know nothing about Islam and the Koran if you don’t understand this.
So naive notions of negotiation, reasonability, or thinking they are crazed lunatics is wishful or self absorbed thinking. No, those guys are extreme observers of Islamist doctrine. This is why I disagree with Trumps pause. I get it. Hope to not have to inflict 20 years of rebuilding on the general population. But sadly, it didn’t work, and the Russians and Chinese are using the time to provide assistance to Iran. Break the infrastructure is pretty much where we are. The IRGC is calling the shots, and even if there were 12 factions, you are going to have to smoke them out one by one like rats. The general population is petrified right now. They only get info from state sources, who parrot US media criticism. (Leftist media have blood on their hands – all for TDS). But they are coming to realize the regime is cooked.
Iran cannot function with no income, 50-70% inflation, blown up bridges so they cannot move food or munitions, cannot make electricity, unpaid IRGC soldiers….etc. There are already reports of skirmishes by the population. The current leadership, such as it is, will be targeted mercilessly if the shooting starts again. Its a powder keg. The only open issue is who and how long. The second is easy: not long but it will be as long as it takes. Personally I think Israel and the general Iranian population (weaponized) should do the dirty work.
Our NATO allies (snicker) sure won’t. The Muslim voting base has grown too large in England, Spain, Germany and France. Islam is winning there without firing a shot. Maybe Europeans will wake up…….or not.
@Drew
Iraq had WMDs, and Trump is a Russian spy. You can believe what you want, but that ain’t rain running down your back.
I do not care about Israel. If you and Trump care so much, move there and enlist. The US has NO obligations to Israel. We do have obligations to the UK and France, but those are defensive. IRAN DOES NOT HAVE ICBMs. Are they going to Fedex the nuke?
I am tired of explaining how war works, but here it is, once again. The purpose of war is to exert your will on the enemy. Wars are won by taking, holding, and controlling ground. Control requires that the people have accepted defeat. You do not exert your will by giving the enemy good scolding and sending them to bed without supper.
War is a dirty business, and done effectively, it makes most Americans queasy.
I am not an expert on the Koran or Islam, but you seem to be. According to your analysis, Iran, as a Muslim theocracy, is recidivist. Despite a few bombs, they will continue to exhibit bad behaviour. To ensure compliance, it seems that ongoing force would be required.
I fail to understand how a little hardship will change them. Real change will require far more death and destruction than you or Trump could stomach. Netanyahu is another story.
After Iran, who is next? N. Korea?