June 23, 2019

"Trump Iran Wisdom"

That's an unusual string of search terms but I wanted to know if anyone else felt the way I do about the President's abstention from "bomb, bomb, bomb... bomb, bombing Iran." There was one - Jacob Weindling who wrote last month that "The Wisdom of Trump Is One of Our Best Hopes to Avoid War With Iran. Help."

Trump is one of our best shots to avoid catastrophe here, folks. That's how far gone the Republican Party proved themselves to be with their invasion of Iraq in 2003 (which also began with about 120,000 U.S. troops). War is not just a goal, but the ideal status quo to major GOP foreign policy figures like John Bolton and Tom Cotton. Trump is not the same kind of perpetually fearful creature as Bolton and Cotton - he lives in perpetual fear of anything that could personally damage him - and Trump's false assertion that he opposed the Iraq War in 2003 is proof that Trump understands the political ramifications of a major decision like this. If John Bolton and his endless line of powerful allies have their way, we will be at war with Iran before this column publishes. President Donald J. Trump is one of our best hopes to avoid the bloody inevitability desired by at least a controlling plurality of Republicans over the last 40 years - God help us all.

Now, Weindling is no fan of President Trump. But he does appear to value peace, and holds Congressional Republicans in greater contempt than this reviled President. Weindling called the 2003 Iraq war under President Bush "disastrous" and it was authorized with the yes votes of a vast majority of Congressional Republicans at the time. But support for that war, as for attacking Iran today, is bipartisan. A majority of 2002 senate Democrats voted to authorize war on Iraq, and a majority of Washington voices today, from both parties, wanted Iran to be "reined in" through the use of military force.

But President Trump did not follow the Washington blueprint. Just as he did in 2018, in withdrawing US troops from Syria, he defied the unanimous opinion of his advisors and chose to use words instead of bombs to achieve his objectives. The simplest explanation for this is that Trump's objectives are different than those of the D.C. bureaucracy. More on them later, but Trump stated his objective the next morning:

"We're not going to have Iran have a nuclear weapon," Trump told reporters outside the White House as he prepared to depart for Camp David for meetings on the situation with Iran, which downed a US drone earlier this week.

"When they agree to that, they're going to have a wealthy country. They're going to be so happy, and I'm going to be their best friend. I hope that happens."

"Let's make Iran great again," he added.

Trump also said Iran is a great country, and Iranians are great people, many of whom are among his friends. In effect he is saying, the people of Iran are not our enemy, but Iran's government is. Iran's people do not threaten world peace, the goals of the ruling Mullahs do. The same thing could be said of North Korea, of Russia and of China. And, I am now prepared to admit, of the United States.

I cheered the invasion of Iraq in 2003. I trusted my government when it said it was defending freedom. But my government did anything but that in Libya. And did a piss poor job of it in Syria, if at all. President Eisenhower's warning about the "military industrial complex' should have included the word "government" because that is their vehicle for action. Action that destabilizes the world in an effective scheme to keep citizens fearful, and themselves in power. President Trump is the most lethal threat to that power since President Kennedy, and we saw what happened to Kennedy.

Weindling has no idea just how much wisdom President Trump possesses, even as he presaged Trump's unlikely decision this month to "avoid the bloody inevitability" in Iran. I submit that Trump's wisdom is far broader than mere self-interest, as Weindling suggests. I believe that trump really does mean it when he says "Make Iran" and North Korea, and Russia and China... and America, "Great Again." And I believe his greatest obstacle in this goal resides on U.S. soil, in Washington D.C.

But nanobrewer thinks:

Looks wise now, eh? Wait them out for an outrageous stunt (any word of fatalities at the refineries?); I hope he (we, including the Saudis) hit them hard. I'd say as many bombs as they sent, *per day*, until they recant.

Posted by: nanobrewer at September 17, 2019 12:36 AM

Don't click this. Comments (2)