The effort to paint a threat that doesn't really exist is all too reminiscent of the Iraq disaster.
2
Supposedly in any actual war U.S. action is to be limited to air operations with ground troops to consist of Israeli and Saudi troops. Fat chance.
Sure, bring on that war with Iran. I assume Mr. Bolton will grab a rifle and lead the assault. Or is he just keen to play with his army toys and let the lower classes do the dying? Thought so.
3
Has anyone seen the "overhead images" showing sea-based missiles to verify this contention?
For those NYT readers who are not interested in a leftist echo chamber, the foreign affairs coverage was one of the few things left. Not anymore: as this article shows, bitter partisanship seeps now even in foreign policy articles.
The article is essentially a thinly veiled suggestion that the crisis brewing with Iran is nothing more than a provocation set up by the Trump Administration. The “evidence” consists of “strange similarities” with the opening acts of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, and the fact that Mr. Bolton, famous “bête noire” of the anti-imperialist lefties, is involved.
Trump being Trump, that may well be. But how about taking seriously the possibility that the Revolutionary Guards, who do not answer to the Iranian state, are taking steps to murder Americans ? How about a serious, well though, non-partisan reporting in a news article, not an editorial ?
1
The Dems would just love it if Trump got us into an unwinable war with Iran. It would carry them into 2020, and they wouldn’t even need impeachment anymore.
Do any of the endless anti-imperialist leftists commenting here realize that the Trump Administration is incompetent and dangerous, AND the Revolutionary Guards are proven extremists, dangerous to the US, to Iran and the whole world, and they might very well be plotting to murder Americans ? I mean those American military who put their life at risk in the Middle East, to allow their countrymen to live safe and confortable at home, while writing deep, noble, anti-imperialist diatribes.
Scott Fitzgerald said that being able to keep in mind at the same two apparently contradictory truths and continuing to function is the sign of a great mind. No such signs here.
1
Now we know who we were dealing with when we made that bad nuclear deal. Now they are showing their true colors.
1
There is no possibility of a meaningful regime change in Iran. Let me quote The Who: Meet the old boss, same as the old boss. As for any US invasion, yes, the Iranian regular army is no match for the US military, but then there will be seven or eight years of devastating insurgency. I assume that rings a bell to everyone but that trigger-happy cowboy, Bolten.
4
We need regime change here in the US.
9
The two reasons for Trump instituted a fight with Iran at this time is:first Trump is insanely jealous of any thing Obama, second the House Intelligence committee is demanding to see the intelligence report connected with the Special Prosecutor's Report.
5
Attacking Iran would be the worst mistake this country might ever make, and it can solve nothing. What is the plan here? Are we going to invade the country, drop bombs on their cities, sink their ships, depose their leaders?
The Iraq war costs more than $3 trillion dollars, and hundreds of thousands of lives, according to a Harvard study by Linda Bilmes and Joseph Stiglitz. By contrast, Iran has almost three times the population, and its military strength is ranked thirteenth in the world. Does our government want to engage in a war with Iran, thinking that we can just pound them into submission?
I repeat the question to our president, Mr. Bolton, and Mr. Pompeo: What is the plan?
8
Why would anyone believe anything the Trump administration says about anything?
9
With our drifting foreign policy, does it seem that the Sunni Saudis would love for us to be their proxy against Iran Shias? Does one really believe that it had to be Iranians fiddling with three oil tankers, one of which had a hole bored in its hull above the water line without anyone onboard ever knowing? After Cheney does one really buy missiles in small Iranian paramilitary boats? Bolton's feelings about Iran are well known. It seems obvious that since POTUS dropped out of the Iranian nuclear deal we have been poking the Iranians with an ever increasingly sharp stick. It would seem that diplomacy, commerce, and engagement is a better way, but as then Sec. of State Albright said what is the use of a huge military if you cannot use it. That is the problem?
4
Agree, this is another hyped and misguided decision.
Odd that John Bolton and Trump did not have such a reaction to North Korea's actual missile launches.
Trump continues to convince voters that he is unfit to govern.
9
Whew, luckily us Americans can rest assured Trump, Bolton and company will have serious criminal consequences in going to war with Iran just like the politicians that got us into Vietnam in the 60's and the Iraq war in the 90's.
They are all behind bars for war crimes, right?
6
The article states that " intelligence officials declassified a photograph of one of the small boats, called dhows, carrying what was described as a functional Iranian missile."
Why isn't this photograph part of the article? Why do we have 3 meaningless photographs of people we have seen too many times in photographs already? Please focus on being a great NEWS paper and not personality, "who said what" newspaper.
6
"As military officials struggled to show that the threat from Iran was growing, intelligence officials declassified a photograph of one of the small boats, called dhows, carrying what was described as a functional Iranian missile."
Seriously...dhows? I've seen dhows in the Gulf. These are traditional small wooden lumbering boats, used by fishermen. So unstable I'd be hesitant to step in one.
And they won't release the photographs? This not journalism. This is regurgitating what unnamed "officials" have said. We've seen this bad movie before...and one of its protagonists was called Judith Miller.
Do a better job and forage for the truth.
3
When the Times and other media routinely publish stories that expressly rely on anonymous sources that are not authorized to make the disclosures that form the foundation of the stories, the Times sends an interesting message - apart from the question of the veracity of the story - as to collaboration with persons whose very acts undercut their obligations. Perhaps the Times should accompany each such reliance with a link to allow readers to see the editorial judgement behind the decision to engage in the particular collaboration with the leaker.
Speaking as a journalist, I really hope the news media - NYT included - do a better job this time than in the run-up to the Iraq War. That means being skeptical almost to the point of cynical as the administration makes its case and remembering at all times: They want a war! The mindless credulity last time is a major reason why the US news media face such a huge trust deficit with the public.
1
Where are the photographs? Where is the intelligence? No one should believe this government about anything without incontrovertible evidence, much less as a justification for armed conflict.
6
When will the Times and unwitting Americans ever get it? The U.S. intelligence bureaucracy is NOT an objective source of facts--the whole purpose of its existence is to justify the decisions of paranoid warmongers like Bolton to launch preemptive wars.
Yet the Times treats intelligence reports like te gold standard by publishing front page stories such as this-filled with speculative reports by unnamed sources and no hard investigative reporting.
1
NYT: you are doing it again: assuming the role of intelligence officers and framing indirectly acquired material as first hand reporting. Please stop.
2
American foreign policy these days:
From the Trumpists: If the tensions with Russia are going up, it’s just a plot concocted by the left, in their witch hunt for non-existent “collusion”.
From the anti-imperialist far left: if the tensions with Iran go up, it’s not because of the proven terrorists of the Revolutionary Guards, but a plot from the wretched Trump Administration, in cahots with neo-cons.
Pure patriotism on both sides.
1
Anybody out there remember the Gulf of Tonkin? George Santayana wants to know.
3
"...the photographs could indicate that Iran is preparing to attack United States forces..."
Well, if someone were going to shoot at my boat, then I'd move my boat. Come on guys, who leans into a punch?
In other news, I feel like I've been led down this garden path before.
3
Once again, the NY Times is aiding and abetting the prospect of war in the Middle East by promoting ridiculously weak evidence of a threat to our country conjured by chickenhawks. The Times apologized for its shameful coverage (and gullibility) in the invasion of Iraq. And yet, here they are, with barely any skepticism, acting as drummer boys for more "shock and awe." It's disgusting.
11
@Umberto Thank you for your comment. I forwarded it and others like it to our editors. We hear your concern and take it seriously. Our reporters and editors have approached the Trump administration's claims about Iran's plans with extreme skepticism. For instance, in this story, we highlight doubts about the intelligence by lawmakers and foreign allies. We also describe the intelligence, who has been granted access to it and who has not. On Tuesday, we further outlined our allies' skepticism about the intelligence: https://nyti.ms/2HCUM9t. We also take great care in who we quote regarding intelligence: https://nyti.ms/2SK2uWx. And when sources insist on anonymity, we adhere to strict editorial precautions: https://nyti.ms/2QyDNso. I hope this helps. Thank you for reading.
5
The NYT has a chance to redeem itself after the disgraceful credulity re WMD that drew us into the Iraq war. I am convinced that the intelligence analysts privy to good information on Iranian thinking would understand that Iran has nothing to gain by attacking the US. This situation is the security dilemma or spiral effect in action: defensive preparations are being misconstrued as potentially offensive plans, provoking US countermeasures and then, in all likelihood, eliciting further defensive buildup by Iran. The rest of the world watches with horror as the unthinkable
becomes inevitable.
2
“The Pentagon has not released the photograph. On its own, two American officials said, the photograph was not compelling enough to convince the American public and lawmakers, or foreign allies, of the new Iranian threat.”
Not quite “deja vu all over again,” and I could be wrong, but I wonder if 1) the “new intelligence” was provided by the White House, and 2) the Iraqi aluminum tubes used by Cheney and W as components for atomic WMDs have been reproduced at a larger scale and are now being “randomly” paraded on dhows, to be photographed by satellites and publicized as ad-hoc “evidence” of missiles. All that remains is for a VP staffer to “leak” a bit of “proof” to newspapers, and then cite the published article as definitive justification for Bolton, et. al., to whatever they desire as preemptive action or “retaliation” for acts perpetrated by Saudis. Perhaps a high-ranking White House staffer will soon “discover” an Iranian emblem (or the Mexican flag?) painted on the tubes.
The headline talks about "missile photos". Show the missile photos, not stock photos of politicians.
Of course, we know that the politicians will be what actually starts the war, not the missiles.
1
Amazing flip-flop! First we heard that US intelligence folks were stupid, misled, out-of-touch with reality, and prone to spewing FAKE NEWS. Now these same folks are Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent. Which Trump are we to believe? The lying one? Or the fibbing one? Oh, they both lie and they both fib - and neither is - by any stretch of imagination - a Boy Scout. Not even a Tenderfoot But what an an accomplished flip-flopper!
1
Sounds like, “Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
4
Selective Intelligence shall we?
Russian election intervention verified by every US Intelligence Agency. Denied by Trump.
Trump then chooses to take action when these same agencies when the Iranians put a missile in an aluminum John-boat.
God help us all.
1
Being in Florida, I was a little confused when I read Iranian missile threat in the Gulf. So I read the article. The "threat" is in the Persian Gulf, not the Gulf I use when there is no red tide. Iranian boats are in Iranian waters, and have cheap missiles loaded, tough!
You guys running NY Times have no shame. It seems like being used like this again, by the same gang of people who made a mountain out of molehill, and got us into Iraq wasn't enough. Maybe you folks are an integrated part of the so called cabal. Who knows. But, please stop playing the game, and focus on the big picture. None of this was bound to happen if Trump hadn't withdrawn from the Iranian nuclear agreement, for which Netanyahu took credit. Focus on him. If you think Americans aren't waking up to the fact that US policy in the middle east is being decided in Israel, think again.
2
Trump and Bolton are reacting to perceived threats from Iran in the exact opposite way than what we should be doing. We should be taking advantage of the fact that we have greatly reduced our dependence on Middle East oil by pulling forces OUT of the region, rather than sending more in. We should be minimizing any military forces in the region that do not have a direct role in dealing with independent terrorist organizations. We can keep forces in the Mediterranean to support Israel and to uphold NATO obligations with respect to Turkey.
Beyond that, the less military we have in the area the better. We should get out of Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. We should pull our military out of all the bases in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region. What purpose do they serve? They were put there to protect the flow of oil. Now they just serve as provocation to the people in the region who (for many good reasons) don't like us. They represent targets that, if attacked, would likely draw us into a war with no upside.
Our military in the Middle East is one of the biggest risk generators for war and instability in the region, right up there with Sunni-Shiite hatred, abysmal governance, and terrible economic conditions. None of which is improved by our sword-rattling presence.
The irritation our military causes in the region could be cut way back. And think of all the money we could save!
If only Trump weren't using the military as an arm of his re-election campaign...
Does this sound familiar:
"Links to the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11" = Lie
"Weapons of Mass Destruction" = Lie
"Mobile chemical weapons labs" = Lie
"Nuclear weapons program" = Lie
"Rape rooms" = Lie (Unless you consider the ones we set-up there)
For the GOP, every dead American GI's means more profit for them and their friends at Halliburton, KBR, Erik Prince, etc, etc, etc.
Remind me again about who and what is the greatest single threat to the American people in the world today?
8
Let us not forget the solemn lies about Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out of Kuwaiti incubators! My favorite was the lie that the Guatemalans were building a Soviet submarine base in a river! Once the US overthrew the government the "submarine base" was never heard from again. How do we know the US govt. is lying? ... everything they say.
3
Missile boats. Just how stupid do the warmongers take the world for? Iran's already armed sufficiently to close the strait from land-based weapons systems. These dinghies aren't going to change anything. It's just evidence that there's a campaign going already. The decision for war has already been made, they're just selling it to the goons who voted republican and caused this debacle in the first place.
6
Where is Drogon when you need him? He did a pretty good job of destroying King's Landing. If you want to easily destroy Iran, just get yourselves a Dragon. Care and feeding are necessary. But he could save us a lot of money and US lives.
Remember George W's infamous quote - 'fool me once, shame on you - fool me...you can't get fooled again'?
And here we go again... shame on Trump, with Bolton at his side, for trying the same trick, different actors. And shame on the American people if we let them fool us again.
4
We are directly involved in the real life game of "Risk" now, if this idiocy goes off. It will come home to us. Weapons of mass destruction are not just explosive ones. See... https://warontherocks.com/2019/05/countering-wmd-in-the-digital-age-breaking-down-bureaucratic-silos-in-a-brave-new-world/
1
Now you see why Iran needs a nuclear deterrent!
An American navy carrier battle group in the Persian Gulf is as much provocation as a fleet of Iranian navy missile destroyers in Long Island Sound would be.
5
someone should check to see how many photoshop experts have recently been hired by this administration.
I don't for a minute believe these are authentic.
3
Trump chose to believe Putin's denial that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election rather than the well documented consensus of US intelligence agencies.
He repeatedly throws doubt on the integrity of our intelligence and law enforcement personnel.
Now his foolish war mongers cite "intelligence reports" and he orders fleets and bombers to Iran's borders.
Bolton and Pompeo and Bibi and MBS are leading Trump by the nose using cherry picked "intelligence".
Cui bono? That bizarre cabal of weapons dealers, evangelists, zionists, Saudis, and Russian irredentists will benefit.
Who is hurt? Everyone else.
7
Remember the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.
2
The removal of American embassy and consular personnel from Iraq is nothing more than one of several thinly-veiled moves to justify a pre-determined decision to wage war against Iran.
We are witnessing the emerging insanity of Iraq v2.0 redux while the catastrophe of v1.0 still bedevils the world. It is ironic that Mike Pompeo cites "new intelligence" to "demonstrate new threats" by Iran toward the United States. It was only a short time ago when US intelligence was roundly ridiculed by president and candidate Trump when it raised well-founded warnings about Russian meddling in our electoral system.
If we believed in the presumed incompetence of the US intelligence community when Trump was dismissing it vis-a-vis Russian meddling, why should we believe it now? More to the point, why should we believe anything out of an Administration whose serial mendacity now tops more than 10,000 lies?
We've already seen this movie. It hasn't even ended yet but it has gone very badly since Vice-president Dick Cheney promised that Iraqis would greet our military in 2003 with candy and roses.
3
"We were provoked when the owner of the house tried to prevent us from throwing a brick threw their window!"
4
Concern about Iran supposedly loading missiles onto small boats is absolutely farcical. The US has waged ruinous economic war against Iran, has reneged on its treaty obligations, has armed and funded Iran's enemies, has invaded its neighbors, retains numerous military bases that encircle Iran, has moved an aircraft carrier and strike group to the Persian Gulf, and has moved potentially nuclear-armed B-52 bombers to neighboring Qatar. Iran has an unequivocal right to self defense, to guard against the extreme aggression being directed at it by the US, and to take measures to deter a possible invasion.
It is vital that the US media be a critical voice at times of tension and brinkmanship, like now, not simply propagate the Pentagon's propaganda.
5
Why do we have to do Saudi Arabia's dirty work? We don't need either country's oil, especially if we wise up and diversify our power grid with more renewable alternatives (ecological concerns aside - it just makes sense from a long term economic standpoint). Let oil become irrelevant and see how long the US stays in the Middle East.
4
We're the toughest country in the history of countries... it's high time we act like we can take a punch instead of running around afraid someone might hit us.
Isn't it about time to have an armed conflict. They is an election coming up, and the stock market is going down. The White house staff look like they are having fun.
3
We are a bellicose, irrational, and hostile nation looking for a war abroad to justify the continued erosion of human rights, financial health and democratic norms at home. Shame on us all for letting this happen.
4
The political party that just banned all abortions in Alabama because, "All like is precious", wants to go into another Middle-Eastern nation, without cause, based on groundless "provocations", to murder another 150,000+ innocent men, women, and children. Apparently, this is because no one in the GOP actually remembers the Iraq War anymore, "It was so long ago!", they only remember Benghazi. A disaster that resulted in .0004% of the number of deaths in Iraq, yet, somehow, for them, was 1,000 times worse.
John Bolton is a pariah. Always has been, always will be. And he brings out the absolute worst in any President he advises.
Frankly, I'd be all for a war in Iran, as long as "Bone Spur" Trump and "Never Seen Action" Bolton were going to be the first sets of boots on the ground in the Militarized Zone.
Neither of these men who are trying to take this country into another colossal military disaster could win a fight against a paper bag if their lives depended on it.
4
Oh dear, those weapons of mass destruction again. Are we going to waste thousands more American lives looking for them? Iran is a far more formidable opponent than Iraq, and what would we gain? It's kind of amusing (if it weren't so tragic) -- you send warships into their territory halfway around the world and then complain that they are defending themselves.
4
This sounds familiar to 2003. Regime change, made up intelligence and threats. When has using our military might ever worked out as planned? Probably not since WWII...
3
A lot of quid pro quo between Trump, Netanyahu, and the Saudi Crown Prince. Apparently Trump’s next favor will be to wage a proxy war for them against Iran.
3
When both Trump and Bolton gear up for combat to fight along the others soldiers in Iran they will have my complete 100% support.
Until then what's the latest on:
1)The public unedited Mueller Report
2)Last 6 years or more of Trump's tax returns
3)Impeachment proceeding timeline.
3
Readers should keep in mind: Iran was judged a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984, under Reagan, and that designation affirmed by every succeeding president, Republican and Democrat, include Obama. I don't recall the Left castigating the latter for not making nice with this evil regime.
That we should take military precautions, in light of today's Iran and the damage only they could have inflicted on three non-military ships bearing oil from other nations is only common sense. Ignoring the need to be prepared would be tantamount to treason.
1
On paper what you are saying sounds good, but we have always been too tight with Saudi Arabia, and SA has always been in contention with Iran. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think there are a lot of factors swinging on both sides.
1
On April 22, 2019, CNBC reported that the US has decided “to bring Iran’s oil exports to zero, denying the regime its principal source of revenue.”
On May 6, 2019, it was reported, “The US has deployed an aircraft carrier to the Middle East to send a "clear and unmistakable message" to Iran.”
Isn’t it ironic that the US is clearly provoking Iran and doing everything possible to not only to collectively punish the Iran people, but also to goad Iran into an unnecessary devastating war.
Regarding the missiles on the Iranian small boats anchored in their own ports, Iran has every right to prepare for its own defense by any means possible. In this context, the US sends war planes and aircraft carrier nearly 10,000 nautical miles away from its east coast to the doorstep of Iran in order to provoke Iran into a war and/or stop Iranian oil tankers from leaving Iran which illegal and against the international and yet, expects Iran not to defend itself. Americans and the world must stop this arrogant US bullying of smaller nations.
2
The US gov't has only a peripheral interest in the middle east. US businesses and the industrial military complex has lots.
however, Trump is cozy with Netanyahu who has a King David complex and wants to use the US as a proxy for his own ambitions to militarily force a solution to the Palestinian issue. As for Putin, he just wants to see the US waste more power and show more reasons why the US is not a good ally. Russia gets higher oil prices and more customers. If countries are choosing sides, who would want to be in our camp.
Even if Iran attacks US forces, the loss of life is small compared to what it would be if we allowed ourselves to be provoked into war. Hardly a good reason to sacrifice lives when our sovereignty is not threatened, yet for decades we persist in persecuting Iran and meddling in their affairs.
For once, step back to see the complete picture, not just the US point of view.
2
Another case of "I know what I want to do and will assemble information - pretending they are facts - to do it". This non-scientific "policy process" has led us to several wars, a growing deficit, and the deaths of many - usually those unrelated to the "policy" process. Also curious why the most bellicose are the least likely to put themselves in harm's way.
2
Except the policies are in the hands of man who has no affinity with reality and a man who thinks that all nations exist in some state of warfare.
1
We must avoid war at all costs. However, we must also maintain our safety and interests. Reports of pipelines being cut and missiles in the Persian Gulf, as well as attacks on ships that show they were rammed have cropped up. It would be incumbent on our government to make a statement that we are NOT interested in going to war, just as we are not tolerant of a build up of weapons in the Gulf. Iran never intended to honor the pact made with Obama and other countries, but that doesn't mean we should instigate by making the first move. It doesn't sound like we have, but then news on this has been very partisan so far.
@Ma
Sorry, not true.
Iran is actually meeting the terms of the nuclear deal hammered out in Switzerland two years ago by the United States-led P5+1 Group (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, United States, plus Germany). According to the United Nations’ nuclear watch dog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran shipped nearly its entire fissionable stockpile to Russia, over 12 tons of enriched uranium that could have been used to make uranium atomic bombs. Iran then mothballed thousands of centrifuges necessary to enrich uranium for this type of atomic weapon.
The Deal has to be recertified by the US Pres. every 90 days by declaring that Iran is in compliance. We won’t know if and when they stop complying because we will have removed ourselves from the process.
The other countries involved, including the UN say Iran is still in compliance.
It is the US that broke the treaty. Once again.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/10/17/the-iran-nuclear-deal-without-the-united-states/#626fae113c94
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/05/09/fact-checking-president-trumps-reasons-for-leaving-the-iran-nuclear-deal/
4
I think that the administration should reconsider a reinstatement of a draft, to include both men and women. All Americans have a stake in the decisions made by out elected leaders, and all Americans should be requited to step up to the plate when it comes to foreign adventures. An all volunteer military allows the administration to simply ignore the larger populace.
If this story demonstrates anyting, then it is the utter stupidity, fear-mongering, and trigger-happiness of some of the high-ranking officials involved. Their positions are clearly way above their intelligence level. They are pictured in the article. Some with an interesting take on facial hair but in line with the turbid appearance of that particular individual.
3
I guess it’s our god against theirs? What a mess.
4
Are we allowed to see this evidence?
Did the NYTimes see the evidence or are they just implicitly trusting the Pentagon as they did with Iraq?
Can we at least get Jared or Ivanka to make a yellow cake presentation to the UN?
Asking for a friend.
3
these articles on iran are click bait - they are substituting for the collusion stories, although a guess is a large fraction of the democratic party base thinks trump just started a war with Iran by viewing these type of headlines, skimming an article, absorbing out of context and by reinforcement due to a comment by N Pelosi that congress did not declare war. - all of this is news processing similar to the collusion stories
1
@sh
Which is of course exactly what Trump wanted in the first place.
That being said, the fact that he hired the architect of the Iraq war and its massive, deceitful propaganda, John Bolton, as his chief national security adviser guarantees that it's war rather than security that will sooner or later be the current administration's official foreign policy, and THAT should make any patriot shiver.
2
@Ana Luisa
Here are some points. 1. Bolton is NOT the architect of the Iraq war. Those in power believed their intelligence information at the time and responded. 2. The new Iran bluster stories have little content. These only seem to be published in the left leaning news media like the Nytimes and are being amplified by democratic politicians. Check Fox (right) or WSJ (centrist), - no such pitches are presented there. The Nytimes publishes this nonsense because it attracts an audience that will react by generating lots of advertisement clicks and $$$$ - the role of click bait. 3. Trump seems to gain in political standing when the democrats monkey him - check the daily tracking polls. The more the monkeying is reflected in higher approval of Trump
Those who vilified Bush for relying on the intel to start Iraq war are now vilifying trump for ignoring that intel.
LOL. people are such partisan hacks. No intellectual honesty. Zero.
1
One thing that should scare every sane person in the world when thinking about war with Iran is that the current *president of the United States, while a candidate, asked multiple times 'if we have nuclear weapons, why can't we use them?'
Let that sink in.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-nukes-msnbcs-joe-scarborough-reports.html
2
We have a president who has lied, according to the Washington Post, over 10,000 times in the last two years.
And he expects anyone with a brain to believe him? And Pompeo and Bolton? Yeah, those are trustworthy characters.
No one can trust a liar. This man is not a deal-maker. He is a con artist who knows only how to grift and lie.
I hope not one person - American or Iranian - dies because of these horrible men in our government.
6
A president who lost the popular vote in his first election, facing a tough re-election, well aware that voters forget about tax cuts but are reluctant to change horses in the middle of a war and goaded on by hawkish advisers and highly suspect intelligence about the nefarious plans of an evil middle eastern regime. You would think that if they are releasing a new movie with the same plot, they could at least be clever enough to change the name of the Evil Empire by more than one letter.
1
The Democrats have lost me on this one. Everything is political to them coming into the elections. They seem more committed to opposing "anything Trump" than protecting the country.
1
@LTJ-It was Trump that pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal against the advice and requests of our allies. It was Trump that has ratcheted up sanctions against Iran, against the advice and requests of our allies. It is the Trump's team that has been talking about regime change in Iran for decades even though Iran has never posed a threat to the U.S. And the Democrats have lost you? Good riddance.
3
@LTJ
You were lost long before the democrats even entered your reasoning.
We have to protect our country FROM Trump.
Protecting which country? Iran is no threat to the US. Is it really that hard for you to say “Israel”?
1
Why should anyone trust this national security team? These are the same people that brought us the fake intel to start a war in Iraq. Only this time it’s hundreds of times more dangerous. Unlike Iraq, Iran actually has a military force capable of fighting back. The destruction and loss of life will rival Vietnam, but that’s never been a concern of blow it up Bolton. We need a good war now and again, gives people something to rally around, and I guess the caravan hoopla has petered out.
3
According to the NYT, there are currently 29 investigations carried out by Federal, state and congressional authorities, into Mr. Trump’s businesses, campaign, inauguration and presidency. And he is clearly worried of the amount of sleaze these investigations can reveal.
He must have figured that after leaving the office, in the worst-case scenario, he could end up behind bars. So, as he has done throughout his life, he has looked around seeking for some kind of a deal that can get him out of this mess.
Going to war against Iran seems to be the key element of the deal that Mr. Trump is presently preparing. Basically, he is trying to counter Democrats' threat of investigating his financial affairs and possible impeachment with his own threat of starting a major war.
Actually, Mr. Trump calculations make sense! If Democrats push for investigation and impeachment, he will order bombing Iranian cities. That will make Saudis and Mr. Netanyahu very happy, which means he will be princely rewarded by them once he is out of office. If Democrats do not want him to start the war, they need to make a concession to him. And the only acceptable concession is dropping all their investigations and possible impeachment.
Ironically, whichever this deal goes, Mr. Trump will come out a winner. Of course, loss of thousands US soldiers and how the US appear to the rest of the world are his least concern. He leaves that to Democrats to contemplate!
1
Iran loading outdated missiles onto boats that will operate off their coastline, while US has a carrier battle group thousands of miles away from home and at Iran’s door step.
Yes, yes...Iran’s aggression.
1
And why would we trust any of these guys? One of them still thinks the Iraq invasion was legitimate and a good idea. They are so lest trustworthy even than Bush/Cheney turned out to be. And Rumsfeld and Cheney removed Congressional oversight by moving intelligence from the CIA to the DoD.
One might dare to use the term 'fake intelligence,' but there's always a risk Trump would seize the opportunity to cheapen yet another term and render it meaningless, as he has done with so many others: Greatness, fake news, witch hunt, border security, free speech, swamp, wall . . .
1
Just heard on NPR that Britain's defense minister concurs with Trump that Iranians have escalated threats.
1
@PaulB67
How convenient. The same two governments that overthrew Mossadegh 66 years ago and installed the reviled Shah. Kowtowing to the US certainly worked well for Tony Blair, didn't it?
2
On the southern border, healthcare and foreign policy, Trump was the only GOP primary candidate to run against the GOP establishment, and many people believed he was serious (including me, for a couple of months).
As soon as he entered the WH, however, he started to pack his cabinet with some incompetent criminals that Mueller in the meanwhile jailed, and then with TYPICAL GOPe people/millionaires, who systematically did the exact opposite of what Trump had run on.
Nothing is as emblematic for this 100% flip-flop as his hiring of Bolton, the very architect of the Iraq war and its false propaganda, whereas I will never forget how during the primary debates Trump was the only one who had the guts to criticize Bush for the Iraq war and "tell it like it is", including calling it based on a horrible lie.
On healthcare he did the exact same thing: he ran on repealing Obamacare with a plan that would do the opposite of what the GOP had been voting for 50 times already, and that would instead cover even more Americans, at even lower costs than Obamacare.
As soon as he entered the WH, he started to enthusiastically support the most GOPe HC bill out there, Ryancare, which would have destroyed the access to health insurance for a whopping 30 million Americans all while strongly accelerating cost increases once again.
And now this.
This is the weakest president ever, when you compare his signature campaign promises to his actual record - caused by the fact that he hires the worst..
3
Curious how any U.S. intelligence gleaned that supports Trump is credible and any that doesn’t is a product of the evil deep state.
Will we take their oil before we leave?
It's funny how having a missile onboard is an urgent threat while actually firing several is "not there yet". Having nukes in your pocket makes all the difference, I guess. No wonder North Korea is holding on to their nukes.
“The Pentagon has not released the photograph. On its own, two American officials said, the photograph was not compelling enough to convince the American public and lawmakers, or foreign allies, of the new Iranian threat. But releasing other supporting images could compromise secret sources and methods of collecting intelligence, the officials said.”
Sounds eerily similar to the reason President Bonespur gave for not releasing his taxes: He was under audit. Of course that was a boldfaced LIE as demonstrated by his throwing dozens of lawyers in the breech to keep his tax records safe from a legal request from Congress.
Same as it ever was. Gee... I wonder if this has anything to do with Iran having the 4th largest oil reserve in the world?
4
Here we go again. Bad poll numbers chickenhawks oil = war. Does anyone honestly believe that the Iranians want to start a war with the US? This is another page from the Republican playbook.
9
We don’t really know what other intelligence may have sparked the warnings.
Meanwhile, Saudi pipelines have been attacked and damaged by drones.
Several Ships have been attacked.
Coincidence?
Iran is freakin out and lashing out as sanctions work.
They’ve been finding militia and terrorists and sowing seeds of havoc.
Deterrent is necessary
2
@Joe Yoh
In other words, first we destroy their economy and then we call them retaliating "freaking out" and use it as an excuse to increase our threats even more (knowing that their military is peanuts compared to ours).
Quite a peace and denuclearization plan, isn't it?
Because THAT is what is necessary.
What Trump has shown in the way he deals with North-Korea, however, is that our threats to invade only end once a small country manages to acquire nuclear weapons.
Sooner or later, he will HAVE to start negotiating though, if he wants less rather than more violence.
Problem: he couldn't even obtain his own two signature campaign promises (wall, HC) from his own GOP Congress, so he seems to be incredibly bad at negotiating.
Conclusion: nothing good will come from this at all.
2
@Joe Yoh
If the sanctions are "working" why are we marching into another war?
3
When did ordered departure of non essential personnel become partial evacuation? Why? Is this NYT or State Dept. language?
2
Tonkin Gulf redux ?
8
@Tim Berry: Don't forget "Remember the Maine", our excuse to invade Cuba.
2
More warmongering by people who have no loved ones in the battle.
12
@Micah G: And warmongers who want to make money.
3
Bolton Pompeo Trump vs Iran...
What could go wrong?
6
The Republicans love to fight wars with other people's children.
17
Wag the dog.
2
Read in the Washington Post that Mr. Trump would rather talk with Iran’s leadership than engage in a war with them, he wants a deal. Didn’t we have a deal that cost blood, sweat and tears to negotiate with our allies, China and Russia? Why did the current Administration pull out of it? Pressure from Israel’s Netanyahu? Another one of those cancelled Obama achievement? Plain stupidity? All of the above?
8
USA went into Iraq looking for WMD.
They didn’t even find a fire cracker.
5
They better have a picture of the Ayatollah literally loading a missile while holding a file marked “attack plan for America” if this most untrustworthy administration wants anyone to believe them, and even then I wouldn’t be sure.
This is why you don’t lie to your citizens a dozen times a day everyday for two years. Or side up with autocratic regional powers hell bent on provoking a shooting war the region’s other autocratic power.
I hope and pray the republican senate is ready to assert their power because, frankly, the sanity and rationality feels of this admin feels so uncertain lately that I started putting together a bug out bag this evening.
3
Who’s doing the final vetting, Dick Chaney? He did so well on Iraq.........
6
I don't think the vast majority of Americans are going to be that impressed with yet another trumped up 'threat', arriving about the same time as a notorious war hawk to defense, seemingly designed to boost and unpopular President's standing before re-election.
The armed forces are not a Republican Campaign arm, and the men and women who put their lives on the line are not Donald Trump or John Bolton's toys.
5
I do not believe or trust Trump and his administration to be honest/truthful about this matter. Or any other issue for that matter. Their "alternate facts" are flat out lies for those too stupid to know or want to know the difference! 2020 election can't come soon enough to get rid of these lying, self serving, war mongering people...
6
Anyone here remember the Tonkin Gulf incident?
8
Iran is continuing it "usual support" to Arab militias according to US Government Officials. Really? Who are these officials? As evidenced by what? Why would a Persian Nation, and Shiite Muslims across the Middle East, be supporting the very people who seek their extinction?
Although it's absolutely certain that much of what the administration is saying here is a lie (as always with Bolton and now Trump), it IS true though that Iran supports Arab militias.
They support (= send in money and weapons) Hamas in Gaza, for instance, and do so for decades already, even though Hamas is Sunnite. They do so because Hamas attacks Israel, and they see Israel as their most dangerous local enemy (for a good reason, as history has shown).
They also are close to militias inside Syria who fight against Saudi-Arabia supported militias.
Saudi Arabia opposes Assad (not a Sunni himself), and Iran opposes both ISIS and Saudi Arabia, so they don't want to see Assad gone and Saudi Arabia taking over one of its main neighboring countries.
So yes, part of the military support of Iran goes to Shiites in the region (certain militias inside Iraq for instance, and Hezbollah in Lebanon), but they also don't want US allies to increase their political and military influence, which is why they support certain Sunni anti-ISIS and anti-US allies too.
The most important thing, for GOP Evangelicals and Israeli (far-)right wing politicians such as Bibi, is that Iran supports Hamas (= Arabs) in Gaza.
The irony is that it's precisely the Iraq war that has strongly increased Iran's influence on and collaboration with anti-US Sunnites in the region (before the war, Iran was almost absent in Iraq, and much less present in Syria than it is today). So GOP strategies don't work...
@Matt LeBrun Perhaps you have not read anything on this issue in many years. Otherwise you would not make such an obviously false comment.
Donald Trump, low-life con man is in charge of our country. What did we think was going to happen? Our megalomaniac president and his choice, Bolton, are not capable of interpreting intelligence in an intelligent way. They will use whatever they can find to instigate what they already have in mind, which is whatever will help donnie trump, not America.
3
I have deployed to the AG and Gulf of Oman many times as civilian captain (master) of U.S. Naval logistics ships. I was never a hero, but I went where I was sent and did what I was told. I personally would consider fully assembled missiles on boats in the AG and/or GOO to be a matter of great concern.
This is not a chest-beating American Imperialist argument. Personally for merchant mariners, and for international trade generally, freedom of navigation is among the longest standing principles of international law. In this case there is context: the "tanker war" of the 1980's in which Iran was an active participant. Off topic but still relevant are China's similarly threatening conduct in the South China Sea.
1
are we placing bets on what's actually going on? my first thought is mbs placed the weapons, then contacted the USA to let them know what was going on. mostly because this seems to through for this administration, and I have serious doubts that its real.
Here we go again with the GOP administration manipulating intelligence to suit their agenda. In the words of that other articulate president,
“Fool me once, ...shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.” —George W. Bush
1
This clown car of a show is even worse than the Bush/Cheney one. In Bush/Cheney there was some iffy intelligence that they were able to manipulate to make their cases that Saddam had WMD's and was trying to buy yellow cake uranium from Niger.
This current charade is being put together on the fly with the help of the Saudi's and some staged photographs. Our allies find it laughable. Our intelligence community finds it laughable. But all we will here is silence and then the sounds of guns. Nobody is going to stop them and innocent Iranians are going to die. The United States has become mean thugs.
3
Good luck starting a war against Iran. You will be alone in the fight, and the rest of the world (save, perhaps, sycophantic Israel) will judge your actions harshly.
3
After the lies told about Iraq (which included photographs!) are we really going to fall for it again with a different country??
If we do, maybe we actually deserve an idiot like Trump.
3
As this disturbing news reports:
"That is the view of John R. Bolton, President Trump’s hard-line national security adviser, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo."
And we all know the credibility of *these* people...
Well, because there was actually no aggressive act on the part of Iran, all of this trump administration fuss will come to naught. But it serves to take away the news cycle's attention on trump's other outrageous activities. Trump is the master of message control.
The problem for the people in his administration is that it is *only* trump who is the master of message control.
When we got stuck in the Iraq War, both Bush and Cheney had avoided service in the Vietnam War, as had trump (W got the National Guard post that wasn't sent to Vietnam. Young men in my neighborhood were trying to get posts like that). Now the draft avoider trump could induce another exceedingly long and costly conflict with Iran.
But this action is simply trump's control of the news. It signifies nothing.
By what reasoning does this administration expect their accusations to be believed?
Credibility, like respect, is earned. This administration has done nothing to earn credibility, and plenty to discredit itself.
2
John Bolton shares a common objective with Sheldon Adelson and Netanyahu - to escalate a U.S. launched war with Iran based on trumped up, false intelligence, the same tactics these same players used to instigate the disastrous rush to war with Iraq.
Sheldon Adelson donated over $100 million to GOP candidates in 2018 and is Donald Trump’s biggest donor, so his money and far right wing hawkish views wield tremendous influence over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
We cannot allow history to repeat itself.
6
I really hope this is all just noise from an incompetent Trump administration. But if tomorrow the Revolutionary Guard launches on its own an attack, and an American aircraft carrier is sunk by missiles from swarming Iranian boats, what then ?
Apparently very few people are willing to think of that possibility - certainly not the American Anti-Imperialist Hard Left Brigade that posted most of the comments to this article.
@Gimme A. Break - Give me a break. I don't understand your dig at he Hard Left Brigade. Aside from trashing that liar Trump, what is their offense? Trump/Bolton is kicking the hornets nest for their own needs. As a proud soldier of the Hard Left Brigade, I also worry about unintended consequences - but let's put the blame on the kickers, not the kicked.
Can you elaborate on your beef?
1
@Gimme A. Break: If our aircraft carrier is sunk by Iranian boats with missiles on them, then something is wrong with our military. How much did that aircraft carrier cost us? How much did the cigarette boats cost?
Just like Putin helping to elect this fake president on a very low budget.
We're being outsmarted all over the place.
And why are we even sticking our nose into the Middle East? Haven't we learned out lesson? Is this all because of MBS and Bibi? Probably is.
2
We threaten Iran and move powerful weapons into their region but if they place a missile on a boat, they are a threat. We are the threat and we are the ones causing the crisis.
2
Trump does not think the time is right to attack Iran. Of course not: ii is too far from the election.
3
@Cassandra: Trump's 'low cunning', the only smarts he has, knows it's too far from the election. Because I would bet he's planning on 'postponing' the election.
1
@sophia
You're probably right.
1
Could this be a pretext for sending military resources into the region in order to protect an impending assault by Israel on targets connected with Iran's nuclear program?
That might also be thought to provide incentive for North Korea to take nuclear disarmament seriously.
Just a thought.
Congress should pass, by veto-proof margin, a law requiring their prior approval of military action v. Iran.
Add in termination of John Bolton.
3
The administration's ytransparent scam is obvious to all except Trump's loyal dupes in the population.
Pull out of the nuclear deal that Iran was honoring.
Try to bully them into continuing to honor its conditions, by imposing sanctions.
When Iran rebels against the sanctions, point to them and say, "See, they violated the deal."
John bolton is one of the most dangerous individuals alive.
He's pushing the United States into committing yet another huge war crime, unilateral aggressive military action against a sovereign nation.
Shades of Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
4
What scares me the most is the fact that Trump really doesn't have the background or knowledge to make a knowledgeable decision to jump into another war - where good American soldiers will possibly die.
Trump scares me almost to tears.
So true. He probably thinks the Gulf of Tonkin is a gas station.
1
Possibly? The casualties will rival Vietnam. This ain’t Iraq, which was a defenseless chaotic nation. Iran has a military, and they will use it. Make no mistake, millions will die on all sides.
2
This is starting to sound like the Gulf of Tonkin all over again: The start of a war based on ambiguous information. The past has a nasty habit of repeating itself when it is forgotten.
3
Wow! How can we talk about impeachment when Iran is threatening us?! And I hear the Reichstag is on fire, too!
5
Saudi Arabia and Israel are encouraging Trump to attack their nemesis Iran as they lack the capabilities . Kushner is their tool inside the White House.
How many lives must be lost for there to be Trump Tower Riyadh and Trump Tower Tel Aviv?
5
It is probably just talk since both sides are not interested in a military conflict. Personally, I much prefer the current though words on the previous administration stance of 'no words at all' when Iranian made anti-ship missiles were fired from Yemen at US Navy ships patrolling the Straits of Hormuz. The president was so deep into negotiating with Iran the nuclear deal that he conveniently failed to refer to that particular incident despite being a clear act of war.
Sometimes incidents are left alone, without a response. Consider the 1967 USS Liberty incident, where Israeli Air Force jet fighters and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats attacked the USS Liberty, killing over 30 American sailors. The USA just overlooked the incident; Israel apologized and paid some compensation... even though American intelligence and Israeli communications showed that the Israelis knew that the ship was American.
1
Been there, done that. Same O same O. Remember Vietnam and the Bay of Tonkin, then the Missles of Mass Destruction in Iraq, etc. Bolton has never seen a war he didn't like. Bomb the whole world for the USA. Heck...bomb the American West and that group of lefties for that matter. Anyplace that disagrees with the policies and idiotic theories of the Republican Party. Are Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan happier that they were bombed nearly out of existence with hundreds of thousands of their citizens killed by the good ole USA. Is the average American happier because of unending war?
No...the problem here is that the USA is the most dangerous country in the world under a Republican Party. For every war, the Republicans get richer and richer. Let's see what the Democrats can do this time. So far, the Pubs are way out in front of them. The public still can't get the full Mueller Report. Not one patriot to smuggle the report into the light of day?
Trump may be a delusional sociopath, but the Dems are just sitting there, scratching their backsides, reacting instead of leading. Elizabeth Warren has is right. Impeach the nefarious president because it's the right thing to do and uphold the Constitution. People will follow where there is strong, honest, common sense leadership.
1
When draft dodger POTUS is willing to send others kids in harms way, we need to reinstate the draft. Then I will see how the saber rattlers will try to find a political solution
2
How about giving the Administration credit for trying to frighten Iran out of closing the Straits of Hormuz, something which they have frequently threatened to do, and which could be done very conveniently with missiles on dhows? What is the alternative? Wait until they blow up an oil tanker or American aircraft carrier in the Straits, thereby threatening world oil supply?
Remember that the Revolutionary Guard is getting older, and has lived very well off the reputation they achieved back home by holding our diplomats hostage. Their children and grandchildren are probably getting restless, and not showing proper respect as they hear the old heroic stories over and over. Furthermore, they're no longer as religious as the Imans would like. The old Revolutionary Guard are very likely to want a war before they die, so you bet, I'll believe this threat; now combine that with their total misunderstanding of how the American system works. No, considerations of the next election will not dictate decisions on defending America (and, in this case, Europe) right now.
Maybe we should quit our addiction to cheap Mid East oil, then we wouldn’t care what the Iranians do, and our children might have a shot at a future. Of course that puts a damper on the apocalypse the evangelicals are pining for.
1
The cycle repeats itself. Cowardly, wealthy old white men willing to send the young and poor to their deaths to further support their greed.
1
Thump, thump, thump...the drumbeat of war is getting louder. As a nation the U.S. has learned nothing from Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Hubris lead us to Vietnam, stupidity and venality to Iraq. Afghanistan could have been the exception if we had taken Osama and then left but we couldn't and didn't and 15 years later, there we are. Dwight Eisenhower warned us about this but we didn't listen and for the last 50+ years we have allowed politicians to build an Imperial Presidency that does what it wants, when it wants and with little or no check on its powers.
As noted in the Constitution, (the supreme law of the land, which, according to the conservative majority on the Supreme Court should only be interpreted as the original signers intended) gives Congress, and only Congress, the power to declare war. Instead, successive Congresses have delegated this power to the Executive branch. And look where it's got us. And look where we're headed.
1
If Bush had been impeached for starting a war without Congressional approval, if Reagan had been impeached for his illegal arms deals, if Congress were more cognizant of their Constitutional duties, none of this would have happened. And now, Congress will probably roll over on this threat as well as back off on Trump’s assertions that they cannot have the complete Mueller report or any other incriminating evidence of any of the wrong-doing committed by him. Precious lives will be lost if Congress doesn’t start asserting themselves and act to protect our Democracy. They were elected to protect American citizens and our combined interests, not those of war-mongers or arms or oil profiteers. Graham recently said the Senate Armed Forces Committee has no idea what is going on with Iran. Trump is running the whole show and he is a full-fledged idiot, deep in Russia’s pocket for his own gain. This whole scenario plays to an addled base of voters as well as the interests of foreign powers that would like us severely weakened. Given how Trump is using American interests against the whole world’s bests interests, that’s not a bad idea. I just hate to see our country’s wealth squandered and the world left without a democratic champion that once upon a time helped countries in need.
1
Why don't they just roll out the aluminum tubes again? They worked so well last time!
6
In hindsight what's Pelosi thinking? It's about now. Remove Trump,before he caves into Bolton's war!
@merchantofchaos
1. "We the people" elected a GOP Senate, remember? That means that we made it legally impossible for Pelosi to impeach Trump.
2. Impeaching him would put Pence in his place, and nothing indicates that somehow Pence would fire Bolton, as for decades now, it's the entire GOPe establishment that has adopted Bolton's war mongering. So even if the Senate would impeach Trump, it still wouldn't be a solution at all.
Conclusion: the only solution is for "we the people" to vote the GOP out ... !!
1
Since when is it a crime for a country to have missiles on small boats? The U.S. has nuclear armed aircraft carriers and subs.
This is total Imperialist superpower bullying. The U.S. invades other countries at will based on fabrications and outright lies.
This caused catastrophic damage and loss of Human in Iraq.
Most Americans accept this with an “oh well, my bad” attitude.
How crass, cruel, and willfully ignorant. Here we go again. The U.S. is a state terrorist nation that employs advanced military technology always weaker and the mostly oil rich nations it attacks. If a causa bellum doesn’t exist -one will be invented
and legitimatized by a willing media.
America look at yourself. The real enemy of Humankind is your government and those who enable and collaborate with its
vile wars of Empire.
Mike
6
Dear GOP voters,
do you now see why a majority in this country hates the GOP so much?
2
May I remind everyone that only the US put sanctions on Irans , all the rest of the world wanted peace. Now iranians have 1 billion usd stuck in china with crude unsold. So first US chokes iran for money food etc..then threaten them with Naval approach then say that Iranians are the evil ones ? what for???? Americans why are you not in the street stopping him????
6
All the fear-mongering by our political and supposed security apparatus is a 20 year continuation of that brought on by the post 9/11 events. This latest U.S. Embassy fiasco is a case in point. It is being used to farm for votes and big public money. If Iran expects it can attack U.S. interests and expect to get away with it then they are sadly misinformed. The mismatch is much greater than an order of magnitude. Our response to a non-event reminds me of the “Magic Word” bedlam depicted in Pee Wee’s Playhouse. “Pompey and the Walrus” must not be allowed to fear-monger Americans without cause. It is not excused by the ignorance and bumbling of Trump himself. Get it together Trump Administration!
2
Have we bothered to ask the Iranians what the heck they think they're doing? I'm very disturbed that everything we hear about this situation will be through a Trump filter of deception, misdirection and misinterpretation.
1
@EJS
It's quite obvious what they are doing: after the US unilaterally withdrew from a peace agreement that didn't force us to destroy our own nuclear weapons all while forcing Iran to stop making them for fifteen years, this administration hired the very architect of the Iraq war, even though that war was entirely based on lies.
So obviously, Iran feels more threatened by the US today than two years ago. So it protects itself by moving around its own, non-nuclear weapons, inside its own territory.
The question is rather: how come you can't see this, and why do you think it would be a good idea to simply forget how notoriously lying both Trump and Bolton are, when it comes to national security ... ?
1
They are protecting themselves from a world super power running amok.
1
Please America. Don't do this.
5
Does the largest state sponsor of terrorism deserve extra attention?
@Reasoned44
It even deserves the next round of negotiations, to make sure that after the 15 years without nuclear weapons that Obama already obtained, Trump can at least get those 15 years after the first period expired too.
But as this president is notoriously bad at negotiating (reason why he never got his GOP Congress to sign a bill that funds his wall, when they perfectly had the legal power to do this, for two long years, and reason why he never repealed and replaced Obamacare, EVEN after "we the people" gave him a "repeal and replace" (= friendly) Congress), he's too afraid to even start negotiations with Iran.
So the only way left for the GOP to give some "attention" to this problem is talking tough - or bombing an entire country. And that, of course, will NOT stop terrorism, quite on the contrary, it's the best way for terrorists to massively recruit new militants, as the Iraq war has proven. Because terrorists pay attention too to what the US does to their countries, remember?
2
Missiles on small boats, huh? Why am I having flashbacks to pictures of trucks supposedly transporting WMDs?
5
It looks like the same playbook orchestrated by the same hawks who hyped up the false intelligence to invade Iraq under the G.W.Bush administration. Shameful!
3
Why do we brand a cautious approach to international aggression and war as "unpatriotic" and "weak"? Oh yes, treaties and nuclear agreements are also for the weak. We will vote this macho warmongering crowd in every time.
2
In a war there has to be an undisputed winner and a loser....otherwise the war continues. Any time an outside arbitrator or mediator steps in and declares peace...it merely fuels the flames of war. This is simply the vile nature of mankind.
Yes, it takes brutality to bring about peace, right? Brutality such as:
World War I
Killed: 16 Million soldiers and civilians (all sides)
World War II
Killed: 60 Million soldiers and civilians (all sides)
Korean War
Killed: 1 1/2 plus Million soldiers and civilians (all sides)
Vietnam War
Killed: 1 1/2 Million soldiers and civilians (all sides)
A soldier will either fall in love with war or with peace, but can not simultaneously love both.
Most humans are plagued with the same capricious, brutal, homicidal, warring, selfish, self serving, pompous, egotistical behavior which will always remain untouched and unchanged. Man should stop making war in the name of liberty, justice, peace and in the name of God (all religions in the world). The true God is good and would not be blessing soldiers nor war itself.
Humans will eventually self destruct due to their inability to control their inborn dichotomies of love vs. hate, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, and moral vs. immoral.
The heavily armed bully on the playground, The Real Donald Trump, is claiming that the skinny kid with the homemade slingshot is an existential threat. The bully's buddies, "Bonesaw" and "Bibi", are egging him on. The G.0.P. fear factory must be happy. Now they have more scary shadows to project onto the cave wall, providing their followers with addictive little hits of anger and fear.
3
Lying again. Trump needs a war to get himself re-elected. The House needs to stop it. No 9/11 this time.
1
It's OK for Saudi Arabia to attack Yemen.
It's OK for Israel to attack Syria.
It's OK for the US to attack Iraq.
It's not OK for Iran to be able to defend itself?
5
This smells like the Gulf of Tonkin and Iraq "weapons of mass destruction" warmongering. Here we go again
Should we expect anything else from the chicken hawks?
4
The Trump Administration has a remarkable number of Evangelical Christians set on bringing about Armageddon, and the Second coming of Christ.
America prefers an Administration that would allow Heavenly Powers to sort out the calendar for the end of the world,
without help from ignorant, inexperienced, zealots.
2
It's just so weird to suddenly believe Iran might be saner than Bolton and Trump... will some adult please step in and return the WH to sanity...
2
So the US unilaterally withdraws from the Iran nuclear agreement that weakened Iran's military, and then hires notorious liar and war mongering Bolton as chief national security adviser, all while appointing someone known for absolutely wanting to bomb Iran (Pompeo) ... and then when in response, Iran decides to increase preparations to defend itself against a US war, somehow, this - notoriously lying - President tells us, we should interpret this as a "provocation" and increase tensions even more by telling the world that we're preparing 120,000 soldiers to be send to Iran ... ?
WHO in their right mind can still believe this kind of propaganda ... ?
It's the worst kind of insult that ANY administration could ever inflict on this country's brave men and women in uniform.
4
'On May 5, the White House sent Mr. Bolton to announce that the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln would sail to the gulf sooner than expected. Choosing Mr. Bolton, who is a longtime advocate of regime change in Iran, to deliver that message ....'
I am not sure of Bolton'a age but I am wondering if he has ever heard of the ' The Gulf of Tonkin incident also known as the USS Maddox incident, was an international confrontation that led to the United States engaging more directly in the Vietnam War. ... 'Gulf of Tonkin incident - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident)
I have no idea if Bolton is a student of history and knows of a thing called the Vietnam War. But looking at his white mustache, I would think he is old enough to remember the Iraq War that happened just about dozen years ago and in about the same region as Iran.
@Dreamer bolton sat out the Vietnam War in the Air Force Reserves in the US. He was around for the Gulf of Tonkin, maybe that's where he get's his strategy.
1
Let's look at the nature of this "fierce debate." On one side is every single government on earth, all informed observers, and anyone with two working neurons who all agree with, like, reality that obviously the US has been the aggressor here. On the other side are three people who work for Trump.
Yep, it's almost as big a debate as whether global warming is happening and mostly caused by burning carbon; whether life begins at conception; whether tearing babies from their mothers' breasts and putting them in concentration camps is a good idea; and any number of other straight-up insane fallacies that you can't actually bring yourselves to bash cuz there are 16 swing voters left we can't alienate!
Sanders? AOC? A Green New Deal? MfA? Progressives in general? Open season.
2
So, if the Iranians find some pictures of our boats with "fully assembled" missiles, should they call for a regime change in the U.S. ?
This sounds like a con game.
9
Iran (and everyone else with warships in the Persian Gulf) has always had missiles on gun boats.
If Pompeo and Bolton and the Pentagon brass and weapons contractors hoping to conjure up an Iran war for fun and profit didn't know about sea launched cruise missiles, they are even more ignorant and incompetent than they have previously demonstrated.
But it is more likely to be lying vs. ignorance. Tossing out old photos of every day weapons in hopes of creating a war with Iran.
A reminder to Pompeo, Bolton and Trump, the cruise missiles made the air craft carrier obsolete. US large ships in the Gulf will be swept away in a wave a cruise missile attacks. In their deceit to try and start a war with Iran, Pompeo/Bolton/Pent/Contractors have inadvertently demonstrated why such a war would go as badly for the US as our current 30 years of losing oil war have gone.
Wow, as the son of soldier who helped free Europe in World War II, I hate to say it, but it looks like this administration...made up most men who probably never saw combat.., is just looking to fight a war...with someone else's young sons and daughters. Meanwhile, we've got Iran surrounded by enough aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and overseas bases, and yet they're telling me there's a threat...Anyone remember the Gulf of Tonkin...stay tuned for a rerun.
3
Something that looks like a missile sitting in a dhow does not constitute a combat ready strike missile system.
This sounds ominously like Gulf of Tonkin redux, and in the hands of this "president" and his clown car full of staff and "advisers" , this could go really bad, really soon.
4
I've serious doubts about whether Iran is either desperate or crazy enough to launch missiles at America naval forces.
2
Trump is playing a dangerous game. There is no way Iran would strike first with regular military. They know they have no chance of winning. Bolton knows this of course and yet persists with aggressive military talk and advice.
But one aggressive action by a militia (of thought to be by an Iran backed militia) could force Trump’s hand. And he’s not the biggest thinker, so unlike Obama, he won’t consider what will have the most positive impact (like Obama did with Syria after the chemical attacks). He will go for whatever seems the toughest”.
2
I am no fan of the White House but missiles being loaded on small boats( if this is true), is patently a threat to shipping lanes, US interests, and very probably US navy ships. Iran or its proxies were responsible for the recent oil tanker sabotage. No one else has the capability. Our mistake is saying Trump is making it up. Put another way, our mistake is to attach Trump on this, for political reasons. If Trump wants it, it must be wrong. And, frankly that seems to be how the press is reporting it. The blind pig finds the acorn sometimes. Iran is in fact an enemy. We are the great Satin to them. We can not forget that. These are the people who took our embassy and held our people hostage and then we did not have the ability to do anything about. That was under Carter. The Iranians have not changed. Now they sponsor terror everywhere, not just in the middle East. And, as to now wanting war, that is what the Japanese said right up to Pearl Harbor.
1
@Bian - So apparently when Iran is facing a threat of war it should not be ready to defend itself. It is height of hypocrisy to insist that Iran should not arm itself to defend its own country when our heavily armed airforce, navy and army have surrounded it from all directions. More over we have armed cruise missile that can fly over thousands of mile.
2
@Bian
Missiles on small boats are a threat to US warships? Really?
What about the threat to small boats by the huge cannons on US warships?
Oh, right. US exceptionalism entitles them to plant warships outside the door of another nation, which of course has no right to poise itself for defense.
The Iranians who took your embassy have been out of power for decades.
2
@Bian What a one sided and narrow view of the U.S.Iran relationship. Right along the company line!
BTW: Do you guys have access to the Internet in Arizona?
2
So Iranians have put missiles on boats, which then were put on ships. This is said to pose a grave threat. Never mind that the Persian Gulf is bristling with missiles on US ships. Who is making the threats here?
I must say that the WMD's of a decade ago were a more imaginative bogus justification for war than this one is.
5
Why would this administration be alarmed by anything coming from our intelligence agencies? Our president made it clear in Helsinki that he prefers information from the likes of Vladimir Putin.
3
But this time, will the allies stand by us?
1
Why is it we can speculate on any other country giving faulty intelligence/ promoting war with Iran, except Israel? Israel has a huge part in this whole situation yet it seems we are prohibited from even suggesting Israel has anything to do with it.
5
How many warships do we have in the Gulf? How many missiles do those ships carry? Are we going to make a ruckus all of a sudden because the Iranians are doing the same? Which, by the way, they have been doing for years? How is it that this is an emergency all of a sudden??? Inquiring minds want to know......
5
Maybe if Bolton parks a war boat in the Gulf of Tonkin, "things" will happen.
Same old same old from the war hawks...
3
Bolton may be a hawk, but he is still Trump’s pet with a chain on his leg. No need to fear that Trump will let him go.
Nothing focuses Americans on war more than the fear some family members may die in it. All able-bodied Americans should face the likelihood being drafted and sent to war no exemptions.
3
I'm wondering who manufactured those missiles?
1
@mg Iran is quite capable of manufacturing its own missles, just like USA and Israel.
It has been less than 20 years, since this country misled its people and the rest of the world into a war in Iraq. We told the world that we had evidence that the country had "weapons of mass destruction." After we invaded Iraq, no weapons were found. The Iraq war cost the US a little more than 2300 dead and 20,000 wounded. Many of the wounded lost limbs and/or suffered brain injury. The Iraq war cost the US somewhere between 5 and 7 trillion dollars (including the medical costs of our Iraq war veterans), as of 2018, and the costs continue to mount. The Iraq war cost 460,000 Iraqi lives. As a country we gained nothing from the Iraq War. We cannot do this again! Please email and call your Senators and Congressmember and let them know you do not support action in Iran.
3
I guess Trump doesn't dismiss ALL intelligence reports. He clearly accepts inaccurate, unsubstantiated ones.
3
The insanity continues.
Rich, powerful people have totally corrupted our government.
Our country is broken.
3
When will the US understand that military might and high tech weaponry cannot win wars. You can kill people and destroy infrastructure, but you cannot destroy the power of the people.
The use of military might is a colossal waste of blood and treasure.
3
We need to start admitting to ourselves that these draft dodgers love war. Nobody loved the blood sport more than seven time deferment Cheney.
Young patriots - do NOT fall for it. These guys are creeps. Ain't no way, no how my teen is going to fight on behalf of this thoroughly compromised set of characters.
Leave the international community to police Iran. Bug off. Clean up the messes that are already here. And leave Yemen alone. And while your at it: help out Central America in a more substantial way. Most of their problems today are because of Reagan/Ollie and gang from the 80's.
6
First, to all the posters who consider US warships to be a provocation, it's not concern about them being attacked that led to the Abraham Lincoln being deployed. It's concern over attacks on merchant vessels and an attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz that has led to the deployment. Get your facts straight if you can. You will be the first people to squeal when gas prices hit 6 dollars a gallon if we waited to send warships to the gulf after the strait was closed. Second, remember that you are not dealing with a rational government. You are dealing with Jihadi's and outright terrorists. These people believe that they have god on their side. So, what to us would be a nutty idea - try to close the strait with small ships carrying missiles - is perfectly sensible. That's because they believe that god will intervene on their side. So, never underestimate how crazy these people are. Never. Finally, Iran is a sponsor of many terrorist groups. These groups have committed countless atrocities, but actually accomplished nothing in terms of either destroying Israel or getting the US out of the middle east. If they can persist in this fruitless endeavor, don't think for a minute that they will be deterred by rationality.
@Ross Salinger - We(USA) are using OIL and energy as a weapon to attack Iran and Venezuela, but then accuses Russia of using energy as a weapon when it forces Ukraine to pay its dues and to pay it market price. It has effectively shut down oil exports from Iran and then accuses Iran of being a threat to oil exports by shutting down the strait of Hormuz. Make no mistake USA is itching for a war and is willing to use any pretext, even to the extent of framing Iran to start the war. According to your reasoning when Iran is facing a threat of war it should not be ready to defend itself. It is height of hypocrisy to insist that Iran should not arm itself to defend its own country when our heavily armed airforce, navy and army have surrounded it from all directions. Moreover we have armed cruise missile that can fly over thousands of mile.
2
They believe they have god on their side? That’s odd, don’t we always claim god is on our side? Seems god is confused.
1
@Ross Salinger I may be wrong, but you probably voted for Trump and have no problem with rapture-Mike and MEK-John who think their calling is to pave the way for Jesus landing in Israel!
Your concern is about$6/gallon gasoline and security of Israel and not atrocities committed by the likes of BiBi and Bin Salman and more suffering for 80+ million Iranians under additional inhumane sanctions that affect everything from food items to drugs.
You're close to the aircraft carriers that may also sail off to the Persian Gulf if a war breaks out. Too bad that nobody from your family will be on board!
Compare the Bolton-Trump approach to North Korea to their approach to Iran, and you can conclude only one thing: once you have nuclear weapons, as a tiny anti-US dictatorship, the so-called "hard-line" tough guys in the GOP will simply ask you to help them to keep their ratings at home high by agreeing to do some photo-ops after the next round of totally hollow "negotiations".
If you don't have nuclear weapons and even agreed to sign an international agreement to not even build them, the GOP will relentlessly do everything it can to increase tension and threats of war, until you do something that they can present as "provocation", and then they'll destroy your entire country and region.
That's why "hard-liners" are always so utterly weak, when it comes to being able to obtain peace, once they are the most powerful players in the game. The US has the biggest military in the world, and then time and again the GOP uses it in such a way that small countries cannot but arm themselves to the teeth if they don't want to see hundreds of thousands of their innocent civilians killed by the US.
And only once they have the military power to retaliate, does the GOP accept them as equal, and allows them to do no matter what they want - including things that threaten the peace of an entire region or that of our allies.
The only ones who know how to negotiate real peace are clearly the Democrats today.
I can feel the fear building in me. Can this really happen again?. Can the American people be fooled into supporting another war? The obvious answer is, yes. But I really don't think it will be as easy this time. America has every right to defend itself. What it doesn't have is the right to go into another's backyard, saber rattle and then play the victim card. We are the aggressors here, make no mistake about it. If we start to contact our Senators and Representatives now, we may be able to stop this madness. We may fail but we can at least try. If we do nothing we can only blame ourselves. Speak up now!
Can anyone say Tonkin Gulf?
Beyond that - what kind of “missiles” are they speaking of?
An anti-personnel rocket-propelled-grenade is a “missile” - as is an ICBM.
For that matter, a “bottle rocket” is a missile too.
Are we talking trivial armaments or armageddon-class.
Beyond that, Trump began ratcheting up world tension in spots as close as Cuba and as distant as his “three rogue governments” two and a half years ago, upon taking office, dumping agreement after agreement, while claiming the US was going isolationist.
Waiting for someone not to demonstrate by testing missiles like North Korea, but becoming frightened enough to actually put arms on boats, note the term, not ships - then sending a US fleet into harm’s way to provoke those pathetic PTs with weapons sufficient to damage a hull.
Then, we can have a meaninglessness war to destroy a relatively tiny nation to prove our might, encourage terrorism, requiring a major national state of emergency ...
And a cry from the White House of “Inter arma, silent legis” and an end to the government of law we loved.
1
They declassify one photograph but then refuse to release it to the public because it isn't conclusive. They refuse to declassify other photographs that they claim would prove the Iranians are moving missiles. They do not say where these missiles are being moved or how these particular missiles would actually be fired seeing as how they generally some type of launcher. Meanwhile, they start a whole series of the sky is falling briefings, interviews, and leaks. Please pardon the non-specific "they" but as it is really not clear who is in charge, it is impossible to be more specific. Let us all hope that Trump is as big a coward as we think he is and pulls the plug on Bolton and Co. before this goes too far.
2
Trump has made it clear from day one he doesn't believe our intelligence reports nor bother to even read or get the briefings most of the time. That way, he can do whatever he wants Putin style.
1
TRUMP WANTS A WAR! The Iraq war got George W. Bush re-elected and Trump now thinks (or those who think for him) that an Iran war in 2020 will set him on the path to re-election in November. When will America wake up? Let's fix things in the Homeland before spilling any more blood over things that are the domain of other countries and not really in the interest of American citizens.
1
The credulousness of the media's coverage of this nakedly manufactured crisis is profoundly disturbing. Read any of the recent Times -- or any other major American news outlet -- stories on the latest developments in the Iran saga, and you'll find a litany of anonymous "American officials" and "secret sources" scattered throughout. Each instance in which an unsubstantiated tale about nefarious Iranian intent appears in print is a victory, no matter whether contradictory or corrective material follows at a later date. Tellingly, the only people willing to put their names on the record are those who are denying the U.S. government's version of events, many of whom are military officials from the United States' closest allies.
It's obvious to anyone paying attention that John Bolton and his ilk are rehashing their Iraq playbook with Iran. The only question remaining is whether the media will let them get away with it again. At this point, the answer points to yes.
5
Iran placing missiles on small boats does not constitute a major threat, one that would require the withdrawal of "nonemergency US government employees" from Baghdad and Erbil and sending in a carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf.
A far more menacing threat was revealed last year, that Iran is building its own submarines specifically designed to operate in the Persian Gulf. And what was the US response to that? Nothing.
The only difference between last year and this year has been the addition of John Bolton who has made his mission to strike Iran ... as well as any other country he doesn't like. Look behind the veil of this entire series of statements and actions related to Iran and you'll find John Bolton orchestrating all of it.
John Bolton is trying his best to get the US into a war with Iran and it's clear that he doesn't care how absurd and unsupportable the reasons for such a war. The propaganda campaign based on nothing but lies got the US into the disastrous war in Iraq and Bolton played a central role in that fiasco. And now Bolton appears to be clumsily guiding US statements, actions and armed forces into a position to provoke a "Tonkin Gulf" like response from the Iranians.
1
Since when did we start believing intelligence?
And second, this is all Trump needs to complete his 'presidency' - a war to make billions for arms manufacturers.
2
It appears that our military planners have made a classic blunder, i.e. their plans and hardware are based upon how they the fought “the last war”. As a result, they leave us exposed to our present enemies.
The specter of small agile boats, carrying anti-tank missiles is terrifying to them.......
Judging by these comments, the United States has reached a new low as a war mongering belligerent country.
When I became an expat American over the Iraq war I hoped that America would fade from my memory. This pending confrontation over Iran led by the paranoid Bolton and the hapless Trump will insure that we must continue to live with danger.
Congressional democrats are showing open contempt for Trump but shrink from impeachment.
I implore my fellow Americans to continue to beat the drum for A Trump impeachment!
2
It was not that long ago that our government lied to the American
people during the Viet Nam war that Vietnamese PT boats
were threatening American ships in the Gulf of Tonkin.
That proved to be a total lie by our government and the military
and escalated the war under false pretenses. That false provocation proved costly in lives lost in extending the war.
Are we going down the same rabbit hole once again. Another example of repeating the mistakes of the past through
intuitive thinking that has no linkage to reality.
Remember The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, let's not repeat it.
2
This seems "sketchy" at best in a few minutes of research I learned Iran has 844 miles of coastland in the gulf and Russian/Chinese derived anti ship missiles with ranges to shoot across the gulf, they don't need to fire from small boats. Does the government really think they haven't been pointing them at our ships for the last decade or so? Our newly beloved Russia has had ICBM's targeting our major cities since I was a kid, we sweat N.K. getting longer range technology and our government is really posing this as a threat now? Didn't we suffer death and destruction from a small boat attack before?
1
Funny how this works... the US has been threatening Iran for decades and was instrumental in the overthrow of their government and installed the Shah. And yet having Iran be seen doing anything that might be considered as preparing to defend themselves from another US invasion ... and the hyperventilation ensues. But deploying a massive military presence just off their shores is ok... Whose agenda is being served by this policy? Trump? Bolton? The Saudis? And message to Kim... hang onto your nukes also seems clear.
2
The Trump sanctions on Iran are more severe than the ones FDR placed on Japan. How did that turn out?
Congress must rescind the AUMF and make sure Congress, and ONLY Congress, can declare a war. The rest of this is hearsay evidence, with the U.S. being the historical provocateur in the region. Waiting for the oil-driven economic “bump” for war. As usual: squeeze, destabilize, call it a threat, go in (with or without declaration), and seek “mission accomplished.” We’ve all seen this ‘movie’ before; time and time again for petrodollars and the U.S.’s ‘masters of war.’
2
You can bet, if we bought the side of those who claim the moves by Iran are nothing serious, and attacks did occur, the same people would yell that we knew of the threat but did nothing. Ever since their war with Iraq cost the two sides at least 500,000 men, Iran has kept to much smaller parts in conflicts aligning themselves with one side in within a war. They might send some boats out to damage a tanker or cargo ship but to go out and tackle a battle group is a lot different. Imagine them sinking our carrier, killing thousands on that boat. The response would be huge. If we send the ships and military there now, they may realize they are not facing Saddam. If the bombing starts, you can bet Israel will want to get into the action. In recent years Iran kept their actions limited to words and threats against us, as well as support for factions like in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Why change what's working?
2
Another Republican in office, another war. Bolton has never seen a war he didn't like. If I was a young man, I'd leave this country and go to someplace that is sane and cares about its citizens rather than making more zillionaires out of the billionaires. You know, someplace like Canada, New Zealand, or even Australia.
The USA Republican Party has completely lost its mind and sanity under the leaderships of Reagan, Nixon, Bush Jr. and now Trump.
People wonder why the streets are littered with the homeless, young people can't afford higher education or trade schools, or over 500,000 families in the USA file bankruptcy each year because of health costs. And, Americans keep electing the enslavers called Republicans no matter what? Whatever happened to the common sense and wisdom of the American people?
3
It is incredibly sad to think that the administration is sounding the alarm. After all the lives lost, money spent and destruction caused by the Iraq Wars and the conflict in Afghanistan, couldn't our resources be better used on infrastructure improvements, health & education? What about housing the homeless or better border security.? Does anyone really realize how much it costs to operate and Aircraft Carrier? Please will the Administration stop its saber rattling and seek to calm our country instead of creating chaos and fear?
1
Iranian missile boats do pose a threat to ships in the area, so if we need to re-arrange some U.S. military assets to deter Iran from acting, so be it.
I would hope that no one is thinking of pre-emptively attacking Iran because they deployed missile boats and I seriously doubt that's the case.
It sounds like Iran made some unusual moves that could be interpreted as threatening and we want to be a position to respond with sufficient force if they actually take military action. In my mind, it's simple deterrence. We don't want to be caught flat footed.
1
The second largest defence contracter in the world Boeing needs money after their recent 737 MAX airliners were grounded. I'm sure they'll welcome a few billion that they'll make on a war.
Trumps approval rating is terrible so I'm sure he'll welcome an increase that generally happens during a war.
I'm sure there will be a ton of other beneficiaries should a war break out.
Seems to me the US is kicking the hornets nest.
2
The trump administration withdraws from the nuclear agreement with Iran, then applies extreme sanctions. What is so strange about the Iranians beefing up their defences in anticipation of further US aggression, which is exactly what those actions were? I don't see any objectivity in this NYT article. It's the same old obfuscation that led us into the second Gulf War.
3
The republicans seem to fall back on the reminder that we don't dislodge a president when at war. It saved W's bacon and it would appear they are looking at Iran with this in mind for our present incumbent.
2
It is up to the Congress to keep the bellicose Trump administration from starting another war. Congress has the Constitutional authority over when to declare a war. The itsy bitsy mice in the Congress voted for the Iraq war on the basis of false information from the Bush administration. Will they quiver and quake again and then vote for an Iran war? Iran is not a threat to U.S. interests any more than was Iraq. Unless Iran fires missiles at the U.S. mainland or attacks U.S. ships they cannot be considered enemy combatants.
2
I feel nothing but sadness for our military personnel - young men and women whose lives are constantly at risk for political reasons.
4
How do we know that the "photographs" of missiles are real?Trump constantly attacks US intelligence agencies, so how can we believe what purports to be photographs taken during surveillance? Given the Trump administration's clear desire to start a military conflict with Iran, how can we trust these reports?
3
In 2.5 years, what unnecessary military action has President Trump taken?
@Dr. John
Sending troops to the border (knowing that troops have neither the authority nor training to deal with the border) instead of negotiating a wall with Mexico or his GOP Congress, for instance.
And unilaterally withdrawing from the Iran nuclear agreement.
And weakening NATO (= empowering Russia).
And refusing to engage in real negotiations with North Korea but instead allowing them to keep their nuclear arsenal and develop even more weapons.
And not installing the safe haven he promised to install in Syria (which means handing Syria over to Putin and Iran).
And of course, hiring the lying Iraq war architect Bolton.
Those are only a few examples of the Trump administration taking actions that have military consequences and that make things much worse rather than better, when it comes to world peace.
2
How many multiples of Trump's 10,000 documented lies have come from this administration? And why would they expect anyone, other than the deluded, to believe intelligence promoting what is clearly a one-sided push to war? Thanks to endless conflict sponsored by the military-industrial complex, there are all sorts of watercraft sailing the world's waters armed to the teeth. Do Iran's actions amount to anything other than routine maritime defense of its extensive coastline?
3
It's getting to be an old story, albeit a boring one. The plot is the same, only players are different. Sub Pompeo and Bolton for Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld and you got the entire picture done.
Actually, we don't even need to exhibit new pictures of Iranian boats with lethal weapons. Our archives should have plenty of supply of that stuff. Or for convenience sake and expeditious handling, we could borrow some of these pictures from the UN. Over the years, we have kept that world body supplied with those things routinely. That is, each time we got this or that country under the crosshair.
2
In this situation Bolton is the bad cop. Trump leads with him, but also sends opposing signals. It’s part of his strategy of keeping ‘em guessing. It’s a Texas hold ‘em game he’s playing, but notice that he’s the one who has chosen the game and he will make the rules. He plays the Democrats the same way. So my friends, stop questioning him all the time. We’re in good hands.
1
Before Iraq, U.S. intelligence agencies were giving the Bush Administration briefings that were full of low confidence assessments, caveats, and warnings about what we didn't know. The evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program was weak. It was not U.S. intelligence agencies that got it wrong. It was the political leadership in the Whitehouse that was taking out the warnings and the caveats and turning "low confidence," into "mushroom clouds."
Nine months before the invasion of Iraq, the head of British intelligence met with the Bush administration and wrote a memo to his Prime Minister about it. He said the Bush administration had already made the decision to go to war and the "evidence was being fixed around this decision." (Downing St. Memo)
The NY Times printed the Bush administration lies on the Front Page and buried he evidence of the lying in the International section. Many Democrats just believed the lies.
The Democrats need to keep having intelligence agencies testify about what they really know and do not know so that We the People can make an informed decision, because nothing the Trump administration says should be believed.
Iraq had 25 million people. Iran has 75 million. Iran would be three times more difficult than Iraq, at least.
In Iraq we had 45,000 dead or wounded American troops (and more contractors), about 40 attacks on U.S. diplomatic personnel and spent trillions of dollars. We didn't get the oil. We didn't create a functioning democracy.
1
I also have a "deep mistrust" of Trump's national security team. To put it more directly, I do not believe one word that comes out of the mouths of Trump, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo or anybody else associated with this deeply deceptive and craven administration. In addition, Bolton especially has a long history of supporting gratuitous, unilateral, self-defeating violence in every conceivable situation.
4
For Trump today to be listening to the likes of John Bolton and Mike Pompeo in their advice to risk a physical confrontation with Iran is akin to Richard Nixon listening to that snake Henry Kissinger in his advice to invade Cambodia, in 1970. Both terrible, terrible mistakes and not worth the cost in lives and treasure, and both custom designed to loose the good will and cooperation of our allies. (But hey, when all you got is a hammer-like Trump does in Bolton and Pompeo-everything looks like a nail).
Bolton, Pompeo, Trump et al. are engaging in threatening rhetoric, actions, and purposely picking a fight with Iran. Iran is a regional power and poses no significant threat to the US. Most rational people understand this.
Iran was (and still is) complying with a very good nuclear accord negotiated in good faith by Europeans, US and Iran. And in marked contrast with this administration, negotiated with extremely well-qualified nuclear experts and others at all levels.
The last thing, I mean the very last thing, the US and the world needs now is another war or military confrontation in the Middle East based on dubious grounds and overtly (right-wing) political calculations.
5
@Michael Trump is desperate.
“Iran began mobilizing its forces after Washington issued new economic sanctions against the country, moved to stop nations from buying Iranian oil and designated the Revolutionary Guards, an arm of the Iranian military, a terrorist group, two American officials said.”
Add in the major trigger of Trump’s Impulsive abrogation of the the Iran nuclear deal which too years to broker and Iranian push back of some kind was absolutely inevitable.
Two problems arise:
That elements supported by Iran but not directly under its control may act out aggressively independently leaving Iran facing an American hair-trigger military retaliation that could rapidly spiral out of control on both sides.
The second problem is most represented by Bolton the National Security Advisor who’s extraordinary penchant for overt belligerence and recourse to military action becomes even more dangerous in concert with our capricious and often belligerent and bullying Commander in Chief.
3
Am I the only one who thinks the fact Iran is a military ally of Russia in the Middle East, has a lot to do with Trump tempering Bolton's hawkishness on the subject.
If history has taught us anything it should be that Putin is the only one Trump listens to.
1
Then Putin is a wise counselor and Trump’s relationship with him a good thing.
@JimmySerious Anything which would temper Bolton's ridiculous belligerence is a good thing.
1
@Edward, @EJS
Trump doing the right thing for the wrong reasons doesn't make his subservient relationship with Putin any less inappropriate and perilous for America.
1
I have four grandsons ranging in age from 21 down to 9.
The US has been in nearly continual conflict, often in multiple places my entire life, and those military deployments have often proven to be misguided or poor strategy.
Defense spending has wound its way into our economy so tightly that anything we do to try and repurpose some of that bloat for the common good likely tanks many assorted local economies.
This is why the Navy gets ships forced on them they don’t want.
I yearn for leadership that’s not so bellicose and eager to play army in places it’d be smarter for us to stay out of. And I’m tired of seeing our solution to every challenge is sabre-rattling. It’s absurd to tell the people of another country, “Hey, we want you to have a better life, so we’re going to come in, wreck your country, and kill a bunch of you. Cool?”
208
@Steve B A quick glance shows Iran one of the oldest civilizations with the largest supply of natural gas and 4th largest proven oil reserves. The current "enemy" government was a result of the people overthrowing The leaders we preferred, and that government likely colluded to get Regan elected ( with the hostage crisis ) I recall they were amongst the first to express condolences and denounce the tragedy we suffered 9/11. We are fortunate in many ways to live in America, but not being a country involved in a real life game of Risk is a big one.
6
@Steve B According to Naom Chomsky emeritus professor MIT now retired in Arizona once said, " If there is a War Crime Tribunal, all of the US presidents after WWII will be found guilty. "
9
You have to travel to a country to feel any anger against America. I have traveled with my very American wife and have rarely found overt anger toward us. Your newspaper constantly brings out negative experiences of these so called enemies. Tighten our Southern borders. Try our best to keep the rif raf out. Stop the hate.
3
Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Same recipe..... Start up another phony war to distract; to further increase the riches of the military-industrial-complex-corporate-rich; to further agitate the ignorant, victimized base; and to time it all so as to slip into re-election. It's a sorry shame that so many can see the simple, cheesy script, but can't change it. More billions and trillions of dollars to kill people we don't know and further the income disparities and societal decay at home. Someday, if the species survives long enough and there are historians and anthropologists to research and write, they will write studies of the predictable but unstoppable decay of the United States empire. Tragedy.
12
Cadet Bone Spurs mired in Chickenhawk approach-avoidance much? Imagine.
3
Trump seems to see defensive weapons on another's territory as subject to preemptive attack. These dangerous warmongers in the Trump administration are a clear and present danger to world. Israel and Saudi Arabia want to overthrow Assad and destroy Iran so they can have absolute hegemony in the middle east. Trump is just a useful idiot. Its interesting that the US is telling the Iraqis they better not cross the US. One can imagine the reign of terror visited on the Shia populations by Saudi Sunni fanatic crazies.
6
Reminds me of Ye Olde "Gulf of Tonkin Resolution."
Attack Iran? Who's next? Boston?
#ArrestMnuchin #ArrestBarr #Indict45 #Impeach45
8
Well, here we go again.
Yet another debate over our intelligence in deciphering intents of a hostile nation.
I find it ironic that the same folks - now questioning intent of intelligence - had no qualms about Russia collusion- but that's another matter.
I have sailed thru Straits of Hormuz on an LNG tanker on it's way from Qatar to India. And saw many of these dhows as described here. As a matter of fact, go to Dubai marina and you will see hundreds of them.
For our intelligence to photograph them from above with missiles - to be honest - defies commonsense. In a scheme of things, these dhows are similar to what Cajuns use in the Gulf to go fishing - small aluminum boats with fat engines. The cajuns would be hard pressed to put a missile on their "pirroughs".
And this eavesdropping of conversation brings to mind that famous "curve ball."
All in all, its deja vue all over again - but with deadly consequences.
130
@Neil
To expand on your point, "curveball" was the nickname the Germans gave to one of the sources of intelligence in Iraq.
Curveball was an associate of Chalibi who wanted the U.S. to make him President of Iraq. He was feeding "intelligence" about Iraq's nuclear program (which we know how did not exist) to many intelligence agencies.
When the U.S. got this intelligence, we asked our allies to confirm it, as is standard procedure. Since they had gotten the same intelligence they confirmed it, but no one realized until later that they were all getting their information from the same biased source, Curveball.
The intelligent agencies were giving the Bush administration low confidence assessments, but Cheney cherry picked the data and ignored all of the contradictory evidence.
It is not the intelligence agencies that got Iraq wrong. It was Republican politicians that pushed the policy, not based on intelligence, but based on their desire to invade Iraq.
20
@Neil You're right. There they go again.
8
"And saw many of these dhows as described here."
The word "dhow" appears to be an invention of the Times. The Times should call someone at the Department of the Navy or the US Naval Academy to learn the correct terminology.
"For our intelligence to photograph them from above with missiles - to be honest - defies commonsense."
You don't need "commonsense", you need a search engine. Do a Google images search for "iranian fast attack craft". Iran has long used those to harass ships in the Persian Gulf.
And they could be photographed from a surface ship, a drone, or a satellite. They could also be photographed in a shipyard by a spy. The White House needs to figure how to get a photo that doesn't "compromise secret sources and methods". Doesn't the WH have anyone at the CIA or the Department of the Navy to call?
Regardless, the Pentagon or the White House needs to release the declassified photograph, because without it, the WH appears to be once again bungling its public relations. The WH national security team needs to read up on the Cuban missile crisis to see how evidence is released to the public. There are numerous books on the Cuban missile crisis.
3
Having lived through the beginnings of the Iraq War, it is hard to assess the appropriate response to this information regarding Iran.
I had complete trust in President Bush and his administration and supported the war in Iraq. That trust was later proven to be unfounded. Now we have an administration that inhibits trust. President Trump has a well documented history of lying and placing very narrow interests above those of this nation of many interests.
I remain skeptical of this inflammatory information regarding Iran. I have been burnt before.
165
@Color Me Purple
And I remember when boys were virtually scooped up off the street and sent to Vietnam to main and kill or to be maimed or killed. Or mentally destroyed. What was that for?
5
@Color Me Purple
I for one wouldn't trust that Iran is a threat even if the White House showed a video with Khomeni and the Iranian President personally ordering a group of Houthis to attack an American city. This is Bolton, a person for whom war with Iran is his life's goal, and Trump, the most frequent liar in American, and possibly world, history.
8
@Color Me Purple: Worth noting that there was plenty of concrete evidence prior to Iraq that there were no WMDs there. The best case for WMDs were actually those we have teh Iraqis in the 80s, so they could use them against the Iranians.
So you may have trusted W, but there was no reason to do so. That goes doubly now. Wagging the dog!
4
We need a Democratic leadership that fights. All Schumer and Pelosi and the other Clintonites know how to do is triangulate. They will triangulate us into a decline like that of 17th c. Spain.
5
@Gary
Except that "we the people" never voted for a Congress that had the power to undo the law that gives the President the legal power to initiate wars, remember?
This is a democracy.
Either we vote warmongering politicians out or we don't.
Asking Democrats in DC "to fight" not only means using war language in order to stop wars, but more importantly, it means imagining that somehow it's not negotiating and diplomacy that is the solution, and that is exactly the mentality that is constantly making the GOP take extremely bad decisions, remember?
Fact is, as long as we vote for Bolton-like politicians, we'll get Bolton-like policies. THAT is how a democracy is supposed to work.
On this issue the Dems hands are tied because of their misplaced allegiance to Israel.
1
Has anyone asked Jared about this? This looks an awful lot like Trump is taking direction from the Israelis. They hate Iran and Iranians. Israel has made more than a few preemptive military strikes against their Muslim neighbors in the past. Bibi might have convinced Jared and Ivanka to butter up daddy to invent a reason to start a war with Iran.
8
Intelligence coming from the White House? Talk about an oxymoron.
12
Despots have used military adventurism to distract from domestic trouble for centuries. This is no different, as Trump is cornered (politically) on all fronts. A regime change is totally necessary....here in the United States, not Iran.
7
Where were these "boats?"
Tonkin Gulf?
3
It’s far too easy for Bolton and Pompeo to manipulate Trump. Trump knows next to nothing about the Middle East, Iran, and military conflict. He couldn’t care less about potential civilian casualties of any conflict. More than once he’s expressed surprise at the military’s reluctance to use our weapons and finally ‘win’ a war.
And who’s going to counterbalance the hawks in our government and the blatantly obvious machinations of Sheldon Adelson, Bibi, and MBS to foment war with Iran? Jared? Ivanka? Stephen Miller?
No. Ever tightening sanctions, ramped up military readiness, hair trigger reactions, manufactured grievances, underestimated risks, overestimated benefits, and the siren song of a war presidency will suck in Trump as sure as two scoops of ice cream are on the president’s nightly dessert menu.
6
There is literally no person in the Trump administration with any credibility. The president is a pathological liar and his minions, like Bolton are not to be trusted. Truth is not truth. Facts are not facts. No “evidence” of a threat presented by this administration can be believed without extensive investigation and verification. Congress must act to stop the easily manipulated moron Trump and the warmongers around him from getting more of our service men and women killed in another fool’s errand of a conflict in the Middle East.
6
Three words are enough: Gulf of Tonkin
5
And are these the same people who took the pictures of the WMDs in Iraq? The same people who sat behind their desks and podiums while they sent other people’s children to die on the battlefield? The same people who repeatedly try to gut the VA to make our returning wounded soldiers mere revenue generating centers for the corporate “health” care complex? The same people who have become beyond rich off of blood and Our treasury for oil? Anybody’s blood but their own, that is. Those guys?
8
Umm, don't we have missiles on boats there too? Just on bigger, really bigger boats. And it's not even our neighborhood.
179
And in recent history we used our missiles to shoot down an Iranian civilian jetliner, killing something like 290 people.
15
@SC: An Arleigh Burke class destroyer, or a nuclear aircraft carrier, is a really bigly boat. And I strongly suspect we will never see a USS Donald Trump.
3
Coming back to the US in April after a few months abroad, we have been hearing much about our favorite national security adviser cum war monger, John Bolton and seeing his picture in the papers and on TV new. And by most accounts, he is crazier than Trump and often, Trump has to restrain Bolton from starting WWIII, rather than the other way around!!
During our stay abroad, we had visited Israel in March. On this trip, the Israeli guide told us, among other biblical stories, stories about David and Goliath, Samson and Delilah, etc.
After having recently been refreshed about the stories of Samson [ ' .. renowned for the prodigious strength that he derived from his uncut hair. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Samson] it strikes me that Bolton's untrimmed mustache, besides making him look crazy, is probably also the source of his prodigious craziness.
I wonder if it will be possible to find a modern Delilah who will charm him enough into trimming, or even shaving off, his unkempt mustache.
If that happens, there will be less of this constant drum-beat of war and we may be able to sleep in peace once more.
@Dreamer
Are you serious?
4
This is an administration that lies with impunity; that refuses accountability and Congressional oversight when it pleases; and that breaks the law and files frivolous lawsuits to stall for political gain. Why should we believe anything they say or leak?
4
I fully understand the Administration's concern, and I would want them to be vigilant , but Not beat the war Drums and get Americans and the World Nervous. I don't understand Trump will talk to Putin and rather nicely, Speak to the Saudi Murder's and to Kim, To China No of these Countries are real friends of ours, so why Are we not speaking to Iran? There should be diplomatic lines between Iran and the U.S.
3
Putin using stolen emails and social media to help elect Trump with Trump's open arms upsets us, but the US talking about regime change in Iran by bombing them into rubble we call foreign policy. Maybe we should take a long look in the mirror.
1
So the Trump White House is howling over missiles being loaded onto some Iranian fishing boats, yet Trump totally gives a pass to Russia after it deployed a new class of *nuclear* missiles along its western border aimed directly at our European allies. Is anyone spotting a not so small disparity here?
5
I'm concerned that Trump has stated he doesn't want to go to war with Iran unless he is pushed into it by a major "event." I have every reason to believe he will create that event to justify war and make it look like his hands are clean. He nearly always telegraphs his plans in advance, and this is no different. Furthermore, a staged event on US soil or against US military in the Middle East would be just the excuse he's looking for to declare martial law or otherwise abuse his emergency declaration. Let's not even talk about how badly he wants to use nuclear weapons. The combination of Trump being unilaterally able to launch nukes and the current emergency status should be a top concern for Congress.
2
it's come to this: because of the unbalanced and dangerous isolationist radicals that run the country by fear ... i have to support the the other side. so i'm backing Iran this time around.
Anything to deflect the public's attention from his criminal enterprises. Including starting a war and killing thousands of people.
5
What the GOP is showing the world today is what many smaller, non European countries already knew for decades: when the US says that there has been no world war for seventy years now, and that that's thanks to America's leadership, it's actually saying that it only accepts to talk about a "world war" when it's the West that is being destroyed by a war, whereas all other US-initiated wars will be called "cold wars" (read: waged too far away from home to feel the heat and smell of burned flesh) or wars "for democracy".
Vietnam, Latin America, and the Middle East: they've all been destroyed by America's hunger for money, cheap resources, and a flourishing military industry.
President Obama got his Nobel Peace Prize precisely because he understood this, strongly disagreed with it, and made America adopt a U-turn.
But then, the American people quickly turned back to voting for people like Bolton and a WH cabinet full of millionaires eager to continue the exact same massive destruction of other countries, only to advance their own agenda of increasing personal wealth.
If anybody is still wondering why Obama got his Peace Prize, THIS is it: because in two decades he has been the only one to get the American people choose peace instead of war. And because he has been the only one he knew how to broker international, multilateral peace agreements, and agreements that could even withstand the subsequent GOP attacks for a couple of years ...
4
Unless you have read about how two or more big powerful military powers fight wars, you cannot grasp how much more destructive wars between them can be. The wars since World War II were bad, very bad, but they were very, very small and not anywhere near as bad as was that war that ended with nuclear bombings. Future wars of that kind risk consequences that could kill billions of people.
"It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber."
-Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, 1979.
It's such a tragedy that our "empire" is built on death and destruction and not peaceful, life-enhancing, ends.
3
It is once again the time to pull out the old VCR (or DVD player) and watch "Wag The Dog".
2
This is just manufacturing a lousy excuse for needless, bloody, expensive, dangerous action. Let's put Trump and Bolton on the front lines of an attack as see how they do.
2
Fire Bolton and Pompeo They are endangering our national security and are trying to draw us into a unnecessary war. If I were on Twitter I would do start a # Fire Bolton feed. We can’t let this happen as American people we don’t want this. We have to do more than write comments, we need to act to stop this madness.
3
Sounds like trumps version of the infamous "aluminum tubes".
2
Riiight - We're supposed to believe a continually lying regime led by Trump to go to war. What Iran needs is a substantial nuclear program to deter rogue nations from bullying them.
Time for John Bolton to go - he is just a hate monger and a war monger! Trump only likes this Iran conflict because of the distraction it creates for his administrations's corrupt and criminal behavior that has been laid before the American people in the Mueller Report and the criminal prosecutions that have resulted from it. Trump is a master at creating chaos and conflict.
5
Bolton and the neocons are at it again. Blowing up the Middle East once wasn't enough for them. Here we go again.
5
I think Trump is trying to set the stage to become a wartime president heading into the next election. Identifying and focusing on a perceived enemy is a tried and true tactic of dictatorial regimes. Such gamesmanship would fit the Trump administration's behavior thus far.
2
John Bolton has never met a war he hasn't liked. He went to McDonough School, that at the time he was enrolled, was a military academy.
1
Given all the trash talk from this corrupt, obstructionist, and insane group of people occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and one half of the capital building, explain why ordinary citizens, who have even a smattering of knowledge of how government is supposed to work, are not demonstrating in the streets.
1
The biggest problem here is John Bolton. The Neocons decided that Trump was easily manipulated and, assuming they have any moral scruples, put them aside, and got jobs in the administration. They can now carry out their fondest war mongering dreams at everyone's expense.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/16/john-bolton-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-danger
4
Everyone knows Bolton lies to start wars. Why would anyone think this is different?
2
Waiting for trump to declare war on Switzerland
Would a President Clinton ignore the findings of her IC - and brush off the threat?
Just as Dick Cheney led G.W. Bush into an unnecessary war in Iraq, John Bolton wants to lead the Donald into an unnecessary war in Iran.
In both cases it was all about their chauvinistic, racist world views, narcissism and lust for wealth and power and has nothing to do with the security of the US and offers no benefit to the American people, only death and debt.
Again, will be let these knaves twist the truth to lay traps for fools? If so, then we are the fools.
2
This is the John Bolton sequel to the war satire, "Wag the Dog". It's co-producers include Bibi Netanyahu, Mike Pompeo and a host of US military-industrial oligarchs, who stand to make a ton of money from this farce.
Fan support for Bolton's tragi-comedy is primarily coming from US Evangelicals ans closet Zionists, since it supports elements of their religious alternative reality and the "end of days".
Their war will cost the lives of thousands of American military. It will keep the US firmly enmeshed in the Middle East conflagration for another 20 years.
"Wag the Dog II" is being directed by the famous con man, village idiot and Imperial President, Donald Trump.
1
Iraq WMD all over again.
How is this criminal insanity possible?
159
@Bill Wolfe
Because we failed to punish those that deliberately lied to us in order to get us into that war. What was the consequences for Bush, Powell, Rice, Cheney, Bolton and the rest? Lucrative book deals. Thanks Obama!
6
Doesn’t the Constitution give Congress the sole power to initiate war? Like it gives Congress the sole power to declare tariffs? And the sole power to impeach a federal officer and secure evidence pertinent thereto?
Speaker Pelosi, you really think moderation, caution and inaction until November 3, 2020 are the correct responses in these perilous times? The nation’s house is on fire.
3
@Julie B
A law passed by Congress right after 9/11 gives the WH the legal power to initiate wars.
Obama had tried to increase congressional oversight again, but the GOP voted it down.
And EITHER you want the US government to adopt a foreign policy based on "moderation, caution", OR you support Bolton and his attack first think later "philosophy".
You can't do both simultaneously. So especially when the GOP gets once again totally overheated, it's crucial for this country - and the world - to at least still have ONE leader in DC who manages to remain calm and think.
As to your idea that thinking and remaining calm means "inaction": that's precisely what the whole GOP warmongering is based on, remember?
In real life, what is truly hard is to have the patience and perseverance and competence to work tirelessly, day after day, and mostly behind the scenes, to obtain real political agreements. Pelosi's entire career has shown that this is precisely one of her strongest points.
2
It is not binary: either Bolton’s reckless insanity or Pelosi’s extreme caution.
If you were here, you might feel how the absence of effective push back from the Democratic House, even if only via coordinated and energized messaging, is sapping strength from the opposition to Trump.
Without passionate leadership, even the most committed activists I know feel overwhelmed and deflated by each day’s Trump Administration outrage.
We know discouraging and exhausting the “liberals” is part of the Trump/Miller/GOP strategy, but it is working for now.
With the current wave of egregious assaults on the rule of law, diminishing standard of life for most Americans, and now absurd pretexts for starting yet another deadly, costly war as the nation’s deficits soar, we the people should be marching in the streets. Why aren’t we? Part of the answer lies with lackluster and scattershot Democratic leadership.
And, yes, I am supporting and encouraging another well-organized march.
You also help make my point. Congress can and should repeal laws by which it has ceded constitutional powers to the executive. The House could start that process.
2
Small boats can be easily destroyed or sunk by the capabilities of our military. The trick is doing so before they launch their missiles. How hard is that with so many assets right there? I think that Bolton is deliberately using them to provoke the Iranian leadership with forces capable of conducting major operations. Being a careless man who thinks that diplomacy is just warfare at a different stage of hostilities, I think that he is oblivious about the real dangers of such saber rattling tactics.
8
1) The Trump administration has been provoking a crisis with Iran for a long time;
2) We can't believe anything that the Trump administration says. It has no credibility.
Trump must be impeached. This is serious.
12
@Josey
The problem is that nothing indicates that Mike Pence will be better able to stand up against Bolton than Trump, as Pence clearly can't even stand up against Trump.
What we have to realize is that the same, corrupt forces inside the GOP that have brought us the Iraq war and so many other problems, are still fully alive and kicking, and are still dominating the GOP establishment.
This won't change by impeaching Trump, it will only change when "we the people" force the GOP itself to change.
2
I vaguely remember the grainy photos Dubya's people used to justify invading Iraq over supposed WMDs.
You know, I've just realized that Trumpers have few original ideas. They just try warmed over gambits, the only difference being that they double down on them when there is resistance.
Guys like Bolton want to try their failed ideas over and over again, hoping next time they will work. When saner heads go along, you have to wonder what they think they will get out of it when the gambit fails...
10
could Iran attack US Naval assets in the gulf region? is Iran a proxy state of Russia?
the answer to both those questions is yes. I can definitely justify this as I am a Navy veteran of the failed rescue mission to free the hostages in 1980. at the time the Iranians possessed fast attack boats equipped with Cruise missiles provided by Russia. I can only imagine what they posses today.
do I think this is Iraq all over again? of this I am positive. for Iran to attack would be utter madness. our allies don't support Trump nor Bolton, a right wing Israel just dieing to strike Iran, and a jihadist Saudia Arabia. Would you prod these bullies?
I think the walls are closing in on this crony government. So why not fabricate the sinking of the Maine again?
10
Sounds like Gulf of Tonkin all over again.
6
Let's see ... a multilateral, international denuclearization deal where Iran acquires no nuclear weapons for fifteen years was supposed to be "too weak" for this self-declared master in "the art of the deal".
HE's the one who knows how to NEGOTIATE, he told us.
No more violence committed by illegal immigrants coming in from Mexico, as he knows how to negotiate a deal with the Mexican government that will make Mexico pay for a wall (and if not, he'll force the GOP Congress to build a wall, and if not, he will of course be able to force a GOP-Democrats Congress to build a wall, as Democrats are notoriously weak negotiators!).
It will be "so easy".
No more dying because of lack of healthcare, as he knows how to negotiate with Congress and big Pharma in order to obtain a deal that will repeal Obamacare and replace it with a bill that insures even more Americans, at even lower costs.
It will be "so easy".
And now that his two signature campaign promises failed miserably ... he tells us he won't even START to try to negotiate with Iran anymore, but instead throw away his main foreign policy campaign promise too and just bomb it and "see what happens".
And already, GOP Senators are telling us that it will be "so easy".
So much for "the art of the deal".
13
I'm going to step away from the political side of this discussion to talk about something I have a great deal of experience with... Naval Weapons Systems.
The one element that really isn't being discussed, is how minor the actual risk is to US naval vessels these missiles actually are. The US navy is without question the most advanced on the entire planet, and each vessel has a bevy of self defence systems specifically designed to deal with this type of threat (and usually far more advanced missiles).
The ships work with a shell concept with the outer layer being complex anti-air missiles coordinated with the vessel's fire control radar, the next being naval gunnery, and if the missile manages to make it through that it will have to contend with multiple Close-In-Weapon-System's (semi-autonomous 4500rmp gatling guns with their own search and track radar).
Even that brief summary doesn't take in to account other countermeasures that modern warships can take such as jamming, decoy's or carrier support.
Essentially what I'm trying to say is that, while Iran arming these small vessels is by it's very nature an increased level of threat, the net increase in danger for US naval vessels is minimal.
As an analogy, these missiles pose the same level of threat that a guy with a shoulder launched RPG does to a tank division. Sure, if a thousand things go wrong a little damage might occur, but they were designed to counter exactly that threat.
6
Even if the Iranians are a bit fanatical, they have plenty of people who know about what you have described. That would lead one to conclude that the target for these boats are not naval warships. It would indicate that these measures are inappropriate reactions to whatever threat that these boats represent. A misrepresentation of reality as an excuse to move a big force into the area to do saber rattling.
The tactics used to attack the destroyer Cole evaded the defensive systems by not indicating a threat until counter measures were no good. Reason enough to believe that our ships are not the targets for these missiles on small boats.
@Casual Observer
I'm glad you brought up the USS Cole, because it is an outstanding example of technology adapted to account for a new type of threat. The attack on the USS Cole happened in 2000 and it was very much an eye opening for the naval community.
The world was a very different place before 9/11, and small boats that were perceived not to be a threat were allowed close to warships, simply because it was convenient and nobody was worried.
Since then, not only have a wide array of safety procedures and protocols put in place, but weapon systems were upgraded as well.
That CIWS mount I mentioned in my post used to be built entirely to shoot down incoming missiles. Since the USS Cole they have been upgraded to include a Thermal Imaging Camera capable of easily maintaining a lock on a small boat.
So now, a small boat wouldn't even be allowed to get within 1000 yards of a US vessel, and if one did and made a move that could be interpreted as hostile it would be gone in literally seconds.
"Images". Where have we heard that phrase before? Are American citizens willing to rely on assertions of images to get us into another war? Will Congress rely on images?
Never mind- Congress doesn't count for anything with this administration.
5
Helicopters can destroy small boats. As can the boats used by SEALS. As can fighter bombers. As can... nobody needs the big forces as are being announced that are being moved into the area, that is overkill and a waste of resources. But it’s provocative and a move that would be appropriate to a far bigger threat.
This move is a belligerent act. It is just the kind of behavior that the U.S. made the world reject as unnecessary after WWII. We are acting like the states that plunged the world into two world wars.
4
This threat of war is all Trump's doing, goaded by his lap dog John Bolton, who has been salivating for years for "regime change" in Iran. Trump is single-handedly destroying an alliance with our allies in Europe that was forged by the deaths of millions of people during WWII. It is beyond infuriating that the will of one con man can push the world to the brink of war for his own personal and political gain. Trump started this provocation with Iran by tearing up the nuclear deal just to spite Obama and show his base he's "in charge", followed by more crippling sanctions. What does anyone expect Iran to do? Seriously? Roll over and bow to King Trump? I've witnessed neighbors attacking and suing one another over minor property disputes! And Trump wants to make us believe, with the same "fake news" tactic that got us into the longest conflict/war in America's history in Iraq that there is an imminent threat against the U.S. The difference is, Iran DOES have nuclear material. To quote the last lines of The Bridge On The River Kwai, a movie about the futility of war where the heroes died..."Madness, madness..." Fade To Black.
5
Where are the diplomats in this? Why are there not high-level discussions between Iran and the United States?
Oh, yeah. They attacked our embassy a while ago, and we withdrew from the recent nuclear treaty. With no discussion, we are reduced to making dangerous guesses based on photographs.
4
Trump played again
Remember Patton's blow up tanks before D-Day?
1
Boats with missiles on them strike me as the nation state equivalent of a person with a gun on view in a holster. It amazes me that these staunch second amendment advocates would be alarmed at the sight, when they expect Americans to tolerate it in the streets.
3
The basis of all this saber rattling by the Trump regime and its fellow Republicans is so-called intelligence that no one has seen. Given that Trump has systematically removed anyone with actual expertise in anything from government, replacing them with the type of lying sycophants he surrounds himself with in his business and personal life, why does anyone believe this? Trump has shown, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that he lacks the morals, foresight and patriotism to do what is best for America. Getting us into a major war to improve his reelection chances is just more "business as usual" for this narcissistic sociopath.
4
Bolton is at it yet again - the man has an unquenchable thirst for war no matter the consequences for those who will have to fight it.
What is Congress doing to halt this aggressive and dangerous man and Trump's ignorant subservience?
3
A US led war with Iran is good for business, good for Trump’s base, good for Israel, good for Saudi Arabia, bad for Hezbollah and Syria, and really bad for the average American and Iranian who will end up bearing the brunt of this repeat misadventure.
Time to buy big oil, Halliburton, Boeing, Raytheon, and/or Lockheed Martin stock again?
3
Sorry, don’t mean to disrespect our intelligence agencies, but this reminds me of General Colin Powell’s mobile chemical plants in Iraq. Powell was a dupe; Bolton is just downright determined to start a war.
6
"The Pentagon has not released the [declassified] photograph."
Why not? Hasn't anyone at the Pentagon or the White House learned that you can't cry "security threat" without producing EVIDENCE for the public?
Tip for the WH national security team: Read up on the Cuban missile crisis to see how evidence is released to the public. There are numerous books on the Cuban missile crisis.
1
If and his chicken hawk minions manage to push our nation into war this will make the Iraq/Afghanistan conflict seem like a walk in the park. Price tag for this folly will exceed $8 TRILLION. Trump will put our nation into bankruptcy just like he his many useless business ventures.
4
In the words of George W. Bush:
"Fool me once, shame on, shame on you...
But fool me can't be fooled again."
It was funny when Bush mangled that phrase, but it should resonate now as a reminder of the bad intel that came out of Iraq. What scares me more than images of Iran with missiles is images of a war-monger that is trigger-happy John Bolton, grandstanding and ready to make his dream come true.
Let cooler heads prevail.
4
Remember the:
a) Maine
b) Gulf of Tonkin
c) weapons of mass destruction...
This is an old playbook.
9
As a non-US citizen reading this, I think it is clear the US (under the GOP) has now become a rogue nation, and is a menace to the rules based international order. The fact that this is the same GOP party who started Iraq war based on flawed intelligence is mind boggling.
885
@John Clarke
Thank you for saying the GOP and not just Trump. It is indeed the culmination of a long degradation and corruption of the Republican party.
97
@John Clarke Agree with much of this. However, the Attack on Iraq had little to do with "flawed intelligence." Bush, and more importantly, Cheney, wanted Iraq for years. Not only are they relentless hawks, Cheney made tens of millions of dollars from the war -- stealing oil from a sovereign nation. As horrific as the actions of the government was during Iraq, including 1M Iraqis killed, war with Iran would be infinitely worse for everyone. The Iranians know this. They are not going to try to start a war with the U.S.
I know the reporters for the Times do excellent investigative work, but I'm not a fan of the first few paragraphs of this article. After the debacle of enabling the war-criminal Bush administration, the media needs to be incredibly skeptical whenever they get sources from the "intelligence community." I'm tired of innocent Middle Easterners dying due to: A. Oil B. Military Industrial Complex C. Right-wing fanaticism against Muslims.
It needs to end. Yes, there is an election in 2020, where we need to take back as many seats as possible, in order to get some semblance of a functional government back in place. But with how many media outlets report how great the economy is (it isn't) and how job numbers are doing great (incredibly misleading), I really worry Trump could beat Biden. He has the incumbent "tag" too, which always helps. Biden's racist and corporate past is really going to hurt him. Here's hoping the "correct" candidate is nominated, in Sen. Sanders.
63
@John Clarke
On flawed intelligence? No, they were deliberately lying then and they are lying now.
90
Fake. Fake accusations, fake scare tactics. fake logic. Fake everything. That's what the Trump administration is trafficking in, once again. Iran was not building bombs. Iran was not planning to invade America or its allies. Iran had missiles pointed at what? The warships threatening them in their own waters? That sounds like a good idea if a super power like the USA is cruising into your territory. The Trump administration is a fake government that serves, not America, but the whims and faulty plans of Russia.
12
Thank God Europe and especially British intelligence is “not worried”. Their help has been so useful in the past . Maybe they just want to keep buying that high grade Iranian crude?
3
@James Arthur
They were right on the Iraq war and WMD, remember? And it's precisely Trump who forced the GOP on public television to admit that they have been horribly wrong and lied, during the primaries.
And it's the GOPe who lied BECAUSE they wanted cheap Iraqi crude, rather than being such "masters in the art of the deal" that they'd be able to negotiate a good price for it - as Europe is now doing with Iran, remember ... ?
4
It's obvious the GOP wants to start another war as a distraction from Trump's collusion with Russia, obstruction of justice, failed campaign promises (health care, wall, infrastructure, immigration) and stonewalling of Congressional oversight.
Besides providing a distraction, they'll accuse anyone against Trump of not supporting our country.
A five year old can spot the scam from a mile away.
10
Right out of the Gulf of Tonkin playbook.....
..... which rewarded the US with a decade long war, ultimately lost, many 10s of thousands of American soldiers killed, hundreds of thousands wounded, an economy wrecked by years of war... leading to double digit inflation that was out of control for years.
They are not even trying to be clever here... and the result will be more trillions of tax payer dollars wasted, and thousands of US lives lost... AGAIN.
4
war, war, war, war, war, war
eisenhower spoke the truth then and it is still true now
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
12
The article makes no mention of behind-the-scenes discussions between the US and Iran, without or through mutually trusted interlocutors. That’s a significant and worrisome omission such discussions could clarify the parties’ intentions and positions.
Especially in light of recent posturing and pronouncements, the likelihood of tragic misunderstandings must be minimized.
1
Tonkin Gulf = Persian Gulf?
Vietnam: No army, no navy, no airforce. Easy win. Result? 50,000 US dead. 350,000 Vietnamese dead. US defeat.
Iran: 500,000 man army, tactical missiles, nukes within one year. Two air strikes and they're defeated? On their own soil?The entire population may not love the ayatollas, but they already despise the US, starting from 1954 with the CIA coup against Mossadegh and Iranian democracy.
5
The problem is that Mr. Trump’s credibility is practically nonexistent, and no one apart from perhaps the other Trumps knows what really motivates him. Is Mr. Trump is using his presidential powers to create turmoil in the Middle East, restrict the oil supply to jack up the price of oil and thus help his Kremlin and Riyadh friends?
Given that the US is no longer dependent on imported oil, the US has no business in the Persian Gulf to justify sending the navy and thousands of troops to become shooting targets of religious fanatics.
It is strange how this incompetent man in the Oval Office is being taken seriously by so many US citizens.
9
Having worked the Iran portfolio for multiple years, I doubt this Administration has either the political leadership or the military commanders in place to throttle down this ill advised saber-rattling. Eighty-one million Persians will be our foe...and that's all you need to know.
6
Mountains. The Italian Campaign in World War II. Attacks across the Rapido. History being ignored.
So until just recently the Iranians have not equipped their small boats with small missiles? I really find that hard to believe.
Also lets try to apply some perspective here. The US sends very large ships with large missiles on them and planes with missiles and nuclear weapons across the globe to sail off the coast of Iran. While doing so we apply sanctions and cut off all trade with Iran to starve its economy; its people. Can you see why the Iranians would feel threatened by us and want to defend themselves.
Where is diplomatic dialog with Iran? I realize both Iran and Saudi Arabia are Islamic based dictatorships who both participate and fund violence and terrorism (19 of the 20 911 terrorists were Saudi). Why is it that Trump will talk to and protect Saudis but sees Iranians as enemies and refuses to have dialog with them. Yes, Iran and Saudi Arabia as different sects of Islam are enemies of each other. So why did we pick sides and are pushing Iran into a conflict?
8
This is what has come of the deal maker in chief. Trump needs to understand that the Evangelicals plus Bolton et al would make his Presidency Rapture. Why are we in a rush to go to another war? we do know that wars are never the answer, we are still in Afghanistan and Iraq almost 20 years after we were told by another Republican Administration it would be a piece of cake, a 'cake walk'. We do remember the 'Shock and Awe' the 'Slam Dunk’ and the 'Mission accomplished' I still wonder what that mission was?
Our interpretation of intelligence and the sequential progression of events needs a sober President to mull on. Bolton and Pompeo with the connivance of Shanahan (a Military Industrial Complex sales person) doesn't give me any confidence re the advice Trump is getting to be balance at all.
May God save our young ones who are about to be sent to the most unwinnable of recent wars.
4
WMD all over again. Same reason, same outcome. Military contractors are salivating.
11
This is Iraq all over again. Of course the Iranians would move missiles into a defensive posture when the United States is sending so much armament into their area. There is no evidence whatsoever that they have made any moves to produce a nuclear weapon. If we go to war, it will be a tragedy of immense proportion’s.
8
I could have sworn I thought Robert Mueller was at one time scheduled to testify yesterday? Iran taking his name and Russia's out of these days' politically charged news is quite a feather in their cap. I saw a picture this morning of Chuck and Nancy huddled together much like they've been for months over Trump collusion conspiracies, so that was nothing unusual; but if there is war with Iran and the animosity still heavy in the air from these last two years of that, the Iranians don't even need to fire a shot to win their war with us for the damage to America from within has already been done. This new Iran war may turn out to literally be a totally gratuitous war not unlike Iraq's but for entirely different reasons. Other countries must really resent us taking out our own problems with ourselves on their soil.
2
"“This is real. This is not a fake thing. It’s not being made up by somebody. This president does not even want to have troops in the Middle East.” Senator Marco Rubio.
So... this is not real. This is a fake thing. It's being made up by somebody. And the President wants to have troops in the Middle East.
14
How many times must Republican administrations lie to get the country entangled in a conflict with blatant falsehoods before this paper of record is skeptical about the peaceful intents of our foreign policy.
The United States did not withdraw from JCPOA, it is in unilateral violation of a multipartite agreement. Would you know if that by reading the Times and other media. Iran is essentially keeping their end of the bargain while the US is ensuring that they receive no benefits out of that. Now that Iran has said that they will stop following some parts of the agreement, watch the administration accompanied by the cheerleading media justify agrresion against them.
3
1. Would Liberals prefer President Trump and Bolton ignore this threat?
2. Would Liberals then take the blame for an attack?
3. Or would they instead be the first to demand impeachment and imprisonment of Trump if that malpractice resulted in attacks on American ships or personnel, and the death of Americans?
1
@Dr. John: "Liberals," along with everyone who is paying attention to reality and engaged in relatively clear thinking, understand that the only threat is from American warmongers -- as usual.
"Liberals" won't need to take the blame for any attack, because it is nearly certain that an attack would either be initiated by the US (or its Saudi or Israeli allies) or in response to intolerable provocation by those entities.
Sadly, it's easy to fool some of the people all of the time, and far too many of you are repeatedly fooled by alarmist nonsense about "foreign danger."
3
@Dr. John
1. Speaking for all liberals, we would prefer not to be lied into a second disastrous, unjust war in Southwest Asia.
2. Like Republicans took responsibility for there being no WMD's in Iraq?
3. Like they demanded impeachment and imprisonment of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld for the senseless deaths of five thousand-plus US combatants and the deaths of over one million Iraqi civilians?
4
@Dr. John
In real life, this president even lies about his own inauguration crowds, remember?
And he hired Bolton, the liar-in-chief and architect of the Iraq war, to design his foreign policy - a foreign policy that is the EXACT opposite of what he campaigned on.
So no, if he can't show any evidence to Congress here, it's fair to assume that once again, he's simply lying, and doing so for one single reason: to distract his voters and keep his "ratings" among them high.
Finally, Trump withdrew from the nuclear agreement. THAT, together with hiring Bolton and Pompeo, strongly increased the tensions in the region and makes Iran prepare for a US attack, remember? To somehow blame this on "Liberals" means to not understanding anything about Iran at all.
2
I haven't seen this blatant an attempt to construct a crisis since Dick Cheney visited the Pentagon and ordered them to make Saddam Hussein look as menacing as possible. Cheney, like Trump, was the master of evading the draft. There's a pattern here with these hardliners who want everybody but themselves to go fight. Bolton was the lunatic fringe until Trump brought him back to power. Relegate him back to the sidelines before we find ourselves in a war that will surely bury this country in debt and division.
6
"In the debate over Iran, Representative Seth Moulton, Democrat of Massachusetts, has introduced legislation to require the Trump administration to get congressional approval before “engaging in hostilities” with Iran."
Don't we already have that law? Um. Isn't it in the Constitution?
5
So the facts at this point seem to be:
There are photos of Iranian boats with missiles on them
...in the Persian Gulf
...which happens to be their coast line and border
...and this is a threat to US forces/bases which are in the area
...both in the gulf and surrounding countries around Iran
...in two cases recently invaded by the US.
...at least 7,000 miles or more away from the USA.
It would be interesting to read an article which actually argues a case as to why the Iranians should not feel threatened at this point. The aggression certainly does not seem to be coming from them. The Iranian government certainly is far from blameless but they aren't stupid - yet this rhetoric from the US seems to make the run up to the Iraq war look eloquent at this point.
6
People do understand that American ships have antimissile defenses that are pretty good right? And that if any Iranian ship threatened an American naval vessel, it would not even be contest of reach or firepower. The Iranian navy is more like a collection of armed tugboats.
We know that Bolton has been fixated on Iran for a long time. Pompeo and Trump want to appear tough. Why they think attacking Iran is a good idea remains unexplained. The only thing I am certain of is that Trump does NOT "know more than the generals," as he has claimed. Nor should any military action be undertaken at the direction of his "gut." Wars are easy to start, but not so easy to end. (Trump should ask George W Bush about that). With Trump, one suspects that statecraft may take second place to distraction from his legal troubles. Robert Gates, former Sec of Defense said anyone who wants to start a land war in Asia should have his head examined.
6
This is just another Trump/Bolton "Wag The Dog" exercise. Remember that it was Bolton and his far-right (dare we say Fascist) cronies that faked evidence to get us into Iraq and Afghanistan. That sure worked out well didn't it? It has been 16 years and no WMDs have been found despite Bolton's claim that Iraq was building atom bombs. There is no credible evidence that Iran intends to attack anyone, let alone the US.
3
Here we go again. Remember the words of Albert Einstein. To paraphrase the definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different outcome. Vietnam , Iraq and now Iran. Please excuse me if I no longer trust the judgment of our leaders. They are going to have to attack us before I will change my mind.
3
Iran may be a hostile regime; however, they aren’t insane and they aren’t stupid. I can’t imagine they would find it in their best interest to launch a missile attack on the US Navy.
I’m more concerned about the fact that we have an unstable and intellectually challenged president who might put lives at risk for a poorly thought out strategy.
4
Thats it. Congress, cut Trump off now. Not one US penny, not one US soldier for Trump and the Republicans FOURTH Mideast war of choice since 911. Starting today, Saudis and Israelis start paying and fighting and dying themselves if they go on feuding with their neighbors.
1
My guess: Trump knows that the congressional Mueller investigation will hurt him and his family. So he needs leverage to try to force Congress to stop investigating and start pretending that nothing happened.
He knows Congress doesn't want an Iran war, whereas he surrounded himself in the WH with Republicans who want exactly that, for years already, AND who don't hesitate to hide and distort intelligence information to get us there, as Bolton has shown when it comes to the Iraq war (by the way, HOW can Trump only hire "the best", be the only GOP primary candidate who had the guts to tell the truth about the horrible Iraq war, AND then hire its very architect Bolton ... ?).
So is he now threatening America with an Iran war in order to try to force Congress and the American people to no longer try to get his tax returns and stop all investigations ... ?
6
Small boats with missiles have been part of the Iranian arsenal for decades. Why is these suddenly a problem?
7
Since when are small Iranian boats with missiles on the a new thing? They have bothered American warships for a decade or more. bolton and pompeo gotta come up with something a bit more compelling in their 'intelligence stream' to justify a war with Iran.
8
The US invasion in Iraq. At least 250,000 refugees. Half a million dead citizens, 4.4 million displaced citizens. Half the doctors in the country left.
US Casualties, 4,424, 31,952 injured. Roughly 6,000 returning Veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan commit suicide every year.
The combined cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is north of 2.5 Trillion dollars. It has been financed by debt.
US military operations are now carried out by over 60% private contractors. For profit mercenaries who aren't loyal to the US chain of command. They have committed war crimes financed by American taxpayers.
We citizens aren't responsible but we are complicit in these crimes. We can't let John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Donald Trump drag us into another disastrous war.
12
An Israeli delegation, led by national security adviser Meir Ben Shabbat, met with Bolton and other White House officials a month ago, to discuss possible Iranian plans. Bolton himself tweeted on April 15 about his meeting with Shabbat:
“Great meeting with Israeli National Security Advisor Meir Ben-Shabbat today. The close United States-Israel strategic partnership reflects the tremendous strength of the ties between our governments and the citizens of our two allied countries.”
Among leaders of US allies, who have either warned against an escalation with Iran or been quite about the US deployment of an aircraft carrier and bombers to the Persian Gulf, Benjamin Netanyahu was the only one who praised the Trump administration’s tough stance. He and Bolton are eager to start a war with Iran. It won’t come as a surprise if Israel has been feeding the US with intelligence about Iranian activities that seemingly pose a threat to the US.
“Iran began mobilizing its forces after Washington issued new economic sanctions against the country, moved to stop nations from buying Iranian oil and designated the Revolutionary Guards, an arm of the Iranian military, a terrorist group.” It was their way to vent their anger. But it doesn’t necessarily mean Iranians want to start a war.
5
The Six Day War was a fluke in that nothing unanticipated occurred that stopped Israel from a quick and decisive victory. The Yom Kippur War proved to be a lot more challenging. But people like Netanyahu see these as proof of their destiny to always be victorious. Iran is too big for Israel to fight by itself to rid the world of Iran’s current regime. But with the U.S., Netanyahu is confident that it would happen. Hubris from Israel and a failure by the U.S. to grasp that we don’t have much luck with wars to change regimes except when we fight until our soldiers drag all of the enemy out of their hiding places at the cost of millions of lives, mostly civilians.
1
Trump is trying to distract Americans from trouble at home, pure and simple by doing that age old trick of creating another overseas evil enemy in the mind of taxpayers.
Frankly, it's a shop-worn trick. Americans should be upset that yet another president is demonising a foreign country in order to justify spending billions of taxpayer dollars on the military that would be better spent on things like infrastructure, education, universal healthcare system, etc.
246
@Scott eisenhower knew the truth: Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
34
@Scott
Right on. I sense another ginning up of intelligence to justify another ill-advised disaster. Vietnam: the Gulf of Tonkin,Iraq: "WMD's". Congress and the American people and yes the NYT, need to stand up against this phony bluster to prevent another stupid war.
8
@Scott
"Americans should be upset that yet another REPUBLICAN president is demonising a foreign country."
Fixed it for you. Otherwise spot on.
8
So, you’re telling me that a sovereign nation with a large military has boats with missiles on them in its own territorial waters?
Just wait until you find out what Russia’s military has in Ukraine.
278
@Benjamin Hinkley
And the Russian naval base in Syria. We have known about the Iranian gunboat threat for years. If they attack shipping, they can be countered without a carrier group.
Indeed, this group was just in the Med demonstrating capabilities to the Russians, got pulled away before they were done.
4
@Benjamin Hinkley You don't seem to understand. The U.S. is allowed to carry its saber where it wants and rattle it at will when it wants.
Other nations must seek permission.
11
There will be no allies to help us warmongers this time. This time, it'll be us alone. Iran is not Iraq. Iran, even crippled by sanctions, can make a mess of things.
Every day new chaos from Trump. All to avoid accountability (he hopes).
This man should be ousted from the presidency in any manner it can be done. I don't think we'll make it to 2020 without a truly major catastrophe. He might even time all this so he can 'postpone' the election; I put nothing past him and his insane advisers Bolton and Pompeo. Bolton drools for war (that mustache must get pretty darn wet with all the drool) and Pompeo holds weekly Bible studies with other Cabinet members who probably can't wait for The Rapture.
America! You are falling apart. I feel so sorry for our young people. Young people with a future ahead of them should leave this country. We truly are not civilized. Especially women should leave as the GOP sees you as bodies that are 'enemies' to be controlled, constrained, defeated and nothing more.
237
@sophia
You feel sorry for young Americans? Why? They voted Trump into office, just like anyone else.
2
@Richard Monckton
No they didn't. The majority of the electorate voted for the Democrat Hillary Clinton. By more than 3 million votes.
21
@sophia You're incorrect as to US allies. Israel signed a treaty with Turkmenistan more than ten years ago, allowing Isreali fighter-bombers to land and refuel at Ashgabat Airport fifty miles from the Iranian border and a couple of hundred miles from Tehran. Fully armed with bombs, Israeli planes have too short a range to hit Tehran and fly back to Israel, With this treaty they can sacrifice fuel for bombs, bomb Tehran, land in Turkmenestan, refuel , fly back safely to Israel. Anyone think Bibi won't take the chance to bomb Tehran? He's been itching for it for years. He's already bombed Iran twice, and the US didn't say boo.
6
“Deep mistrust of Mr. Trump’s national security team”. Mr. Bolton’s record is on full display and it isn’t pretty.
10
And the evidence that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction? Evaporated into thin air AFTER the US invaded and killed President Saddam Hussein, destabilizing the Mideast for years to come.
All we heard from Republicans in the push toward the Iraq war was WMDs, WMDs, WMDs --- and then there were none.
We're expected to believe them now? The same guys, with Trump a willing participant in whatever lies and corruption benefit him? Republicans never saw a war they didn't like.
Whatever happened to Trump's campaign promises to get out of foreign wars? I guess they went the same way as his promises of transparency and draining the swamp.
10
These missiles sound suspiciously similar to the "aluminum tubes" of yesteryear.
10
Something tells me we’re going to have to spread our wonderful freedom and democracy to the Iranians regardless of what they say or do. John Bolton has openly called for regime change and a war we will have. Always to war, it’s the American way.
11
“Small boats”... of Mass Destruction?
14
it all boils down to shipping lanes and free trade
1
How could we win a war against Iran if we couldn't even remove the Taliban?
10
@W.N Excellent question. I doubt anyone in or near the White House has an answer.
I have one question. How many boats with missiles and other armaments does the United States have in the Persian Gulf? We all know the answer is “plenty.” So if the U.S. claims the right to have military assets thousands of miles from its shores, does Iran not have the right to have such assets only a few miles from its shores?
What we are witnessing is a repeat of the buildup to the disastrous Iraq War. Americans had better wake up to this reality before it is too late.
18
Make no mistake, the escalation of war with Iran is merely a Saudi tactic to get the United States to fight their enemies for them. The current administration greatly diminishes the outcome of a conflict in Iran, while the truth is that Russia will find a way to enter the conflict, Iran will turn it's sights on Israel, and place the entire globe at risk of an all-out conflict. At the same time, the escalation of the trade war with China could also result in a military conflict; China would likely seize the opportunity while American forces were focused on the middle east. The Trump administration is needlessly escalating conflicts worldwide, with no regard to the outcome.
12
@TommyMac
The one thing I worry about is for someone like the Saudis to clandestinely stage an attack on US forces in the Persian Gulf and precipitate a war on Iran.
They seem to be pretty good at that in Yemen.
4
Will we ever learn?
7
@John
Where have all the flowers gone, long time passing.
1
@John Since WWII all of our wars have lacked official declaration of war from Congress, and been less than successful. We don't seem to learn at all.
1
Once again American's are forced to see Wag the Dog play out in real life. These manufactured wars seem to happen about once a decade, where to next!
6
Will Liberals please promise not to complain about the untold environmental damage if Iran sinks a few oil tankers?
2
@Dr. John And that comment seeks to justify exactly what? War with Iran?
2
@Dr. John: Will conservatives openly admit, when the true facts come to light, that Trump, Bolton and the rest of the Administration are lying about Iran? Since the vast majority of conservatives still claim that Barack Obama is not an American citizen despite the US Constitution, I doubt it.
4
@Dr. John
Except that for decades Iran did NOT go to war at all, whereas it's Bolton and his GOP that destroyed the Middle East and turned it into a WMR zone: a weapon of mass recruitment for anti-US terrorists zone.
Will you please promise not to complain about the Iran war after it will have become clear to you guys too what a horrible mistake it has been, killing thousands of our bravest young men and women all while killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians ... ? Because that's exactly what you did after the Iraq war, remember?
3
Maybe John Bolton should call Colin Powell and get the band back together.
14
@FXQ Wolfowitz ! He can explain why invading Iraq will be a "cake walk." and Douglas Feith !
Where is Colin Powell with his laser pointer and enlarged reconnaissance photos of chemical trucks presumably making mobile chemical WMD's? Instead this time it's boats? Not much originality this time either.
10
@John Doe
What a sad case is Powell. He totally blew his reputation out of the water (same with Condoleeza Rice) and to this day will not admit that he was stroked by the boss.
2
@Bob Burns, I agree why I also disagree that Trump is the Devil when I think back to the vile eight years under W. and Cheney and the horrible things those two conspired and pulled off, like stealing the reputation from who should have been America's first black president.
@Bob Burns He fell on his sword for the Republicans. It was a disgrace. And boy were the Republicans happy to get rid of the smartest guy in the room. It's no coincidence that the man they threw under the bus was black. Their old white fart egos couldn't take it.
The US designated Iran's Revolutionary Guard a "terrorist organization".
Definition of terrorism:
"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
The US "Shock and Awe" attack on Iraq was obviously violent and intended to intimidate. Thousands of civilians were killed. Bush's objective was political regime change.
18
I seem to remember the charts and graphs and white boards that were used as "evidence" to prove we should invade Iraq. All turned out to be lies in the end. The Trump administration, never one to benefit from history, now uses photographs as "evidence" that we should invade Iran. Really?
11
Vietnam was the same sorry tragic story as is asserted to us now. The big lie our government told was the USS Maddox was attacked by a phantom enemy PT boat in the Gulf of Tonkin one foggy night. No damage just radar images, maybe electronic ghosts. Congress was circumvented and many years later 2 million Vietnamese civilians were dead along with one million Vietnamese soldiers and 55,000 Americans. That ushered in Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge and another 3 million innocent souls were murdered by their neighbors.
This is madness and must stop before it begins.
2
@Ms. Pea Trump has already lied to the public over 10,000 times since he was inaugurated, so a few hundred more lies is nothing to him.
1
Could be another "war of choice" by a US Administration, with end runs around both the United Nations and the US Congress.
The US will end up isolated within a wall built by the Trump Administration.
7
Dear President Trump,
Before you send my 18 year old son off to fight another pointless war your security advisor desperately wants, will you please send your sons first. Perhaps, unlike you, they will do their duty, but probably not...
27
@JB---no trump has ever served--including the first one who came here after being exiled from his own country for refusing to serve---
17
@JB
Nobody's son has to fight anywhere they don't want to. This is 2019, not 1969.
Armies throughout history have been called upon to fight battles at the whims of their leaders. Don't like it? Don't enlist.
Captain, USMC (ret.) Vietnam 1968
2
@dahdog: Rich man's war, Poor man's fight.
2
I was wondering how Bolton would be linked to the inevitable war he was looking for... WMD Redux!
9
Bolton's itchy war fingers are all over this, and we should be very skeptical, since he was part of the neo-CON gang that lied us into the Iraq war buttressed by a photo of aluminum tubes that Cheney got Colin Powell to present.
Bolton has been on the warpath against Iran for decades, but smart people know his bias and know that he will say or do anything to have his way. Now he found willing ears in Trump, especially now when Trump is starting brushfires in as many areas as he can to deflect attention from his Mueller investigation "problems" and a Democratic House out to find the truth.
My first thought when I read the headline was Photoshop! Now that is sad that we can't believe our Republican administrations, but why should we?
Our GOP president, Mr. Trump, has lied more than 10,000 times since occupying the Oval office. He also told us not to trust our intelligence agencies, implying we should trust him??
Trump and Bolton get rid of anyone working under them who criticizes their plans and are not 1000% supportive of every wrongheaded plan their authoritarian and vindictive bosses demand.
How come most countries in the rest of the world smell a rat with Trump and Bolton, but not 38% of Americans?
20
Imagine that! Iran has armed boats off its own coast. The notion that Iran wants to attack US warships and start a war is laughable. What would they gain?
15
The fact that Trump behavior as POTUS has become more normalized day after day is chilling.
The fact that he represents the absolute worst in character yet gets a daily pass for over 2 years now as POTUS is chilling. Politicians should be embarrassed of what they have become, absolutely powerless when it comes enforcing the law on one of their own. Embarrassment is a trait most politicians don't have. Most are spineless lawyers who shift the wording of laws around to suit themselves and their corporate owners. Nothing gets done.
Politicians telling us if he was not the POTUS he would have already been charged with felonies is meaningless. It is a testament to the fact Trump and others are above the law and they should be ashamed of what they have created in DC.
9
Unfortunately our current 'leader' has neither the respect nor the trust of the free world. His choice in 'advisers' has always been suspect. His track record for bald faced lies and sudden reversals, his intent to do everything by himself, his way, has hamstrung any efforts we might make for diplomatic resolutions based on an allied front.
The Prima-donna POTUS sings alone, and it ain't pretty... or safe.
9
Will the Liberals please promise they will not demand the impeachment of President Trump if one of these non-threatening missiles hit a US aircraft carrier or destroyer killing scores of Americans?
@Dr. John
The President has told so many lies up to now , that when it comes times to trust him I feel very betrayed by him. Would you like a list of the lies?
11
The aircraft carrier is a sitting duck.
1
I don’t understand? Will Trump suddenly become a competent, rational, non liar if that were to occur?
12
The meme, "tension between the U.S. and Iran," is just propaganda.
First, it's not news. It could as well be "Thursday's Same-Old U.S. Reports about Iran."
Second, it's not symmetric. It entirely revolves around the U.S. projecting itself militarily into other regions, starting as far back as at least the 1940s, at which point the U.S. was picking up slack from the UK et al.
Third, it's not bilateral. The U.S. economic warfare is attacking the whole world (including U.S. firms).
Framing events Pres. Trump's way may preserve your White House press pass, but it misinforms the public.
4
More Republican lies. Just like the non-existent "weapons of mass destruction" lie used to start the war in Iraq. Fascists need wars to distract people from their crimes against the country.
It's treason until you get away with it.
26
Yeah, and don't forget those mobile chemical labs in Iraq that Collin Powell told us about.
13
This is like Deja Vu all over lying us into the Iraq war and the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam. We unilaterally abandoned the Iran Nuclear Deal. We started saber rattling, interfering in the Middle East and support Saudi Arabia despite their aggression in the area, the murder of Khashoggi, and the war in Yemen. Who exactly are the aggressors here?
It should not be lost on anyone that this Iran "crisis" coincides with the Mueller report and talk of impeachment. It should not be lost on anyone that there is an election next year and many are questioning whether Trump would cede power and some wonder whether he would hold an election at all. Would Trump declare emergency powers and suspend our constitution? Do we think Trump is capable of this subterfuge?
11
With Pompeo and Bolton what else would you expect. Being wrong over and over doesn’t seem to inform these hawks. And certainly Trump is itching for some confrontation so the he can demonstrate how tough he is during the election. More predictable than a 2 bit thriller.
14
"But other officials — including Europeans, Iraqis, members of both parties in Congress and some senior officials within the Trump administration — said Iran’s moves might mostly be defensive against what Tehran believes are provocative acts by Washington."
Why on earth would Iran be planning an attack on anything having to do with American targets or anything else. This is simply a means to portray a threat to American interests in the region and it is a prelude to armed conflict initiated by the US. This is another Iraq war in the making.
7
Photographs of missiles on (small) boats or boats or ships or something like that? Really?
President Bone Spurs actually thinks that the American people are going to fall for the old "Look, we have photos!" LIE again.
Trump's confrontation with Iran has been completely conjured up by a terrified President trying desperately to divert attention from his criminal investigations and his showdown with Congress.
So Trump Loving GOPers:
Behold the monster you have created.
100,000 troops to the Middle East?
God help us!
Now Trump's defying both House and Senate constitutional powers.
8
The base seems quiet on Iran. Maybe they realize whose sons and daughters will likely pay the real price.
10
Missiles that can be mounted on small boats are not a strategic threat. They could be used to strike oil tankers, yes, but Iran knows that shutting down the Gulf would cause them to lose support from Europe.
This, by itself cannot justify having non-essential personnel leave Iraq or Kurdistan. This smacks of sabre rattling and an attempt to gen up a conflict where none exists.
7
The skepticism about the administration's ramping up fears about Iran is fueled by the fact that we have a President who lies daily. How can we believe anything that this President or this administration says?
7
With Iran's economy in bad shape,
it is not in a position to start war
with USA. Missiles on the boat
are probably an entirely a defensive
move. It will be totally irresponsible
for Iran not to prepare defence
in the face of belligerence from USA
expressed by John Boton and Mike
Pompeo. With historic blunder in
case of WMDs in Iraq, any intelligence
has to be evaluated very carefully
before resorting to military action.
with 5000 American troops killed,
45,000 injured and trillions spent
in Iraq, we should be careful in starting
another war. When it starts, Bolton's
and Pompeo's son or daughter
should be sent there. How about
Trump, Jr. also volunteering to fight?
6
It will never be enough for Bolton and Pompeo. It will never be enough for Netanyahu. It will never be enough for MBS. As long as Iran continues to exist as a regional power and the center of Shia Islam, they will try to destroy it.
Most of us are old enough to have seen Bolton and Cheney create the fake case for war in Iraq. Many of us are old enough to have seen Iranians overthrow the tyrannical police state of the US-imposed Shah of Iran. Some of us are old enough to have seen the USA and Britain overthrow democracy in Iran. But a lot of young Americans will never get the chance to grow old if we continue our attack on Iran and eventually create a pretext to go to war. Iraq was child’s play by comparison and we had allies then. Yes, a lot of young Americans will again die in defense of arrogance and ignorance and flat out lying.
12
IS IT CONCEIVABLE that we start a war with Iran to shift the attention off Mueller and Trump's finances??
11
Wouldn't be the first time lies are used to start a war so the rich can get richer.
4
What again? Weapons of Mass Destruction 2.0. It worked the first time.
3
We seen this show several times before. It doesn't end well. John Bolton should never have been hired. Also, why are we solving problems for Saudi Arabia and Israel? Let them solve their own problems.
8
Over-reacting? With the most powerful - and ignorant - and irresponsible man in the world in fear of losing his 2020 election and going to jail? It is not possible to overreact! The world should be in a panic that he intends to kick off a world war to convince voters we dare not change leadership in the midst of such incredible risks to our nation. And the planet.
We are barely reacting to the greatest threat Earth has ever faced - Trump.
7
Donald Trump's election year strategy, a war with Iran. Heck it worked for Bush/Cheney in 2004.
7
And weapons of mass destruction are involved too?
1
Men playing the same war games they played as children with their little soldiers. They have NEVER grown up. (and they do not want to). It makes them feel important!! God help us!
2
Trump should ignore the missiles.
Iran is harmless.
2
Debate? Bolton creams his jeans with pleasure just thinking about starting another war.
3
The US Neocon tactic is to ramp up the aggression, which provokes a defensive Iranian response.
Next, portray that defensive response as Iranian aggression.
US aggression will inevitably come via Iran's coastline. Hence, coastline defense. Iran has learned the lesson of what happened to Saddam Hussein. They are right in what they have learned even if we (the US) don't like them.
20
What is Iran to do?
Roll out the red carpet?
If a belligerent power starts sending carrier battle groups and heavy bomber squadrons to your doorstep, grab a gun!
This is yet more madness from the rudderless trump administration, and the spineless GOP.
36
So our destroyers and battleships, sent half way around the world into foreign waters, are not armed with missiles?
How DARE the Iranians patrol their coastal waters with armed gunboats!!
Teddy Roosevelt redux.
25
A total overreaction to the threat. This is just his way to ramp up his diehard supporters who are just like him. Except they are not President and do not have the responsibility a normal President would take seriously. For him it is just his latest campaign blitz.
13
I thought the US intelligence agency and FBI were the enemy?
20
Rubio emphasizes the attention-getting threat of Iran to be seriously considered and not being fake. Maybe. But why go out of the way to emphasize this? That’s tied to our national problem ... credibility. With Trump as president (supported by “loyalists”) who does so much for self-serving purpose, the question becomes, What political gain might be realized for him through the frantic sound of alarm about Iran? He’s on the campaign, after all. After all! If it’s not this, then it’s something else with this second-term seeking president ... say, the threat of criminal immigrants that will make America un-great more. Trump, the bully, does not understand that effective presidential leadership is tied to devote service and critically dependent on personal integrity. And yet, Iran may be of great concern presently.
3
When your presidency is threatened and your polls are down, time to start a war!
58
Trump is dreaming of how he'll get to wear a general's uniform, with his chest covered in medals, while he salutes the tanks rolling down Pennsylvania Ave. And, he has a brilliant new idea: we will start celebrating the 4th of July with parades and fireworks! What an original mind!
10
Wow, missiles on a boat(s). If that is all they can muster, they do not have much of an argument for going to war.
Not to mention, Iraq would never tolerate or survive an invasion in Iran, from Iraq. Nor would Afghanistan.
Short of the Iranians attacking NYC with their brown-water navy armed with "missiles", this is another big lie, exaggerated threat.
14
Remember the WMD that supposed existed and were never found? And that members of the Bush-lite (oh, to bring back those good old days!) shilled for a war?
The same neocons and their evil spawn have set about to bring us another disastrous, expensive, immoral foray into "regime change" (sounds so attractive, appealing, and innocent, doesn't it?), with the help of a Narcissist-in-Chief who is (a) in need of a monumental distraction and (b) believes that only CEOs during wartime are "true leaders."
The same man who had four (five?) deferments from the Vietnam draft for (supposed) bone spurs and who reviled a true patriot and war hero (John McCain).
These people deserve our contempt and impeachment.
It's a race to between the start of war and the start of impeachment.
The House better get to it!
25
We have been the Great Satan for 40 years. Iran has used every opportunity across the globe since then to take pot shots at our troops and use their lackeys to foment discord across the Middle East and Yemen for decades. They have made threats against us for decades. Our President is doing what any prudent leader would do. And the crazy neo-left is hysterical that this is somehow a political ploy. People are already bracing themselves for an excuse for his re-election. It is almost comical.
1
What inherent right does the US have to occupy countries and waters 6000 miles from our shores?
14
@Kimbo
What is tragically comical is that people in this country were lied to about Iraq and are now being lied to via Trumped-up charges against Iran.
When you embrace the lie, you own it.
4
For he past few weeks and for several weeks to come, there will be an insidious and incessant pointing of the finger at Iran. This is called manipulation of public opinion. The objective is to discredit the country and anything it does or says. Iran must be demonized and silenced in preparation for the selling of the Kushner-Netanyahu "Deal of the Century" coming soon to your local media.
14
Strange that Trump doesn't listen to his security advisers on Russia but is all over these pictures that would have come from the same security advisers.
6
How can we stop this insanity?
All our analysis in the world isn’t going to hold back the Bolton Pompeo Trump triumvirate.
Is there any way for Congress to IMPEACH cabinet members for endangering our national security?
6
This administration has no credibility. They have lied so often, and so blatantly, that not a word they say can be trusted.
Republicans love a war at re-election time, and they are creating one here. Why not? They don't have to fight in it.
10
"Bolton said he 'felt like a kid on Christmas Day' after he orchestrated the U.S. withdrawal from the International Criminal Court in 2002. And now as a senior official in the Trump administration, he pushed for the U.S. to withdraw from a crucial nuclear arms treaty with Russia."
-Ben Arbruster, The Guardian, 5/16/19
U.S. withdrawal from the International Criminal Court paved the way for torture policies by Bush and Cheney that shamed our country before the world. And as Bolton wanted, no one was ever held accountable.
Bolton is in Trump's cabinet because Bolton is essentially a discredited 'outcast' from the foreign policy establishment, which made Bolton an ideal choice for Trump -- whose reasoning for hiring is based on disrespecting 'the experts," & "the elite."
Trump is now picking fights in many corners of the world - Middle East, China, N. Korea, Venezuela, Africa - without clear objectives - with the lamest foreign policy experts in generations. Bolton and Pompeo are chickenhawk amateurs compared to people like former Secretary James Mattis, who quite Trump when he couldn't stand it anymore.
U.S. is heading for war for no reason but John Bolton's delusions and the wishes of Netanyahu and Mohammed Bin Salman for us to fight their wars for them.
Israel and Saudi Arabia should fight their own wars, not lobby their good buddy Trump to do it for them.
10
We are a colonial power throwing our weight around with reckless abandon.
Trumped up claims against Iran , threats against our allies if they trade with Iran , threatened and implemented tariffs against our neighbors and largest trading partner with no clear end plan in sight.
Then rejecting on a whim key global agreements with a clear purpose minimizing climate change, containing Iran’s nuclear program and TPP building up our relationship with Countries in China’s area of influence by building trade not destroying it.
The rest of the World will not be our lackeys, they will bypass the USA banking system , they will trade more with each other , they will embrace China which will use its economic and demographic capacity to build its military, technology , aviation and consumer segments.
Meanwhile Trump will continue to love Kim, do nuclear deals with the real problem the Saudis and our infrastructure continues to crumble, our education , health care continue to fail our future , our debt rising along with the Oceans.Our Country will be more divided economically , geographically and demographically .
Not a good scenario..
7
This smells like the phony attack on American warships by North Vietnamese boats that started the escalation of the Vietnam war.
And Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. How many times will
US presidents use these ploys to start wars? And how many times will Americans fall for it?
34
Republicans must be in love with war and destabilization in the Middle East. How else to explain our Government's belligerence and false perspective on Iran?
Iran shares a 1,458 kilometer border with Iraq, and a 921 kilometer border with Afghanistan. Iran has a border with Turkey, and the rather narrow/shallow Persian Gulf is a shared boundary between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and Iran could without much effort shut down the Gulf. Assad in Syria is a strong ally of Iran. Russia and China are sympathetic to Iran's situation and concerns.
What could possibly go wrong, and for how long?
When are Americans going to wake up? Our Policy in the Middle East has been a disaster and seems as if it will continue to be ad infinitum.
21
Beware the viewing of events through Bolton-Pompeo glasses.
The judicious would well keep in mind the Tonkin Gulf resolution or the Iraq rationalization.
26
Does anyone remember that Iranian backed terrorists attacked Saudi oil tankers the other day?
Iran is starting a fight it can't possibly win.
Iran is threatening Israel with atomic bombs and financing terrorists isn't going to get them any sympathy.
I seriously doubt the US can force a regime change. I think it is in the best interest of the rest of the world if Iran's economy and military is disabled, at least for awhile, so the Ayatollahs can't continue exporting trouble.
5
@mrmeat
Like we don't? We are the aggressors in the area. We are the ones seeking regime change. We abandoned the Iran nuclear deal. There were all sorts of excuses made in order to invade Iraq. I remember well and it smelled, just like this smells to high heaven of manipulation, distraction and diversion and beating the drums of war. Bolton wants it and Pompeo wants his holy war.
10
@mrmeat -- No, we do not know that Iranian backed groups attacked those tankers. The damage has not been pictured nor described in detail, and we are not told the nature of the "sabotage" nor how it happened. One report is that a crewman on board one of the Saudi ships sabotaged its engine. We don't know.
Iran is not threatening anybody with atomic bombs. It does not have any.
However, the wild war talk includes people threatening Iran with nuclear attack by the US and/or Israel, as the "only" method that would defeat them at a reasonable price to the attacker.
Trouble is exported all across the region, but not only by Iran. Iran is a small and largely defensive actor in that trouble, which on the aggressive side has been done by the US, Israel, and in Yemen by the Saudis. At most, Iran has armed defensive forces to resist attack.
The Ayatollahs are not my choice of a government, but neither is Netanyahu. They are not the problem, he is.
2
@mrmeat There seems to be some doubt as to what actually happened to those Saudi oil tankers. Little damage, and no evidence that the Iranians were involved. According to the NYT, "Neither Saudi Arabia nor the United Arab Emirates assigned blame, made public any evidence of damage to their ships or described the nature of the sabotage."
1
In 2011, John Bolton visited the law school I attended. One student asked him about the questionable decision to go to war with Iraq, and he responded loudly that "Saddam Hussein is in the ground!"... He struck me as a bit crazy.
27
I would certainly hope that Iran has lots of missiles, on land and on sea. It would be irresponsible not to. Iran has been under threat from the nearby US military bases and from Israel. Now that threat has increased.
11
It’s not clear what the Iranians would gain from such attacks. There’s no evidence they’re crazy, so it’s hard to think this is anything other than a first round of war propaganda.
Bolton certainly wants it, and Trump will do anything that seems popular. Now that this has started, we just have to hope this time it doesn’t work.
11
So it's not OK for Iran to defend itself? The US has missiles on big boats. Iran has missiles on small boats. So what?
25
There are sources in the White House reporting that Mr. Trump opposes an armed conflict with Iran, that he would rather use diplomacy and wants to actually meet their leaders to get a deal.
We already had a deal with Iran that cost blood, sweat and tears to negotiate and sign with the European Union, China and Russia. Why did the current Administration pulled us out of it? Was it pressure from Israel's strong man Netanyahu? Was it because it was an achievement of the Obama regime? Was it because of plain incompetence? All of the above?
24
@Jgrauw
Answer:
E. All of the above.
9
@Jgrauw
The Trump Administration was dissatisfied with the deal because they viewed it as insufficient to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, an outcome that would be catastrophic to regional stability and the security of American cities. Full compliance provided, the Iran deal would have delayed the development of nuclear weapons on the part of Tehran up to 2031, during which the economic pressure on them would be greatly relieved. At the end of those years, however, the sanctions would be gone and Iran would be permitted to open up whatever enrichment facilities and development programs they chose, this time with an economy strengthened after years without sanctions.
With all due respect, 16 years is not enough time for an entire country to radically renovate its worldview, especially when said country is a clerical regime not known for human rights appreciation. The current generation of government officers would not have turned over. Once 2031 hit, we would essentially be in the same place as we we were, except that Iran would be stronger at the table. The JCPOA would have served to delay Iran, but was not strong enough to stop it.
I respect President Obama for getting the Iranians to the table at all. That was an accomplishment. However, to really achieve a resolution in the Iran problem, a firmer treaty - not an executive agreement, a real treaty - is needed. A 15-year pause while Iran bulks up for another round of nuclear diplomacy doesn't suffice.
Just like the tragically misguided Iraq wars, this is based on evidence made up out of thin air.
This horrible administration must be stopped in its tracks.
22
If I’m not mistaken, the highest approval ratings Trump has received since taking office followed the actions against reputed chemical weapon storage facilities in Syria.
I wouldn’t put it past him to be preparing for war in time for the election cycle, to get a bump in his ratings. I wonder if this craven man will hesitate before sending others into harm’s way.
19
Trump, who has disparaged the intelligence communities since the moment he took office (remember his comparison of CIA officials to Nazis?), who over and over again has dismissed the conclusion of the IC about Russian interference in the 2016 election and accepted Putin’s word instead, who gets his “intelligence” largely from Fox News—Trump is now ready to go to war with Iran over a few vague intelligence reports?
This is truly rich. Everyone is focused on the parallel with the Bush administration’s misuse of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq War. That was horrible, of course. But the idea that Trump is even given enough credibility on the topic of intelligence to be compared to the Bush people? Outrageous.
12
". . . missiles on small boats in the Persian Gulf . . ."
missiles on small boats
are telling to me
my future is sinking
across the blue sea
why don't the boats
carry fresh copra instead?
then you and I will not
wind up as too dead
3
If Obama hadn't decided to forward instead of backwards and had indicted Bush, Cheney et al for War Crimes we wouldn't be here today.
15
Trump will do what Bolton says because he's got a cool mustache and gritty demeanor. He will do what Pompeo wants because Pompeo was in the army.
We will go to war based on personal envy.
7
First, did anyone consider they are moving the missiles in order to assess our ability to see them? And, our reaction? Or that the missiles are being scattered to protect them from a first strike?
Second, a carrier strike group and 120K troops will not be able to defeat a full-on conflict with Iran....not unless other forces from other local allies are brought in.
Third, the amount of civilian deaths from a high intensity conflict with Iran will be staggering. Probably like nothing we have seen since WWII.
Fourth, who will deal with millions of refugees once Iran is defeated? Who will pay for reconstruction?
Fifth, how can a president that refuses to read briefings and only believes Fox News possibly understand the gravity of an armed conflict with a modern adversary?
22
Hey America, why the rush to war with Iran? Are Bibi and MBS promoting this as part of the "Jared peace plan"? When Trump left the JCPOA and hired Bolton you had to know that Bibi was behind this. How much will Trump reap from Israel and the Saudis for this? We Canadians were with you in Afghanistan and we are currently fighting in Syria with you but we skipped the made up Iraq war and we will skip this made up war with Iran. Will you people ever stop letting neocons try out their theories using American lives?
19
The great tragedy being revealed by the Iran issue is that the rest of the world is unable to credit the US and it’s leaders with even a modicum of credibility. Trump is a pathological liar and has surrounded himself with men who are similarly untrustworthy. Some might even call two of them, Bolton and Pompeo, unstable ideologues.
24
Here we go again. And magically ,just in time for the real ramp-up to the coming election.
15
The boat based missiles are both a threat from Iran and a very rational defensive move by them too.
In 2002 as part of the war game Millennium Challenge 2002 the unspecified red team, generally considered to be Iran, used a variety of low tech methods to neutralize the advantages of the blue team the US.
The results of the game had the red team losing an aircraft carrier and other capital ships through a combination of cruise missiles and small boats armed with missiles.
3
Gish Gallup : A debate technique where you barrage your opponent with as many different topics as possible. The intent is to overwhelm their ability to adequately respond to them all. In true debate circles, it is considered as a resort to “style over substance”.
How did the fake WMD workout when US invaded Iraq destabilized the region. The chicken hawks like Pompeo, Bolton are getting their intelligence from Mr Bone Saw and the other dictators from the gulf regions.
13
In 1953 US and British intelligence officials orchestrated a coup to overthrow Mohammad Mossadeq, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran.
We are paying the price for that interference to this day.
22
Trump has 20 plus criminal investigations today against him and this is a perfect time to get America into another fake GOP war. This time let his able bodied sons Donald Jr, and Erich go into the front lines.
We need the draft to bring in every GOP supporters sons into the more and more fighting the GOP want every year.
17
Ms. Sherman and the Obama Administration gambled that a nuclear deal would cause Iran to change its revolutionary behavior and become a normal country. The bet failed
1
@MelGlass Wrong. It was working until Trump ripped it up like a petulant child.
15
Hoped we had seen the last of these neocon nitwits after the two disastrous Bush/Cheney wars we still can’t extricate ourselves from. But no, here comes the GOP again, trying to stir up another insane conflict our country doesn’t need. And Bolton and Pompeo are the guys we’re trotting out there to interact with the world? That is embarrassing and frightening.
The Trump administration has zero credibility on any topic, given its pervasive dishonesty and incompetence. Add this one to the list.
19
Disagree. Trump’s fast food luncheons for young athletes exceeds credibility.
Our satellites see a bunch of Iranian skiffs, a few mile off their coast, with rockets. What would the Iranian satellite see, if they had any? An entire fleet of nuclear war-ready military equipment with aircrafts, missiles, submarines, assault troops, also a few miles off THEIR coast, not ours. And who should feel endangered? This is pure rattling the cage, we have seen enough of this. The rest of the world should help us come to our senses. Hopefully there will be no coalition.
24
@Giuseppe There won't be a coalition, because Trump at every turn has cheesed off all of the allies that would participate. Not to mention, he has no concept of "working together" nor "common cause". If we go into some military adventure with Iran, we'll be in it alone.
1
We are on the brink of the 3rd war in the Middle East. Soon we may have American Troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Americans seem to learn nothing from their past experiences. We are right back to 2003 allowing another Republican administration to play us into thinking that we must go to war with Iran. John Bolton is on the brink of getting his heart's desire--war with Iran. Men and women who serve our country will be maimed and killed for this nonsense.
11
Beware the great threat that the small dhow (with functional missile) brings to all who live in the Eastern Lands and across the great Ocean...
The dhow brings great pain to all...
Splinter is Coming.
Let us call this manufactured Iran hysteria exactly for what it is... a cynical attempt to get Trump re-elected by rallying the nation around a wartime-leader while at the same time diverting attention from the legal and congressional entanglements perpetuating Trump's negative image amongst a majority of voters.
So this has all the hallmarks of another Made-In-The-U.S.A quagmire in the making, compliments of the sinister warmonger Bolton.
Except this time, with regards to its traditional allies, guaranteed it ain't gonna be "America First"... it's gonna be "America Alone"
12
Aside from having a proven warmonger such as John Bolton holding sway over a president who wants to pound his chest and be a winner, a looming issue is the total lack of regard for Congress being displayed daily now by the Trump administration. It’s becoming clear that Trump believes Congress holds no power over him, which is reinforced every day as Democrats talk and fume, and the GOP remains silent in abeyance to lord and master Trump. The War Powers Act means nothing at this point.
8
I am an Iranian and frankly hate this regime perhaps as much as Bolton does. But now I am more with the regime than the US in this fight. How come boarding missiles on small boats inside our territory is a threat but sending aircraft carriers close to our borders is not? The Iranian people have suffered more from US sanctions than this regime's actions, and It's hard to believe that if there will be a war they will cheer up for American soldiers. And MEK as their alternative for this regime? NO thanks! You can keep them for yourself.
16
And the beat goes on......Maybe there should be a UN resolution that all other national defenses should be abolished in deference to America. That way, there’s nobody to complain about! Methinks a false flag operation is brewing to kick off war with Iran. The US credibility of the foreign policy apparatus is either the Keystone Kops or the Nixon plumbers. Clearly, the game is afoot. America “exceptionalism” is revealing it’s true nature.
14
"But releasing other supporting images could compromise secret sources and methods of collecting intelligence, the officials said."...….Can't release the unredacted Mueller report, can't release the tax returns, can't allow Barr or Mueller to come and testify to Congress. Same thing with McGann. No transcript from talks with Putin. Hoards of illegal immigrants streaming across the border in record numbers with terrorists hiding in their midst. Millions of illegal votes give Clinton a 3 million popular victory. Trust me, there is no problem here folks. Oh, almost forgot...there was no collusion with Russia.
8
US intelligence can never be believed ... uh, unless they come up with reasons to spy on the Trump campaign which is okay considering how much Dems hate the guy. Then US intelligence MUST be correct. Yes?
The least credible POTUS in the history of the country. Why would war weary Americans believe any of this?
Putting us in a war might even push his impeachment numbers over 50%.
5
Saber rattling makes the price of oil go up. Iran and the Russians love high oil prices.
Gas is already hitting $4 a gallon in parts of the USA.
Q.E.D.
3
The Trump Administration has lied to the American public and the world community everyday since he took office, I don't believe a word about the increased threat assessment from Iran. Trump has been pounding his chest about the horrible Iranians forever and now Bolton and Pompeo are planning the war Trump has been demanding and what happens, even Trump is scared of the Bolton Pompeo war against Iran, things are really scary, I hope Congress will prevent Bolton and Pompeo from executing this madness.
13
Missiles on dhows? Dhows are ancient wooden boats commonly powered by oars & sail as I recall - that's the threat? And we're concerned they are going to attack naval vessels so we dispatch more naval vessels(aka targets) to the region. If you're searching for a pretext to start a war this doesen't pass the laugh test, at least claim the missiles are on motor boats. If our navy can't deal with row boats & crude sailboats we need to reconsider our navy.
8
"Dhows are ancient wooden boats commonly powered by oars & sail as I recall - that's the threat?"
Wrong and wrong. Do a Google images search for "dhow persian gulf". Some are obviously engine-powered, because there are NO sails.
As for the threat -- an anti-ship missile on a small boat is indeed a threat.
John Bolton has hopes of toppling the Iranian regime.
This time he has Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with him sending ships,planes and personnel to the waters around Iran while president Trump has other things on his mind.
To review this in it's relative importance and relationship with the past, take a step back to year 2003.
The following neoconservatives were pushing then president George W. Bush to war against Iraq. They always have an enticing name for these attacks so they called it "Operation Iraqi Freedom"
We like to free country from their oppressors also we are still
stuck there sixteen years later.
Here's a list of some of the neoconservatives advising George W. Bush to make war on Iraq in 2003.
John Bolton(yes, back then) Cheney, Rove,Wolfowitz,
Rumsfeld,Perle.
Last week, Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (also hawkish)sent our warships ,planes and military personnel to
the waters near Iran. This time to protect Iraq from Iran.
Iraq doesn't even feel threatened at this time. They and some European countries are hoping that we back away from these unnecessary military maneuvers.
Once again, we are cooking up an enticing name for this operation. So far, the best name they came up with is
"Operation Iraqi Freedom-Again". This time we are trying to protect Iraq from possible attacks from Iran.
Our war operations move forward and we'll give our next attack on some country a catchy enticing name. Bolton and Pompeo like that kind of stuff.
5
@M.W. Endres "they called it "Operation Iraqi Freedom""
Didn't they first call it Operation Iraqi Liberation before someone realized that the abbreviation wasn't a good one?
1
Feel like we’ve been down this road before... but I can’t quite recall when... the point is to trust John Bolton, he’s usually right about these matters, if I remember correctly...
2
Colin Powell fed us a bunch of hooey in making the case for Gulf War 2. Although skeptical at the time, I said to my wife, "If Colin Powell says so, it must be true." Turns out it wasn't, and Powell was shamelessly manipulated to take advantage of his enormous reservoir of respect and goodwill.
There's no Colin Powell in this misadministration, no one who is even remotely credible. This is 1939 Germany, taking a few prisoners out of its concentration camps, and dressing them in Polish uniforms. Then they are executed, and Voila!, a camera documents "proof" that nasty Poland has attacked German border posts.
If you think this is not exactly what's happening, you're not paying attention.
12
There were alleged alarming photos before “president” Bush lied us into war with Iraq, too. Bolton has been gunning for Iran since he was born. Looks like the republicans are going to lie us into another costly and disastrous war paid for by our descendants (since the republicans keep cutting taxes, we have no budget for a war).
Bolton has in the past lied about and misrepresented the info our intelligence agencies have in order to support his ridiculous positions. He is so extreme that he cannot get Senate confirmation (does not need it in his current post and could not get it under Bush so he was a vacancy temp appointee). Trump has eliminated all credible people from his administration and now has temporary appointees and marginal figures that no previous president ever would have appointed. Trump is so awful that these are the best he can find. TV personalities, industry lobbyists, wealthy donors, and kook extremists: these are our current executive branch heads.
10
If I were an enemy of Iran (Israel, Saudi Arabia) or not fond of the USA (Russia, China, North Korea) - I’d sure be tempted to pay off some Iranian allied militia to stage an attack on the USA or its interests. Once the ball gets rolling it’s not going to be easy to stop.
Even the Trump gang would find this useful. Look how successful it was for Putin when he “allegedly” blew up some apartment buildings in Moscow and blamed it on the Chechens. He parlayed that into his current position of “Maximum Leader for Life”.
1
Remember the Maine! Sorry, anything this administration says or does should be greeted with skepticism. 4 boats sabotaged- maybe, but it could be "them"!. Classified photos that really aren't because we are told exactly what is in them - doesn't that sort of declassify the information - step back and ask - why? There is not a reason on earth these days why a small sovereign nation would attack a nation that could wipe them off the face of the planet in a matter of minutes - it simply doesn't make sense unless you factor in oil and the neighbors in the region who would benefit. This is unacceptable on many levels when we have problems at home that would benefit from money and resources that will be wasted.
10
If Trump and his administration had any credibility, basically never told us 10,000 and counting lies, I would possibly believe what the three amigos are telling us.
Right now I tend to believe the missiles on small boats equate to the mysterious centerfuge tubes and more mysterious chemical weapons factories that was used as evidence for another long and costly war based on lies and the burning desire of the neocons to have a war, any war, they could loudly claim as a noble cause.
Let us, the people, see the evidence before we go down a path the we may regret.
And for the news media, please question every press release, every statement and any piece of evidence as you journalists and publications know full well the lies we constantly hear.
10
Mr Trump was asked by a reporter about those 120,000 troops. He replied: "I think that's fake news..."
He should know.
2
What is real and what is fake? This administration has mixed facts and lies where who knows what to believe. Given the track record of the this administration, facts are delusional and given the track record with Iraq, few believe much of what we see as threats anymore. War is good for our economy especially on someone else's shores.
1
@Bella
The Iraq war added at least $3 Trillion dolllars to our national debt and the war is not over yet. We have to borrow to pay interest on that debt meaning less to spend on infrastructure and other benefits for the American citizenry. Who is really benefiting?
Another war is brewing in the Middle East and Central Asia. Started again by us. Iraq and Afganistan, Syria and Yemen are not enough. To do what? Support a brutal regime in Saudi Arabia and, sadly, a dictator in Israel. Perhaps Trump thinks this will keep Americans distracted from the destruction of our constitution and democracy? Maybe next Trump will declare martial law? Must be right out of the Putin PlayBook.
7
The American people have no appetite for a war on pretextual grounds. I don't think Trump does either, but it becomes a question of whether Bolton and his ilk can spin and manipulate us into a conflict of their own devising.
We also shouldn't take war off the table though. Iran is the bad actor here. The US is far from perfect, but I've already heard too many commentators (e.g., Vox) engaging in their typical moral equivalency, going out of their way to excuse Iran's actions.
If we are attacked, we must respond. Not everything can be solved diplomatically, unfortunately. At the same time, let's not be too quick to violence, and certainly let's not let biased policymakers like Bolton lead us over the precipice, which is unfortunately easier said than done now that the fox is in the hen house.
Our nation is still stuck in the quagmire of two failed wars in the Middle East, one in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. These quagmires have been ongoing for 18 and 16 years, respectively, with no end in sight.
Our nation not only committed one of our worst foreign policy disasters in Iraq, but an international moral evil, which was accelerated by greedy, right-wing extremists saturated in their own delusions. Our moral authority was ruined, hundreds of thousands- perhaps millions- were killed, and trillions from our treasury were essentially lit aflame as our domestic quality of life and infrastructure continues to crumble.
I am sick and tired of smug, grinning war hawks goading another nation into war through military provocation, hysterical interpretation of "intelligence", and blatant lies. If there is a military threat to international stability, it emanates from the United States, not Iran.
8
The human and financial costs of war should make this talk about war against Iran something that should not be considered. Iran poses no significant threat to the United States. Now we see the same cast of characters pumping up war cries against Iran. It is these same people that misled us into a war in Iraq that destroyed that country and ignited conflicts throughout that region. It is a symptom of insanity that this country would be contemplating war in that region of the world, or anywhere else, given our previous dishonest rationalization for attacking Iraq. There was a recent study from Brown University that estimated that the Iraq war, all the funding for the other conflicts in that region of the world, and our fanatical fight against terrorism has cost this country $5.6 trillion dollars.
Congress needs to assert his constitutional authority to make sure that this administration does not lead us into another costly war. The Trump Administration talk of war against Iran looks a lot like a strategy to deflect the problems which it faces here at home. We the people must let them know that war is not a substitute for impeachment.
9
We seem to be looking at another fixing of intelligence and hysteria like the nonexistent WMD in Iraq that the Bush crowd manufactured. It is unbelievable that these people think the same playbook used with Iran will end any differently.
11
The Trump Administration, and especially its two front men on foreign policy - Bolton and Pompeo, has no credibility on anything. There is no reason to believe that the photos haven't been faked. No reason to believe that anything they say about Iran isn't a lie.
If Bolton and Pompeo manage to start a war with Iran, it should bring them, Trump and any complict Republicans down. And result in them all being imprisoned.
7
Functional Missile? )
(Was the touch paper lit? Who told us it works? )
I would argue first if there is Functional Military Intelligence giving us such bold claims of a Functional Missile...especially lying horizontally on the floor of a small dhow!
Sounds like a weapon of certain malfunction to me!
And does the dhow have new sails to ensure faster breeze catching efficiency?
We might be more prudent to send another Carrier Group with bomber support just in case the dhow is hiding an outboard motor under all that sailcloth...
4
Missiles (fully assembled!) on small boats. In the Persian Gulf. They say.
If it's true, is there some reason that Iran (Persia), which adjoins about half of the Persian Gulf shouldn't have small boats with missiles in those waters?
Doesn't the US have boats and ships of all sizes in the waters off its shores -- and indeed, in waters all over Planet Earth, including the Persian Gulf?
Our warmongers aren't even bothering to make the lame excuses for their warmongering credible.
8
It’s the long recognized ability of US naval and air assets to destroy Iran’s major strategic assets including its highly vulnerable oil export platforms in a short afternoon’s activity that maintains the “peace” in the Gulf. Iran surely knows a pre-mediated attack on US naval forces would quickly result in the destruction of Iran’s economy and military capabilities. And that no other nation would come to Iran’s defense. Since the Mullah’s have given every indication they seek to continue to hold power there’s every reason to believe that talk of “War” is exactly that.
2
The Trump posse speaks as though the Iranians have ships with missiles just off the US coast. But we are the ones with ship just off their coast. The cry is that we've got to protect our vital interests. What about other countries' vital interests. Ours somehow always outweigh theirs. US exceptionalism strikes again. It's time to put Trump, Bolton, and all these other bullies out on the street.
6
Some of us are old enough to remember how Iran sowed the seeds of Islamic terrorism during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The hostage crisis when innocent Americans in Tehran were blindfolded, abused and kept in captivity for 444 days ended with the inauguration of President Ronald Reagan but the menacing impact of Iran continued.
Iran’s message of terror resonated with Islamic world before oil money from Saudi Arabia began to support the equally sinister Wahhabi beliefs.
The thugs who humiliated the US during the hostage crisis (like the former Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) and their religious justifiers continue to be in power in Iran. And their reign of terror continues.
Iran is singularly responsible for propping up the terror organization of Hezbollah, igniting the famed Iran-Iraq war, fomenting chaos in Yemen and Syria, rattling sabers in the Strait of Hormuz and supporting anti-American sentiments in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Unfortunately, unanimous public support within Iran (and from Iranians worldwide) appears to exist supporting Iranian theocracy.
I do not know words alone can tame this rogue nation and result in a regime change.
2
How many wars has Iran started in the past 50 years? How many wars has the US started in that same time period?
How many Iranian military bases exist in close proximity to the US? How many US military bases exist in close proximity to Iran?
How many Iranian aircraft carriers are currently close to US soil?
It's not too difficult to see who the aggressor is here.
4
So, Bolton and Pompeo - both of whom deserve to be tried at the Hague for war crimes, are handling this as Trump's sycophants, while Trump is beholden to Saudi Arabia for all the purchases they've already made - AND have also talked about making - when it comes to Trump's real estate.
Heaven help us all.
5
Now it seems, Trump has his crisis; an excuse to get us into a war, which has been his goal all along. Reminds me of the Gulf of Tonkin, different time, different circumstances. Since Trump’s election, it was inevitable that he would find a reason for a war. He knows that it will distract attention from other issues and hopes it will be a rallying cry for his dwindling base. It will also provide the context that he needs to enlarge his executive powers and further bypass congress. If congress and reasonable people don’t wake up soon, we will be well along the road to a Trump dictatorship.
11
After checking with Wikipedia, I can see some progress. "The missile gap was the Cold War term used in the US for the perceived superiority of the number and power of the USSR's missiles in comparison with its own (a lack of military parity). The gap in the ballistic missile arsenals did not exist except in exaggerated estimates, made by the Gaither Committee in 1957 and in United States Air Force (USAF) figures. Even the contradictory CIA figures for the USSR's weaponry, which showed a clear advantage for the US, were far above the actual count. Like the bomber gap of only a few years earlier, it was soon demonstrated that the gap was entirely fictional."
Now there is a genuine gap between the number of small missile boats. I hope that cool heads will prevail and USA will spend less than a trillion dollars to patch the gap.
2
Oh No! A Functional Iranian Missile on a small Dhow in Iran's local waters!
Are you sure that an Aircraft Carrier Group with Bomber support and 120,000 Troops on a Contingency Plan can handle this Threat?
Perhaps ceasing all Oil Income and crippling Iran's economy will help calm and insure that the dhow and missile emergency threat can be contained...?
OR...just to be SURE...best to wage WAR?
Come on America, what else can you get,
To ensure ending this Iranian big threat?
Do all the things...do everything and More!
End the dhow missile threat 5000 miles from your Shore!
11
It looks like we replaced the Imperial and Nazi Germany of the last century in the International political scene. The same arrogant behavior and disrespect for international laws. It is sad to see that all these are the result of our misguided foreign policy which is not in the interest of American people but in the interest of of some friends of us.
10
Pictures of missiles are a dime a dozen but make for a good press release; especially when they can't be seen. Our country has been raking the cage bars of the big Iranian cat for the last two years and we are surprised when the cat growls? This reminds me of the Tonkin Gulf during the Johnson administration or George Bush's WMD.
The whole story could easily be construed as a diversionary tactic to take our mind off obstruction of justice or hundreds of other examples of of inept leadership: a demagogue's gambit.
27
I fear Trump has already put us on the road to war when he pulled out of the nuclear deal, "issued new economic sanctions against the country, moved to stop nations from buying Iranian oil and designated the Revolutionary Guards, an arm of the Iranian military, a terrorist group."
11
Don't these highly paid, intelligent folks (excepting Trump) have some sense of history and some perspective on the potential to create a very destabilizing domino effect in the desert. Just appalling - we have no defined or articulate foreign policy, no credible rationale to initiate any military action save for an attack on our personnel, and an administration that is like a pinball machine -bouncing and careening from one purported (i.e., fake news) crisis to another. Bolton and Pompeo at the helm, not very comforting.
9
It seems like the USA government expects Iran to roll over and if Iran does anything to prepare for the continual on going attacks from the USA government that is further proof that Iran needs to be attacked.
5
Younger readers who may be less familiar with the cries of WMD, Iraq and John Bolton's role in that disaster should do some reading. This is Iraq 2.0. In fact its even less credible. The nation nations still healing from 9/11 when we started on Iraq and many who supported it then disavowed it later as colossal waste of life and resources. Even many Trump fans won't buy into this one. I think that is why Trump is now saying "now isn't the time to attack." Doesn't mean we still won't fumble our way into another war but I don't think Trump is as itchy as Bolton.
4
@northeastsoccermum only if his thinks it will get him re-elected.
1
“Houston, we have a problem!”
Yes, we do. It’s called skepticism. What we’ve learned about war in the past 200 years or in reality, from the beginning of time is most wars could have been prevented.
For some reason, human beings have a propensity to fight battles, either real or imagined.
Enter Donald Trump. He’s not the first or the last president to command forces while never serving in the military, but the way he avoided the draft really scares me when he has those short stubby fingers so close to the RED buttons.
2
The positioning of any American vessel within 12 miles of Iranian waters is a provocation. Apparently the powers that be in America intend to violate this rule at will.
4
Which lawmakers have a deep mistrust of the President’s national security team? Names. How is a reader supposed to evaluate that comment? Thus far, Trump’s national security team has been right on a number of issues, and appear at times to be the only realist and adults in the room.
As right as they were about North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela?
1
The reason Trump will ultimately fail is his desire and conviction that complex problems be resolved quickly by threats and extortion. Any inkling of progress will be over run by the hardening of the oppositions views as they rightly perceive that the "negotiations" Trump offers are really more like the mafias "deal" that can't be refused.
4
Has anyone seen these boats and missiles "on the ground" to verify they are real? Remember the allegations of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? After the invasion, they were nowhere to be found.
Suppose they are real. We say we're sending war ships over to the waters off Iran, and then act surprised if Iran responds with weapons they have to defend themselves. If you don't want to start a war, don't send war ships half way across the globe when there's no war.
The people (like John Bolton) responsible for the Iraq wars are the ones fomenting this one. Looks like the same set up in Iran to me.
7
I think we have been down this road before. Maybe we should remember Colin Powell and his comments in 2004 where he said his information had been inaccurate. Is Cheney running the show again?
4
Make America Peaceful Again. We have been longing for Peace since the late 60's. Peace Now. Please.
4
EVERYTHING Trump does serves the interests of Donald Trump, first, last and always. By now this much should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. Maniacs like John Bolton might very well want to go to war with Iran in order to effect regime change. I wouldn't be surprised if a hawk like Bolton hopes to place a new Shah on the throne. But Trump will go to war if and only if he sees a personal advantage in it. And he might, if he comes to believe that war with Iran will distract the public from the aftereffects of the Mueller Report. Ware becomes even more likely if he concludes that it will improve his odds of being reelected in 2020.
5
So the fact that other countries have military equipment is justification for going to war with them now?
19
I am struck by the contradiction and the consequences inherent in the evaluation of "indications" of possible problems. The Trump administration is creating an atmosphere of imminent danger upon seeing some missiles on Iranian small boats. They are prepared to take extreme measures, squadrons of ships to the Persian Gulf, the announcement that 120,000 troops could be sent there, etc. HOWEVER, when the FBI discovered dozens of unusual contacts of Trump operatives with Russian agents, Trump's claims that there was an illegitimate reason for investigating into the possible significance of these meetings. A good example of seeing the mote in someone else's eyes.
9
Congress: I want to know if Trump's business interests in Saudi Arabia are influencing the administration's dealings with Iran. That alone should be justification for seeing Trump's tax returns.
25
What is so infuriating is that nobody in Trump's family or his administration have family members serving and that will end up going to fight in this war. Instead, Trump's family will profit over it.
I served and my son is serving and the last thing I want my son to do is to be deployed to a combat zone so the rich can get richer in this manufactured crisis.
US Army Veteran
70
First, you don’t know whether this is manufactured or not. There is a lot of intelligence that we are not aware of. Second, it should hardly be a surprise to you that the military is sent to fight dubious wars. Since and including Vietnam, many conflicts have been such. Presumably members of the military know what they signed up for. It’s also a reason, by the way, that I would never let my children serve in the military under any circumstances.
5
@mrpisces
Perhaps a good start is to not refer to it as "this war"
Not yet. Not ever.
Give it a rest America,
regards,
The rest...of the World.
4
@DRS...read between the lines on "the intelligence" put forth by bolton, pompeo.
Also, is the alarm bell re: Iran being rung by the UK? France? Germany? Australia?
Certainly there has been a long history of mutual animosity between the USA and Iran.
But really going to war?
Could someone explain what strategic interest the Middle East is to the USA anymore? The USA is self sufficient in oil and will continue to be so. Europe , China, and Japan have much more need of stability in the Middle East for their energy needs.
Constant warring in the region is bad for American trade, investment and tourism ( with exception of the armament industry of course).
The brutal totalitarian monarchy of Saudi Arabia certainly does not deserve any support from a country that values human rights.
Is there any evidence that the Iranians are planning to re- establish their Ancient Persian Empire perhaps?
41
We should not forget the role that the media played in promoting and legitimizing the government's push to get into a war with Iraq a decade ago. To paraphrase Noam Chomsky, a dictator would be gleeful to have the US media outlets to cheerlead them.
39
@Jarrod A vast number of people and media outlets were hoodwinked in the actions leading us to war.
Hopefully we, well most of us, will question any Trump/Bolton/Pompeo war the way we should have questioned Bush/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld.
One final thought, a friend of mine, a journalist, with other journalists, did question the "intelligence" and justification for the war.
They, for the most part, were ignored.
5
Tonkin Gulf 2019?
20
I cringe when I see a smiling Mike Pompeo, a Mike Pompeo I know as a "yankee with a big stick", a man who could place the lives of millions upon millions of people in harms way.
How do you sleep at night, Mike?
36
Gee, this sounds familiar. Photos of misiles or whatever, decent people forced to say it is a grave danger, let’s all go to war. Time to get over the idea that photos equal truth.
10
So this “intelligence” coming from the administration that lies about everything, big and small, consists of unnamed officials describing s photograph that we cannot even see?
26
This whole bogus ramping up of Iran threat perceptions is shameful propaganda and has been predicted for years. Well here it is. Like the writers of Game of Thrones, these people pushing the war narrative believe the people of the world will just swallow anything. Worse than that, they don’t care what people think.
12
There is no profit in a war with Iran only calculable losses in the trillions.
9
This brings back memories of Colin Powell haplessly telling the U.N. General Assembly that an photo of an innocuous panel van represented Iraq’s sinister plan for mobile chemical weapons factories.
A fictional pretext to real war.
All the more ominous under a president who avoids fact checking his gut reactions.
17
Missiles on small boats? This is a reason to mobilize for war?
More evidence we live in the upside down.
17
Rubio: “I’ve been here 8 years... this is not fake.” Mario, those of us who were mature adults 16 years ago have seen this movie before.
When Cheney’s henchmen set Powell up, to give not merely “wildly wrong” but damnably wrong testimony to the UN about Iraq’s non-existent WMD, the administration leveraged its most credible and admired hero to tell that lie. Even Hillary Clinton believed him; only Obama saw through it, and he was still in just the Illinois legislature when he called it out.
This administration has no such credible and admired messenger as Colin Powell now.
This administration has no credibility or coherency at all. Can the average American even name the Secretaries of Defense and State — how many times have they changed in the past two years?
The President is war mongering, just as Cheney did, to wrap himself in the American flag, because he is on the brink of impeachment, or, as Pelosi said, self-impeachment in the form of a 2020 referendum on his dishonesty and treason with Russia.
Trump has dismantled the core apparatuses of our government — refusing to release subpoenaed witnesses and material that only pertain to his personal culpability. Why and how should Americans and their Congresspersons believe Trump now?
This is precisely why, above all else, our government officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution: so that our government can function effectively and credibly during a crisis.
But Trump has broken our government — it is dysfunctional.
45
Our country and the world will become a safer, saner, and better place when Trump and the Republican Party are out of power.
But until that time comes, they remain a menace to our democracy and international stability.
51
Beyond the Beltway virtually no one supports war with Iran. It will be interesting to see if Washington can successfully prosecute a war with so little support from the citizenry.
10
The last sentence of this article is what this is all about. The sanctions are going to break the regime in Iran, or reduce it to a mirror of North Korea if the regime digs in hard enough. That means the regime only has two choices. Come back to the table and make a new deal, other nations can be at the table too if they want to, or provoke a war. The current regime is unlikely to choose the first. Preparing for that is not stoking anything. Anyone remember the Stark?
1
@GregP: I think you're confused, Greg. The US left "the table," not Iran.
The US abandoned an international agreement, not Iran.
The US is acting aggressively, not Iran.
If a war is the result of this mess, it will be the US that provoked it, not Iran.
BTW, yes, I remember the USS Stark. It was accidentally struck by an Iraqi missile, during the Iran-Iraq war, a time when the US was an ally of Iraq's and Saddam Hussein's. Why do you think that incident is relevant to the current situation?
7
I meant to ask does anyone remember the Cole? That is the ship I was thinking about when I posted this.
@Douglas
The Stark was struck by a small, explosive laden boat. It is very relevant to today's concern. US abandoned a new creation called a JCPOA. Here is a question for you. What if Trump negotiates a JCPOA with NK, Italy, SK, Japan and even gets Russia to sign on to it. Congress doesn't get a say, no weighin from the House. Would you object to the next Democratic President withdrawing from it? Of course you wouldn't. We are taking wise precautions to be able to respond if Iran attacks our ships, our Servicemembers. You don't seem to have their welfare in mind at all. Why?
The United States has in effect already begun a war against Iran without authorization. We have seized Iranian assets, blocked banking transactions, threatened retaliation against other nations that trade with Iran and blocked oil sales.
These measures have already caused significant suffering. The purpose of this aggression is to force Iran to renegotiate the nuclear use agreement that they already spent five years negotiating with the G-5 plus One.
The agreement is the most transparent and restrictive arrangement for any country subject to international atomic energy standards.
By all accounts, Iran has met the burdens required by the agreement. But that's not enough for Trump. At the urging of Bibi Netanyahu Trump withdrew from the agreement, ignored the G-5 partners and unilaterally imposed sanctions on Iran.
The small Iranian boats in the gulf have been there for years and are purely defensive weapons. They are no match for modern American war ships, even though they could cause casualties in a conflict.
But why would Iran attack the US, knowing full well that there would be a massive retaliatory strike?
This scenario makes no sense, yet it is the excuse being offered by the administration.
The real reason is Bolton's fantasy about regime change in Iran, which all experts agree will not happen short of a US invasion and repeat of the disaster we have created in Iraq.
The US should stand down from this dangerous posturing and Bolton should be fired.
98
@Drspock
Fail to mention what happens when the deal sunsets. Iran has no restrictions then so what is the world to do after the deal expires? Does time pass no matter who sits in the White House? Was it the expectation of Obama and the other nations signing that Iran would change their behavior? Did they? Did they spend any of the money handed to them to feed their people or buy medicine or did they fund terror? Leaving out a lot of details, why?
@Drspock I agree with everything except the regime change. A US Invasion will rally the Shites globally against the US and we will have another Iraq war (which is still being fought regardless of propaganda) only greatly magnified and deadlier. Any regime change would be in name only and US troops will continue to die propping up that illusion.
4
@GregP
Its not illegal to develop and have nuclear weapons ...ask America ...they have enough to destroy life on Earth 3 times over.
Iran can spend its money on whatever it likes...America spends more than half a TRILLION every year to buy guns, bombs and all the materials to wage war in multiple spots all over the World ...and does so all the time and hasn't stopped waging war and funding the terror they brought to vietnam, Korea, and many other countries and the peoples it has killed over the last 70 years.
Medecine is too expensive for many in America and they have stopped feeding the poor school lunches ands the aged meals on wheels...money went to increase the war budget...
7
So the policy is to put a very big target into the Persian Gulf. It only takes a couple of sea skimming missiles to put a carrier out of action or sink destroyer.frigate (see Fallkans war). Iran has many such short range missiles both on land (hidden) and at sea (camouflaged).
These are apparently not the missiles that have prompted the US to take action. These are SCUD type ballistic missiles and it is very unlikely that such could be launched from a dhow. More likely they are on the way to Yemen.
In reality, this is a pretty clumsy excuse for escalating military deterrence against Iran.
So why the escalation and why in this manner? It is aimed at deterring any Iranian moves to restart nuclear weapon development and specifically includes B52 bombers able to carry the most potent bunker busting bombs.
The carrier is there either as a distraction or the US fears that land bases, which are much better than a carrier for launching fighter bombers, will become untenable due to attacks by Iranian proxies.
Nothing is as it seems but all this does is to raise the chance that some colonel will launch missiles at these ships so precipitating a major confrontation with unknowable results.
Bolton would probably like such a result but Trump not.
4
Trump’s intelligence is a direct line to Putin, who is sitting back and laughing. “ I’m having so much fun.”
17
@David J You're right. If Putin prods the Iranians into a fight with the U.S. he will sit back and laugh. Yet another foreign policy win . . . and he can play peacemaker, if he chooses to do so. Sadly, KGB Vladie is outwitting Don the Con and CIA Mike at every turn. . . . in the Middle East, Venezuala, North Korea, with China . . . etc., etc.
1
When you have two neocons in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton who both have well-advertised very itchy fingers when it comes to "regime change" in Iran, it seems almost inevitable that with U.S. and Iranian forces in very close quarters in the Straits of Hormuz that an accident will happen triggering another Middle East war that will spread throughout the region. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is right to be skeptical and to demand consultation, but given the current White House stance on stonewalling the House, she should have the House immediately pass a resolution against any military action until its approved by Congress. It's time for the Democrats to go on offense and stop another unnecessary and potentially catastrophic war in the Middle East.
23
@Paul Wortman A good legislative move by the Democrats to deter GOP hawkish attitude would go well to sell in 2020.
1
America elected a loser for president when it elected Mr. Trump, a guy who has spent his entire adult life trying to prove he is not a loser but as evidence keeps piling up it is becoming depressingly clear that he is and has always been a Loser in every imaginable way.
Mr. Trump then aligns himself, and America, with some real beauties; Bibi, who single handedly has turned Israel into an apartheid state and MBS, who sends a man with a bone saw to interview a dissident journalist.
And now he has turned over the keys to America's armed forces to a warmonger with a proven track record of warmongering, Mr. Bolton.
Whatever happens here going forward belongs to the USA, America owns this one.
54
Absolute nonsense. Pretext for Bolton’s decades-old lust for a war, any old war will do.
22
It looks like the Bush playbook. Start war, unify country behind president, win re-election, appoint more judges, overturn roe vs wade, destroy obamacare, reduce taxes, reload.
51
Perhaps if the criminals who ginned up the Iraq war had been brought to justice the current administration would be less bent on repeating that horror. But Bush/Cheney etc. are doing just fine in their guarded mansions.
28
I think it's obvious what Iran must do: Take a page from the Saudi Arabia, North Korea playbook.
Invite trump to a summit and lavish effusive praise on him with parades, huge posters of his face, lights, fireworks and promises to pay the United States untold millions of dollars for maybe buying something in future years. After his ego has been sufficiently sated, he will proclaim them the greatest friends the U. S. of A. ever had.
Then they can do whatever they want with no fear of, and in fact probably the full support, of the trump administration.
26
@KEM
So continuing unrelenting sanctions and seizing a coal transport ship is how you treat someone you call; your greatest friend? Or is it just how you see it when you have TDS?
Three words, "Gulf of Tonkin".
18
when the price of gas soars to 4.00 a gallon and the economy crashes, the republicans will be voted out of office.
when someone tells trump that he will be prosecuted when out of office this issue with Iran will go away.
3
@me You are assuming that Trump's base can connect the dots and be reflective, reasonable types. This has proved to be an impossibility time and time again.
Of Bolton,the NeoCons,and the Chicken Hawks : "They have learned nothing, and forgotten nothing."
6
Just drop the new World Trade Center buildings and claim Iran did it. Then you'll get the support from the public to invade the country and get their oil.
4
Classic hawk behavior: poke the hornet's nest with a stick until the hornet's come out, then retaliate. Bolton and armageddon-loving Pompeo trying to use the incompetent, vote-seeking Trump as facilitator. Caveat emptor.
11
If you believe the photographs (which, so far, have not even been produced), General Colin Powell, then I have some mobile chemical labs to sell you! My name is Donald J Trump and I make the best deals, believe me!
Stuff the photos and stuff John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Donald J. Trump (the 2019 versions of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney). Wait for the rose petals in Tehran, guys. (And you mothers, wives and girl friends: start booking your flights to Dover Air Force base.
2
Seriously, pictures of boats with missiles?
Again “pictures as evidence”
Last time former secretary of defense Mike Powell was forced by Cheney to present fake pictures of Saddams weapons to justify the Iraq Invasion.
We are thought times like this would have been over.
Why does the bad part of history always need to repeat itself?
7
US vs Iran....a war too far?
1
".....three American officials said." If they do not have names, why on earth would anyone believe their story? This is junk foreign policy, peddled by anonymous peddlers of fake news. Part of the problem with having a criminal in the white house is that nobody in the government is credible.
6
The white "Christian" folks in Trump administration, and allies in Congress want to rule women's bodies and ban abortion even at all stages, but they have no problem killing real "human beings" over there, in other parts of the world. Because that kind of killing by shock and awe and missiles is very much within Christian teachings? What kind of Bible are they following? All these hard liners. John Bolton is proven killer murderer architect of the Iraq war. And he inserted himself into the Trump administration just so he could continue boosting defense contractors who pay for Republican (and maybe democrat) re-election fundraising?
9
Leading starts at the top and if the top person is a known liar the American people + military will be asked to support a war for reasons that are/may not be true. SAD!
3
"This president does not even want to have troops in the Middle East."
But John Bolton does. And the President is a gullible fool who swoons over anything military and likes to think of himself as "tough". We are clearly going to try to go to war by provocation for Bolton's satisfaction and Trump's re-election. Trump voters, get your sons and daughters ready!
12
What comes to mind after reading this story is the 1979 movie, ‘Wag the Dog,’ in which a US President uses a manufactured ‘crisis’ overseas to divert attention from his political problems at home.
Sound familiar?
9
@Gene Eisman
Riight: 3% quarterly gdp growth, record low unemployment rate, rising wages, 2 year investigation comes up with nothing - he’s really losing at home, eh?
1
@Gene Eisman Very familiar!
@Paul I would respectfully suggest that you ponder an old phrase: "character matters." The President is without morals, or any guardrails on his behavior. I believe that will ultimately lead to his political demise.
"A senior British military official who is deputy commander of the American-led coalition fighting the Islamic State said Tuesday that he saw no increased risk." This should have been the lead in your story. Not the faked nonsense "intelligence" coming from Bolton the paid lead supporter of an anti -Iran terrorist cult known as Mujahedeen Kalq its parent group, the Paris-headquartered National Council of Resistance. They have zero support in Iran and have killed American service personnel. "Missiles" on boats is nothing new. US intelligence has known this for a long time. In a little reported event Bolton met with Israeli officials and a few days later his hair was on fire. When you have Trump who knows nothing and does not know he knows nothing and does not care, you get him being led by the nose by they likes of Bolton, Netanyahu and the Saudi's. The Congress must act to stop Bolton and his acolytes before they get the US in a 100 year war in the Middle East. "This disgusting madness has to stop," said a distinguished long time national security student of the region.
8
The master of distraction has created another one because the congressional investigations are closing in on the naked emperor, his financial misconduct, and the frauds he calls family.
7
Iran supplying weapons to Arab militias? Are you kidding me? Do you know how far back the tensions between Persians & Arabs go? These folks obviously have no knowledge of the history of the Muslim world. Parents in Iraq today won't give their child a Shia inspired name for fear of the child being slaughtered. There are no Shia Arabs in that region plotting to overthrow U.S. interests. Anybody who believes this is utterly ignorant. Now if you said the Saudis were secretly arming Arab militias with US weapons then...but our president loves the Saudis.
2
“It’s a shame, but it had to happen...”
...we say of the limping packs of amputee seven year olds covered in iodine stained gauze.
“Nothing we can do...”
Let’s just admit that as Americans, we love war. We love being sweet talked into it. We love protesting against it to, futile as it is. We know so little of the outside world, of faraway places...
Meanwhile Asia rises... And the world turns to authoritarian Asian values because at least the Chinese and Singaporeans don’t invade and bomb and bomb, and bomb.
1
John Bolton wants a war with Iran, and he's getting impatient. That, in one sentence, is what this is all about.
8
We are definitely down a rabbit hole when trump is a moderating influence, pushing back on Bolton and Pompeo as they try to hustle us into a war with Iran.
4
We are provoking Iran. Make no mistake. Yes, it's a regime that hates us but we're poking them in the eye and daring them to spit back doesn't serve our purpose. They will. Who wants more war, more killing of innocents, more loss of American soldiers? For what? Mr. Trump, give me a succinct answer why we should go to war with Iran, because that's where we're heading under your leadership. Thanks for nothing.
6
At least Bush’s WMD was half way convincing. Bolton is so bent over for another war, he will accuse Iran for sailing in its own water. In sane world, Bolton would have been prosecuted for a war crime. In Trump’s world, what Iran need is a dictator that Trump admires. Just see how NK, Russia, and Greece get along with the Trump regime.
3
Here we go. Our greatest fears about this crew finally realized. John Bolton and a president in need of a distraction. So much for trumps isolationism and “pledge” to stay out of wars. Can’t wait to see the US led coalition this time; Hungary, Philippines, Poland and of course Saudi Arabia come to mind.
4
Trump has been looking for a war. He could go to war with the State of California. Americans would stand with him shoulder to shoulder because Americans are as fatuous as he is. Trump could invade Vermont, and Americans would applaud.
But we have a congress.
Oh, really.
They could start getting tough and issue a subpoena.
Congress has rendered itself a toothless absurdity beneath contempt. Congress would hide beneath their collective desks and shiver in fear as the Iranian hordes descend from their dhows. Congress is irrelevant. It has made itself irredeemable.
If Trump marched out into his driveway and announced that the CIA had "discovered..."
He would then proclaim the CIA is never wrong.
Americans would believe him. They don't question anything. They goose step like compliant lemmings jumping off cliffs.
I know, we'll make Iranians suffer in poverty, and then they'll understand we mean business as the biggest, pompous, most imperial jerks on the planet. But the entire world already knows that. I know, we could go on Twitter and rant about Iran. That will show them.
I know, we could bring back the draft. Trump's own military record as a winning General could give something inspirational to young American snowflakes who will defend us with pretentious vigor from kebabs being served in school cafeterias. I know, we could all claim to have flat feet. Our lawyers and fixers could prove it.
But those photographs of our feet would not be available to Nancy Pelosi.
2
The con-man president will con you into a war for no other reason than it will help him get re-elected in 2020. It’s a well known fact that Americans sheepishly support presidents at war no matter how dubious the cause (Bush the 2nd anyone). This man only pushes foreign policy that personally benefits him by stoking his base. We’ve seen it again and again. This time America you’ll probably have to go it alonene because Trump has pushed away all your allies. Good luck though, you’ll need it.
7
Am I the only one seeing another Gulf of Tonkin??
3
Sounds like old times. Bolton is fabricating reasons for war again. There is good reason for worry, as Trump is so easily duped.
4
Let’s follow the “logic” on this; Iran has fitted small boats with missiles that are a dire threat to US naval ships. So in response, the US... sends more ships?! This is as utterly nonsensical as when Bush claimed that Iraq had massive stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons... and then proceeded to mass huge numbers of US troops on the Iraqi border like sitting ducks. Folks, when it doesn’t make sense, it’s usually a lie.
4