Another Forever War?

by Ted Flint

Donald Trump ran on a campaign of ending the “forever wars” that cost America in terms of lives and money. So much for this campaign promise. Americans always bear the brunt of these types of regional conflicts. To be fair, the world is a dangerous place and sometimes leaders must make unpopular decisions which they believe will make the nation safer. But is that Trump’s justification for jointly attacking Iran? We know about Iran being a leading state sponsor of terrorism, a nation with sleeper cells in this country and around the globe, the main bankroller of Hezbollah and Hamas. But did President Trump adequately make his case to congress or to the American people for military action against Tehran?

The president has stated that he believes Iran’s desire to acquire nuclear weapons is a direct threat to the U.S. Not everyone agrees with that assessment. Depending on the poll and how the question is framed, Americans’ support or opposition to the war is divided along party lines. 55 percent of voters in a recent Quinnipiac poll said they do not believe Iran posed an “imminent military threat” to the United States. A recent Fox News poll found opinions more evenly divided: Half of registered voters approve of the U.S.-Israeli military strikes, while half are opposed. Fortunately, we have a president who doesn’t govern based on poll numbers.

A Strategic Revolution

The president understands that before dismantling the Russia-China-North Korea nexus, long the source of global instability, he must first cripple the new “axis of evil” Iran-Venezuela and Cuba. As historian Victor Davis Hanson points out, a weakened Iran means China and Russia lose their proxy in the Middle East, Russia has already lost Syria. All three nations have been supplying Iran with drones and missiles. That pipeline has been severed. Of course, this strategic move doesn’t come without challenges. President Trump is having a difficult time getting our NATO “allies,” many of whom are dependent on Persian Gulf oil, to step up and escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has been targeting those vessels, and the disruptions have forced a spike in oil and fuel prices.

The verdict is still out on whether a neutered Iran will make America safer. Attempts at regime change in that region have had less than stellar outcomes. The toppling of Basar al-Assad in Syria, Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya have not ended well, certainly not for them. Each of those nations were led by secular leaders in charge of religious and ethnically diverse populations. In Syria, radical Islamists affiliated with I.S.I.S. now oversee the purging of Christians. Warlords control Libya and radical elements have taken over Iraq, which is why it is a failed state.

Undoubtedly, the world would be a safer place without a nuclear capable Iran. But as former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned several months ago when America and Israel bombed Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities: “The enrichment of nuclear material, and the future production of nuclear weapons, will continue.” He claimed other nations would supply Tehran with nuclear missiles. Did he mean Russia, China, North Korea or even Pakistan might furnish Iran with nukes? Or was he just saber rattling?

Democrats have suddenly discovered the War Powers Act and complain the president didn’t notify congress before deciding to launch missile strikes. When Obama took out Gaddafi in Libya in 2012, I don’t recall him first consulting with congress. What about the hundreds of drone strikes Obama authorized? Estimates suggest as many as 3,852 people were killed with between 324 and 807 civilians among the dead.

One thing is certain: Iran’s revolutionary guard is a much more formidable adversary than was Venezuela. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently observed that several factors will determine whether Operation Epic Fury will be viewed as a stroke of genius or as a step into quicksand. If gas and oil prices continue to climb and the war drags on for months with no end in sight, Americans support for the effort will wane and the President’s failure to keep the nation out of forever wars will come back to haunt him.