President Donald Trump. BBC/Getty.
As tensions with Iran are rising, Republicans are split on possibly joining the war on Israel's side. BBC. Trump has been trying diplomacy with Iran but has said that it was possible that America could strike Iran. Trump ran as a peace candidate and against "stupid endless wars" but has also said that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. This has split the Republican party into two factions, hawks, like Lindsey Graham in the Senate who want strikes, and doves, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson and Thomas Massie, want to stay out of the conflict. Vice President JD Vance tried to bridge the gap, acknowledging the failures of previous conflicts but said Trump might be forced to act to end the potential enrichment of nuclear material. It is unclear if the debate is reaching the base of the party as Trump's approval on sending weapons to Israel was at 79% while 89% said that Iran having nuclear weapons was a concern.
My Comment:
Given that Donald Trump has always been committed to strategic ambiguity it's not surprising that nobody is really sure what his goals in Iran are. Yesterday it seemed likely that he was just trying to force Iran to the diplomatic table, but today it seems more likely that we may join the war. But nobody is really sure outside of the White House knows and indeed, given that Trump likes to float policy proposals before enacting them, this could be the whole point of the exercise. As a reminder, Trump floated ending enforcement for immigration violations for certain businesses earlier in the month but went back on it very quickly after the backlash. He might be trying to see if there is a backlash against striking Iran.
But this post is less about what Trump is going to do and what he should do and which group of Republicans are going to get what they want. Like the post said, the hawk and dove factions are fighting each other now even though I don't think it's all clear which side is going to prevail.
I'd also say that there are a lot of people in the middle as well that aren't getting the coverage the steadfast people on either side are. I'm kind of in that category. I don't like joining wars and don't particularly support this conflict due to seeing it as a war of choice by Israel. But I also think it's very possible that Iran will give us a very valid casus belli that would make war an unfortunate reality. If Iran were to strike US targets in Iraq or try to close the Strait of Hormuz, for example, war would absolutely have to happen. You couldn't avoid it at that point.
And I'm also very critical of a lot of folks on both sides of the debate. Lindsey Graham, for example, is a warmongering idiot, that just wants to fight no matter what the situation calls for. If, God forbid, he was president, not only would we have nuked Iran by now, we also would have nuked Russia and he'd be ruling over a destroyed country.
But I also think that quite a lot of the opposition to the war is due to outright antisemitism. There is something to be said for not joining Israel's wars, and I am personally glad we got out of the Houthi situation myself. But some folks are going beyond just avoiding foreign entanglement, just because they hate jews. These voices are a lot more common on the left, but there are more than a few on the right, far right especially, but not exclusively, that have been calling Trump Zion Don for years just because he's not anti-Israel.
There's also a few people that are just "trust Trump no matter what". I'm not a fan of those voices too. Trump absolutely makes mistakes and has policies I disagree with. If I don't like his Iranian policy I will call him out on it. I think he's in a difficult position to be sure and he might not make the right call, so I do think it is fair to criticize him if I don't like what he is doing.
Of course this is a bunch of sound and fury that probably doesn't signify much of anything. If we do join the war, I am guessing it will to be just to drop a penetrator on the Fordo nuclear site, which Israel isn't going to be able to crack. If doing that and maybe striking a few missile sites and possibly Iranian leadership is all we end up doing then I think even the dove faction would shrug their shoulders and get back to work. It's not like we are going to send 1 million soldiers to occupy and rebuild Iran, which doesn't appear to be what anyone wants. Well, outside of Lindsey Graham that is.
I do have to say that this isn't a cut and dry issue. My support for any strikes on Iran would have to depend on what the casus belli is. If it's just the noise about them getting nukes, I would probably not be too supportive, we have been burned by bad intel before and I have little reason to trust the idea that they are going to have a bomb in the next few months when that has been said for basically my entire adult life.
But it might actually be the right call though, even if Iran doesn't give us a casus belli on a silver platter. Israel is an actor here too and it might be smarter to take care of the Iran situation ourselves. Like I said yesterday, Israel can't destroy all of Iran's nuclear sites, Fordo specifically, without using nuclear weapons. If the only way to stop Israel from dropping a nuke is to drop a penetrator of our own, it seems like a very easy choice.
It's also possible that Trump could lose the plot here and get us involved in a war we don't really have any interest in. If Iran does nothing but fight Israel and there is no real threat from nuclear weapons, which seems likely, I don't think the war could be justified. Focusing on ending the war through diplomacy and letting both Israel and Iran fight it out for a bit longer might be a good idea, especially since Iran seems to be on the ropes anyways. Indeed, that could be exactly what Trump is doing. He's been known to make bellicose threats before but back down as soon as a deal is made, and who is to say that isn't what he is doing here?
If it sounds like I am conflicted here, it's because I am. I don't know the right course of action here and I am not sure anyone does. This is a tough call and I am sure glad I don't have to make it. I do know that I am glad that it is Donald Trump making the call, and not Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
Finally, I do think that this is probably getting overblown in importance. The worst results of any decisions here are also dramatically the least likely. I don't think either Israel or Iran will drop nukes on each other and I also think any kind of 25 year ground war in Iran is basically impossible. Indeed, I'm still optimistic that diplomacy might still be in the cards, though a bit less optimistic than yesterday. Ultimately, I don't think us either deciding to abstain or join a war that appears to be wrapping up anyways is going to affect much in this country at least either way.
No comments:
Post a Comment