Share This Article with a Friend!

#NeverTrump New York Times Pushing For War With Iran

Iran Oil Tankers
We could devote this newsletter to the hypocrisy on the Left, fill it every day, and never run out of material, so today’s analysis of just how hypocritical the #NeverTrump gang and the Left are on matters of national security and Iran is but a gill from a huge cask.

Since the recent attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman there has been a flurry of media appearances by former Obama administration officials claiming to know the peaceful intentions of the Ayatollahs in Teheran, a steady drum beat of social claims from the Left that the attacks were “False Flag” operations orchestrated by the US and/or Israel, and accusations that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan and of course President Donald Trump are all lying about the attacks being the work of the Iranians.

There has also been a barrage of shots across the President’s bow from congressional Democrats demanding that if President Trump plans to go to war with Iran he first come before Congress, spill all his plans in advance and give the Mullahs plenty of time to prepare for our attack.

Yesterday, contra all of that was an opinion piece in the New York Times by #NeverTrump writer Bret Stephens (who recently called Trump the worst president ever) demanding that we sink the Iranian Navy.

In an article titled “The Pirates of Teheran” Stephens pines for the good old days when President Reagan responded to Iranian misbehavior in the Gulf by sinking half the Iranian Navy:

On April 14, 1988, the U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts, a frigate, hit an Iranian naval mine while sailing in the Persian Gulf. The explosion injured 10 of her crew and nearly sank the ship. Four days later, the U.S. Navy destroyed half the Iranian fleet in a matter of hours. Iran did not molest the Navy or international shipping for many years thereafter.

The problem, however, decides Mr. Stephens, is that “The Iranians categorically deny responsibility. And the Trump administration has credibility issues, to put it mildly, which is one reason why electing a compulsive prevaricator to the presidency is dangerous to national security.”

From there Mr. Stephens speculates that there are two questions, one minor, the other much more consequential, that are raised by the Iranian attacks.

The first one, while first admitting that the Trump policy of maximum pressure is hurting the Iranian economy, posits that the Iranian actions are all about President Trump and his ego, “The most likely explanation was offered by Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who suggested that Iran’s purpose was ‘to demonstrate that Trump is a Twitter Tiger.’ It’s not a bad guess. The Iranians know that vainglory and timidity often go hand in hand,” opines Mr. Stephens.

The second question, the much more consequential one, is what are we going to do about Iran’s latest provocations? The answer Mr. Stephens suggests is – wait for it – more bluster:

What is appropriate is a new set of rules — with swift consequences if Iran chooses to break them. The Trump administration ought to declare new rules of engagement to allow the Navy to engage and destroy Iranian ships or fast boats that harass or threaten any ship, military or commercial, operating in international waters. If Tehran fails to comply, the U.S. should threaten to sink any Iranian naval ship that leaves port.

We propose an alternative scenario just as likely as the one Mr. Stephens proposes:

The Iranian theocracy, its economy under severe pressure from Trump’s policy of maximum pressure and threatened by internal dissent over its Sharia-inspired oppression of women and its inability to  deliver on the economic aspirations of its huge population of young people, decides that nothing will unite the Iranian people behind it like a little dust-up with The Great Satan – America.

The Ayatollahs further know, because the Democrats announce it on TV (and their agents of influence, such as Trita Parsi and National Iranian American Council, confirm it) that the Democrat-controlled House will never back a wider war, so if America retaliates, losing a few fast attack boats is a cheap price to pay for uniting the Iranian people behind their failed regime.

Iran’s militant theocracy is a civilization-level threat to the United States and the West, which we will have to confront and defeat one day, or be annihilated ourselves.

The questions raised when we acknowledge that reality are not the small ball queries proposed by Bret Stephens, who assumes the Ayatollah’s regime must last indefinitely. The real consequential question is: Is it better for us to defeat the Islamic Republic of Iran through the economic and cultural means that brought down the Soviet Union, or is it better for us to go to war?

The day may come when, at a time and place of our choosing, we fight a war with Iran. In our view that time is not today; continuing and increasing President Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy is the preferred alternative, not because we couldn’t win a war with Iran, but because our leaders have not made the case for the civilization-level violence and destruction necessary to do so.

Share this

fake news

The biggest "compulsive prevaricator" in America is the fake news media, and fake news is certainly the enemy of the people - ask Josef Goebbels. President Trump has done nothing to show himself precipitous in judgement or lacking in responsibility. He always reads his daily security update.