The concept that Iran can be "blamed" for suppling the legitimate government of Yemen with arms to enable it to resist the blatant and sustained military aggression of the Saudis - which is primarily aimed at terrifying and killing innocent civilians at bakeries and hospitals - is disgusting. I applaud and celebrate the Yemeni strike on the evil dictatorship of Saudi Arabia.
That said, this article conforms the the absolutely unfounded and essentially delusion idea that Donald Trump is in some way averse to military action. Trump is always ready to criticise whatever anyone else has done, but he has been planning to start a re-election war against Iran - in exactly the way he predicted in 2011 that Obama would use military action against Iran to boost his chances of a second term.
Exactly on what basis do these journalists claim that Trump is "averse" to military action anyway? Because he said so? How big a rock would you have to be living under to understand that Trump's default position is to lie and mislead. If he is saying he wants to avoid war with Iran, there could be no more certain evidence that he is planning war on Iran.
Trump's plan is to launch a secret nuclear first strike on Iran's nuclear facilities in mid-January (he doesn't want to start a war and get American kids killed before Christmas). The idea is to start the war with a nuclear strike so Congress has no chance to stop it before it starts. And why will he use nukes? "Because I can!" is what he'll say.
2
Iran is a paper tiger in regards to purely conventional warfare (army on army). They are much more effective at proxy wars. See Iraq and Yemen. They can cause huge casualties as they did with EFP IUD in Iraq, but they cannot stand up to a significant military attack. Air power is limited outside their borders, and they are economically weak to maintain a large military force or occupation. Trump blinked because he didnt want to kill a lot of Iranian Soldiers. This is not weakness. This is proportionality. I do believe the Iranians will only understand direct force. A large military strike will force Iran to back down as the strikes could strategically weaken them. I am not calling for open ended war, but I do believe a strong military response can actually prevent war. Their is a risk of miscalculation and a larger regional war, and voters may want to sue for peace instead of fight. significant damage to Iranian naval assets and air defense along the coast should be enough to cause desertion and morale collapse among the rank and file. RG forces may not be scared, but history shows that conscripts will eventually buckle. Tough situation indeed. Diplomacy only works from a position of strength. If Tehran views the US as weak, diplomacy can't succeed.
1
The unwillingness to go to war is not solely Trump's, it's all of America's. Who actually wants a war with Iran? Anyone? This would not be another Iraq (as if THAT were a good thing), it would be Vietnam on bath salts. A heavily mountainous country more than 3 times the size of Iraq with half a million soldiers under arms and more than a million reserves with sympathetic relations with Russia and China, and in close proximity to several vulnerable and valuable allied nations that would be flattened nigh-instantly if Iran invaded.
And make no mistake: none of Iran's neighbors have the wherewithal to resist invasion. They will back off or surrender in order to prevent it, no amount of American military support will make them willing to turn their cities into battlegrounds, to become another Iraq or Afghanistan.
Iran is aware of all this, so they are being aggressive. Ordinarily such aggression would make them internationally unpopular, but decades of American imperialism in the region has given them miles of slack to pull on.
The urge to stand up to Iran is a knee jerk reaction, I feel it too. I don't want America to be seen as weak, and I'd like to maintain a status quo that benefits Americans, but the cost of maintaining that status quo is becoming too high to bear.
Trump likely hoped the sanctions would be a bargaining chip he could trade when Iran sued for a deal, but Iran has realized now they have other options in exploiting American unwillingness to go to war.
4
This article ignores the degree to which Iranian foreign/military policy is an expression of internal politics. For the Revolutionary Guard and its allies, it's beneficial, even crucial, for Iran's economy not to be well integrated with the rest of the world. The badly-run companies of the RG with their poorly-conceived, often environmentally disastrous projects, would never be able to compete with outsiders if the economy were open. At the same time, the RG has monetized the sanctions. While new sanctions may, at times, be inconvenient for them, on the whole they would lose smuggling etc. money if all sanctions were ended. The Supreme Leader has no incentive to get everyone on the same page, either for or against cooperation with the outside world, because his own position is safer as the arbiter of disputes.
2
Saudi Arabia is going to bow to Tehran just as the UAE has done. SA is unwilling to be on the frontline in a war with Iran or any country for that matter even with US backing if it means that SA’s oil capacity can be taken out.
What this all means is that Saudi Arabia is increasingly like to make its own deal with Iran over the objections of the US. This will be the beginning of the end of US influence in the Middle East. Iran is expelling the US from the Middle East by peeling away the US’s most important ally - Saudi Arabia.
The fact that Iran can bring down the entire Middle East oil production and the US military cannot prevent such an action from occurring is what world has learned since Saturday. The shift in the balance of power shift is remarkable. Wait until SA and the Euros make their deal with Iran.
2
It’s all very complicated, and nothing in this area is ever “perfect”. But do you think Obama might have been onto something?
3
NYT readers, the US never agreed to the so called Iran nuclear deal because the Senate never ratified it. So please stop saying Trump withdrew from it, we were never in it. As Trump would say, that is fake news! As for Trump's handling of these tensions with Iran, I admire his patience, so far. Iran is begging for the US to take military action in order to get sympathy. Trump refused to bomb Iran for the downing of our drone several weeks ago because it would result in the disproportionate response of 150 deaths. You NYT readers give him no credit for his careful use of military force.
2
None of this would be happening if Trump hadn't unilaterally withdrawn from the nuclear agreement. Our allies are standing with Iran. Only Trump could have created a mess this big.
10
@Steven
China and Russia are standing with Iran too aren't they? Both signers of the JCPOA correct? Are they are our Allies? Is this how a puppet should act? Consistency matter at all to you?
As much as he loves to sow chaos and confusion, Trump is very predictable. Unless he's punching down, he blinks when confronted, especially when it comes to ordering men and women into combat. For all his macho bluster about being "locked and loaded," General Bone Spurs has no clothes. The Iranians have figured that out and are gaining the upper hand.
6
Saudi Arabia is the big problem in the Mideast not Iran
13
The article makes it look like Iran is involved in increasingly aggressive acts while the US is passively watching.
In fact at this very moment US diplomats across the world are pressuring countries to cut ties with Iran and to harm it economically.
8
What this article fails to note is that Iran's "bellicose" strategy has been the standard for the country since their revolution in 1979. From the American hostages to Lebanon to Syria (even while the JCPA was being negotiated) their international behavior has been consistent over the years since then. So, this is not just about President Trump's missteps in his policies toward Iran, it is also about a rogue regime doing everything within its power to encircle its Sunni rivals, and threaten Israel. It's not new, and it's not going to stop no matter what policy a new American administration will adopt.
2
The Shah was the rogue regime.
5
@David Godinez
If only history started in 1979! It's mostly what we want to remember because of the tragic American hostages situation and the revolution that led to the Islamic Republic.
David forgets the CIA engineered coup against elected Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh and then installing the brutal puppet regime of the Shah, "some people" say arming Saddam Hussein during the Iran Iraq war and then the downing of the Iranian flight 655 by the USS Vincennes, resulting in 290 civilian deaths over Iranian airspace. We did apologized for that incident. What about the computer Suxnet virus a few years ago?
So when one mentions 1979 as the start of Iran's "bellicose" behavior, one should study and understand history past and current.
8
To the NYT don't encourage another war.
Someone will tell him he lacks credibility and is viewed as weak which will set Trump in a frenzy and lead to tragedy. The source of the tension is dropping out of the Iran agreement and sanctions imposed by Trump. This administration is responsible creating the open wound with Iran.
7
“They are challenging American supremacy and forcing the international community to come to terms with a new relationship with the Islamic Republic,” she said. “They come out ahead no matter what happens.”
Thank you for creating the world we now live in George W Bush and Dick Cheney.
8
Getting rid of Saddam Hussein, who kept Tehran in constant fear and pinned down, doesn’t look like such a great move now.
4
Iran knows that when himself is challenged he always blinks, every single time.
2
"[Trump] is not a lion, he is a rabbit;" that about sums it up.
5
“The Saudi air defenses have been proved completely worthless,” said Michael Knights, a scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “They are not going to be ready for Round 2.”
The Iranians have apparently proven that the Saudi tiger, arrned to the teeth by Washington, is made of paper.
4
International affairs, especially in the middle east, is no place for US partisan politics. The Iran nuclear deal was sensible. It ran afoul of Republican hatred for Obama, which increasingly looks to the rest of the world like racism (since the other Republican claims, like excess executive power, running up deficits, trying to meet with enemies, etc., are exposed as fallacious.) Other countries may be racist, too, but when they see the American administration wagged by it, US soft power vanishes.
Forget Trump. Republicans have to get their act together. They're damaging the country's reputation, many acting as hard line as the religious conservatives in charge of Iran. This undermines US credibility. Trump will listen to Republicans Senators and congresspeople. This fear that keeps them mouthing crazy talk has to stop.
6
The Persians are doing it on the cheap, a couple of million dollars spent on a few drones/missiles etc which told the world that the brains beat brawn every time. You do not need to spend a trillion and a half dollars if you have the smarts to hack and reprogram a drone Lockheed Martin RQ 170 which happens to be spying on them and that they did in 2011. they used our technology and reverse engineered it for their use and now in a miniaturized format they have sold it to the Houthis.
Our defense forces need to understand that we are no longer fighting the battle of the Bulge. Stop spending billions on obsolete equipment; spend on helping people, both at home and abroad. stop selling obsolete weaponry to others who can't even use them.
Is it possible these attacks came from Israel? because there are two nations that want us to fight their battles against Iran, Israel and Saudia.
7
So where is Jared? I thought he would have the whole Middle East crisis solved. Who knew it would be so easy.
9
"It ( = Iran) suffered little penalty. The United States declined to retaliate for the tanker sabotage. With Britain eager to lower the temperature, officials in Gibraltar, a British territory, freed the detained Iranian vessel last month."
And as long as that continues, it will go its merry way spreading terror directly or indirectly through through Hezbollah, Shiite militias and Houthis.
This was the case before the nuclear accord and afterwards.
3
Iran is to sting to fight now. Yes, you can fight and beat the, but that would take 20,000 American lives, and for what may I ask?. we could not beat the Taliban.
3
Iran has a highly vulnerable strategic asset - Kharg Island Oil Terminal. Not difficult to destroy. And once “reduced” Iran’s oil export economy is on its knees. There’s no reason to expect the Iranians can significantly interrupt mid-east oil deliveries. Unless they increase their attacks on the Saudis. Given the Saudis large missile inventory capable of destroying Kharg Island that’s unlikely. In a word Kharg Island is the “Queen” and highly vulnerable.
The Iranians could go for broke and order Hezbollah to unleash their 100,000 Iranian supplied missiles upon Israel. In response both Lebanon and Iran would be destroyed as functioning economies.
So Iran is pretty much a “one trick pony”. The Saudis are playing it straight up the middle. Assembling the evidence for international experts. A likely outcome is reduced European complaints about Pres. Trumps oil embargoes. In the end the Iranians will be outfoxed. Without a major military confrontation.
2
@Peter I Berman Trump is going to outfox the Iranians? Very, very unlikely. The Iranians don't need to mount any more attacks. They have made their point. Absent any further attacks Trump needs to make concessions to get Iran back to the table. He doesn't need a war. He does need a new Iran agreement with his name on it, even if the terms are not much different than Obama's deal.
9
@phil
Trump need make no concession, let alone concessions, to get Iran back to the table. He only has to continue the Maximum Pressure of the Sanctions and wait. Let's agree to call it Strategic Patience so it shines a nice bright light on the Saint. Deal?
@GregP
Except Trump will be history before this so-called strategy could possibly succeed.
Same with China.
Trump speaks loudly and carries a very small stick. He is destroying this country's credibility.
He tore up the JPIOC and then is seen on television practically begging the Iranians to come back and sign anything to get him out of the corner he had painted himself into. What a disaster- Trump and his policies.
11
How pathetic is Saudi Arabia as an "ally?" They are proficient at dismembering a defenseless American citizen in Turkey but, even with their billions of dollars in oil revenue, they can't protect their own territory -- and will fight only to the last American.
11
@Brian Kidnay
I agree with your take on Saudis Arabia but want to point out that Mr Khashoggi was not a US citizen, rather he was a legal resident of the US. This of course in no way diminishes the barbarous act of murder committed by the Saudi government.
3
Trump should address the Iranian people directly to encourage them to overthrow their illegitimate, unelected, religious-fanatic dictators who oppress women and gay people, who regularly threaten Israel with annihilation, and who execute more people than any other country in the world, including for being gay.
The so-called "islamic republic of" Iran is not even a legitimately constituted state. It was established by religious-fanatic criminals who overthrew the last illegitimately constituted government, the Shah, (who unfortunately we maintained in power).
It's always better to overthrow a government from within than from without. Saves us a lot of trouble.
As this is a state illegitimately constituted by criminals, they should immediately be expelled by the United Nations.
If the Mafia took over Italy by force would anyone have anything to do with them? Would they be UN members? Same thing here.
1
@MIKEinNYC The reason why the revolution Government is there is because the U.S. meddled with Iran's affairs in the 1st place. Overthrowing a Democratically elected govt of Mosadegh, installing an Autocrat Absolutist Shah Pavli which led to people being frustrated and radical that they called for the religious fanatics to rule their country. If the U.S. would stop overthroeing govts and replacing them with dictators e.g. Mobutu Sese Seko, we world would be much more peaceful.
11
What seems to be lost in this article is the very weak and fragile state of the Iranian regime. This is a regime with no support inside Iran and very afraid of the Iranian people. They attack any legitimate strikes by workers, teachers, retired people by arresting and torturing them.
Trying to prop up a brutal dictatorship which has reached its end is a futile attempt by the same Iran apologists who benefit from this misogynistic corrupt religious dictatorship in power. Regardless of what The US does or does not the days of the mullahs ruling Iran is numbered.
1
@Jalil
With a 520,000 man Army mostly conscripts the Mullahs are well positioned to rule indefinitely. Iran’s weak spot is its oil export dependency. If the oil embargoes are maintained long enough we may see some serious protests. Helps remember that Iran’s 70 millions have an economy substantially smaller than Israel’s 7 million. It’s major European trade partner is Germany and just 4 Asian nations - China, India, Japan and S.Korea - comprise its oil customers. So US interests are not seriously affected by Iran’s reduced supplies of oil exports. Maintaining US oil embargoes long enough is the best strategy to ensure the Mullahs do not secure nuclear weapons. That’s the “brass ring” here. Not oil. Just nuclear weapons.
1
Over the last ten years the Iranians have been very pragmatic. But in that way their policies have also been predictable.
If a western nations hits an Iranian installation, they will retaliate. But the retaliation will be very proportionate to the original harm.
They have been very public and very gradual about moving beyond their nuclear deal. When their forces where hit in Syria they offered a warning, but no retaliation, at least not yet.
In fact they did not move Revolutionary Guard forces into Syria until after the Saudi coalition of jihadists, including ISIS moved into eastern Syria which shares a border with Iran. Again, predictable moves usually well announced.
When we invaded Iranian air space with our drone they shot it down. Was the attack on the British oil tankers Iran's response? Possibly. But again they leave room for de-escalation as well as military a response.
The idea that they would attack the Saudi's seems inconsistent with their approach.
It's also not clear with the many American ships and aircraft in the Gulf that there are no radar records of drones leaving Iranian air space flying across the Gulf.
If that happened, it's almost inconceivable that we would not pick them up mid flight. Drones can fly low but they are slow and leave a clear signature.
This is beginning to sound like elements in our government are trying to force policy, as they did with Obama and the gas attack in Syria.
That turned out to be a false flag. Could this be another?
5
@Drspock Sure Alex.
The Iranians have taken a measure of Trump and have seen that he is a coward. They rightly have decided that he isn't going to go to war with them in an election year and that the western alliance won't back him if he does. They also figure that if they can't sell their oil, then the Saudis shouldn't be allowed to sell theirs. We now have the worst of all worlds with an aggressive Iranian military with no constraints on their nuclear ambitions. Nice job 'tough guy' Trump.
15
@Chazak
Saudis will be back to full production in days. They will sell all they oil they want. Iran will not, even with you cheerleading them on won't sell more than a few tankers worth, and only then by promising one thing and doing another. The world sees them in their true light. The regime will not survive, and I will tell you now so you can be prepared... Trump is Re-elected in 2020.
@GregP
"... I will tell you now so you can be prepared... Trump is indicted in 2021."
@Stephen
And who becomes President when/if that happens in 2021? Mike Pence? Think I have an issue with Pence? Trump..Pence..Haley....Trump ( Invanka )....can the future get any brighter?
Gosh, the Iran nuclear agreement is looking better and better every day. Too bad our uninformed and ignorant president thought he could "get a better deal" and now we are staring at a war in the Middle East. Heaven help us.
10
@Vern
Oh sure if you wanted them to first have proxy forces all over the world and tgen in 5 years when the agreement expired get the miles. So clueless!!!
1
@Vern
The Iran Deal delays but not preclude Iran’s eventual securing nuclear deliverables. Western intelligence estimates well over $10 billion has been spent by Iran on its nuclear weapons program. On Jan. 2 Iran’s Top General was quoted publicly in the press that Iran will “annihilate Israel” - a major nuclear power. And Israel has repeatedly stated publicly Iran will not be allowed to secure nuclear weapons. Most analysts take the Israelis at their word. So the Iran Deal is a red herring. Iran’s Mullahs seem bent on sacrificing Iran in their quest to secure nuclear weapons and dominate the mid-east. The “smart monies” are betting the Iranians will never be allowed to secure nuclear deliverables.
1
@Vern Agreed. Also, why would Iran now back away from developing a nuclear bomb? Looks like strength only respects strength.
2
So, exactly what is the results of Trumps "policy"? Yes the average person in Iran is suffering, the moderates and those who want peace are marginalized as "tools of the West". The revolutionary guards are increasing their wealth by the black market and also, able to ask for a bigger piece of the pie for weapons. Result, sanctions making Iran more resistant to talks and now believe they could not trust any results regardless.No way would they trust making a deal with Trump, who would?
5
@RichardHead
The average person in Iran have been suffering for the last 40 years with this dictatorship in Iran. The sooner the mullahs leave the country the better people will be.
1
@Jalil Mullahs or not the Iranians are a proud people, They do not want an American incited revolution, especially one that involves someone as hateful as Trump. Nor do they want Iranian exiles back with any power.
2
Wasn’t the game of Chess invented in Iran(Persia)?
They know a thing or two about strategy.
5
@JWB
The Iranians clearly came out 2nd best in their War with Iraq lead by Saddam Hussein. Casualty estimates range between 500,000 and one million for each side. Iraqs western armaments were clearly superior to those acquired by Iran - most from the Soviets. Lacking a modern army, navy and Air Force the Iranians are reduced to using surrogates - Hezbollah in Lebanon and Houthis in Yemen. The Iranians lack a modern air defense system. And have only small numbers of intermediate range conventional warhead missiles. Iran has no ability to forward project significant military forces. It’s claim to fame is to briefly interrupt mid-east oil supplies.
Trump's only agenda now is to win his reelection. And he very well knows that economy is his only bragging point even though a great, sorry- greatest, economy proved not to be so helpful if we go by last year's midterm and recent poll numbers. Most Trump's die hard supporters are poor, less educated white folks. they ate a lb. so the hardest hit by most Trump's policies. A downturn or recession would simply devastate Trump and it doesn't take much to provoke those Trumpets, and no one knows it better than Trump.
Then those military families would not like their dear ones sent to another war that to for saving ego and corruption of a President and his autocratic friends in Saudi.
It does not matter how much Trump brags about military and American weapons. He will not take any chance that might damage US economy and those military families. It's not something that Evangelical fundamentalism or white supremacy rants can cover up for Trump.
Trump has a habbit to dig his own hole and then congratulate himself for coming out of it full of dirt all over!
7
Trump is a classic bully, which is to say he’s fundamentally a coward.
13
Based on Saudi response so far, they would rather take a couple billions dollars in losses than engage in a war with Iran. The US won’t take unilateral military action without active Saudi taking the lead in the fight. Iran has won this round but they have not made any impact on world economy so they have won nothing
3
@Qcell
The Saudis have a substantial inventory of intermediate range conventional warhead missiles easily capable to destroying Iran’s major strategic asset = Kharg Island oil terminal. (See Int’l Arms.org). Destroying Kharg Island brings Irans oil dependent economy to its knees. There’s no War with Iran in our future.
@Peter I Berman
And what do you think the Iranians would do in response? Do the words "scorched earth" mean anything to you?
Trump's thought processes (if we can call them that) have gotten one thing right: he cannot afford opening another war front in Iran. The Iranians understand that and will exploit it to the hilt.
Their strategy is obvious: do as much damage as possible expecting Trump to get most of the blame before the 2020 election and count on negotiations to end the sanctions with another President.
Trump has painted himself in a corner by butting out of the accord instead of trying to build on it as any rational US President would have done. By ratcheting sanctions he has stiffened the spine of the revolutionary guard, and by badmouthing European allies he has ensured that none of them will support any action he undertakes.
11
So it seems Iran is free to carry out more attacks in the region so long as they are plausibly deniable. And Trump is unlikely to retaliate for fear of harming his chances of re-election. That's a terrible situation he has created with his so called Iran policy.
11
The damage to those containers was made by canon fire from a slow moving aircraft, not by rocket powered missiles. The Saudis themselves did it.
4
He's already blinked twice. Trump has only two options, lob missiles and drop bombs or he can storm the beaches and meet a half million Iranian troops and another 1.5 million reserves.
Iran is no Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan. Thousands of US shoulders would die and the American public won't have it.
And now Trump is talking about a face-saving visit with the Iranian leadership, Might have been smart to stick with Obama's policy, Trump never thinks things through.
Iran has Trump boxed into a corner.
4
It isn't just the dislike for war that Trump is more bark than bite. It's a worry that Russia and China will come to Iran's aid if the U.S. bombs Iran. That is a probably as well as an an attack by one or both of the "friends" with Iran, but an attack against Saudi Arabia as well. I believe that the Saudis also fear a war with Iran by itself.
1
Maybe are Democratic Congress should consider the Iranian strategy of standing up to Trump & getting him to blink. Push hard on Trump and don’t let up. He protects his tax returns much more zealously than American interests.
3
Unfortunately We Americans do not know 101 of foreign policy. We don’t know how other countries think and we don’t care either. We have to show how macho nation we are where all other nations have to surrender. This is not your father’s war. Things have changed. Trump policy of anti Obama policy has finally come to haunt him and we all suffer because of his incompetence, foolish ideas and bullying tactics.
17
How do we know Israel is not behind these attacks? It's been attacking Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.
Yes I know. Saddam has WMDs again.
8
Trump should not attack Iran on behalf of Saudi Arabia. The US should rejoin the JCPOA.
4
Is anyone surprised that Trump is all bluff? That snowball is rolling now, gathering steam as more countries realize that Trump doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut and has no feel for the sophistication fundamental to playing on a stage larger than the real etate market in Manhattan.
More to come.
7
“Iranian hard-liners consider Trump’s inconsistency to be weakness.” Erratic is the president’s normal
5
Trump started all this, of course, when he withdrew from the Iran nuclear treaty, which was working, and added harsher sanctions.
Gee, why didn’t Iran send Trump a love letter a la Kim, and promise they would be good, and do a photo op with him?
5
China and Iran have figured out they can outlast Trump. A trade war with China or military war with Iran will be the end of Trump and the republicans.
3
I don't get it. Do the Iranians really believe that this is a winning strategy. Aren't their oil terminals as exposed as any Saudi refinery?
1
@Matti Start destroying any oil supplies and the worlds economies would tank. A loss of 15-20% of the worlds oil supply and all of the world would suffer.
A "war" with Iran would cost thousands of lives and many many billions and go on for years. You want your son or daughter to join in? China and Asia get lots of oil from the Middle east and they would be forced to move. So Russia backing Syria, China backing Iran, we struggling in Afghanistan and with ISIS waiting in the wings it would be disaster.
3
@RichardHead
There’s no serious prospect of War with Iran. Destroying its major strategic asset - Kharg Island Oil terminal - is not difficult and brings iran’s Oil dependent economy to its knees.
The Saudi Royal family has been selling the world oil and have profited in a manner beyond most peoples comprehension.
Protecting their oil fields is their number one concern.
If they know the Americans are not going to ride to the rescue then they will find a way to settle their conflicts to protect those fields.
6
@A Pwell
Well said
1
The danger in Iran's boastfulness is twofold: first, there are a lot of people in positions of importance in the U.S. who consider Iran, or at least its dictatorial theocracy, to be a serious threat that must be countered; second, if Trump is portrayed as a weakling he might just lash out. We have seen this before, and if he doesn't want to be involved in a war in an election year, he has ample power at his disposal to see that any conflict is way over by next year.
1
@Jon Orloff did i read correctly? the conflict wou;d be over before the next election?
2
@Jon Orloff
Just like the Iraq War was over in six months? And that oil from Iraq paid for everything? And democracy flourished, unicorns, flowers and candy lined the streets?
Think again.
8
@Jon Orloff
Iran isn't Iraq. War with Iran will last longer than anyone in trump's mob can imagine.
At least it would put a huge dent in our reliance on oil.
3
Don't forget the context here.
Saudi's are bombing Yemen into oblivion. 75% of their population is in danger of dying of starvation. This implies that the Houthi's have their own reasons for attacking Saudi installations.
The sanctions on Iran are already an act of war. The regime in Iran is in an existential crises and getting pressure from inside and outside. You put your hands around someones throat and start squeezing they will fight back for survival.
All consequence of pulling out of the Iran deal without thinking of all the ramifications!
12
@Karan
Sanctions are not an act of War. Allowing Iran to build up their economy when they have a stated intent to destroy Israel and are openly hostile to the West is an act of Suicide.
I used to live near the refineries in Los Angeles and I looked at the footage. It's all smoke and no mirrors. The drone took out the old fashioned distillers, and my understanding is those aren't used anymore in modern operations but that they are expensive to remove, so at most refineries they are just left in place. There's a really bright orange one I remember in Lomita - they all look like that.
The rest of the plant is intact.
7
@Thomas Busse I remember they decorated it as a huge pumpkin at Halloween!
@Thomas Busse
That’s a Sarah Palin argument if I ever heard one.
1
@Thomas Busse Interesting, if true.
Perhaps the US shouldn't be involved. But we should remember that Iran/Hezbollah have bases & influence in Latin America not so far away (eg Venzuela, the tri-border region of S America, and elsewhere).
Iran has demonstrated capability not just to create bases outside their territory & find proxies there, but to direct large scale military attacks from there with strategic implications (eg wiping out Saudi oil wealth, or hitting the Israeli refinery in Haifa to cause mass civilian casualties as Hezbollah has openly mentioned, or hitting its nuclear facilities, etc). Likely they have plans for developing ways to strike at us, "The Great Satan", too.
Maybe they're too strong for us to counter without casualties we aren't ready to bear, so we should give in to their demands - which may increase over the years as they get stronger.
They have a new alliance with Russia; perhaps Turkey will be part of it instead of being in NATO.
Whether we should be their allies or foes or neutral, we should take all this into account now.
[And reduce tensions via one of the projects designed to bypass the straits of Hormuz, so oil can flow to Europe and elsewhere without chancing a violation of Iranian sovereignty.]
One needs to understand one's opponent: keep in mind: Persia was once THE world power and the extremists aim to re-establish that. We may think that's grandiose/insane, but one must take megalomaniacs like Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc, seriously or suffer the consequences.
3
@Avirab
None of this is necessary if we can wean ourselves off foreign oil.
@Zeke27 US is the world's largest oil producer. We can do without foreign oil now.
1
@Avirab
For years Israeli warplanes have flown over Iran without interruption. Iran lacks a modern army, navy and Air Force and has only small numbers of intermediate range missiles. It has no ability to project significant forces. It’s major strategic asset - Kharg Island Oil terminal - is not defended by modern defense systems. Once set aflame Iran’s economy is brought to its knees. Time to relax.
Blinking is a change from his usual move of filing under chapter 11.
16
He has the spine of a dust bunny. If Iranian hard-liners have concluded that Trump is weak, they have that much right. Setting aside the fact that there is no evidence that Iran did this. Setting aside the fact that we can't trust Trump et al. Setting aside the fact that this entire escalation on both sides was caused solely by the inane abandonment of the pretty good Iran deal, motivated by Trump's racist obsession with everything Obama.
19
Why would anyone expect Iranians (or anyone else for that matter) to trust our current dysfunctional government that has betrayed previous good faith agreements and alliances that it even initiated? Trump regards foreign powers—excluding Putin—in the same light he does his mindless base: simple fools ripe to be conned.
Problem is, those leaders and diplomats hold the intellectual advantage in this game and see him as a feckless loser who can’t even maintain his own cabinet staffing.
This could turn into a costly lesson for the rest of us, but nothing is likely to be resolved until we have reinstated a real government.
14
Iranian hard-liners think Trump will blink, and why wouldn't they? That's exactly what he did after they shot down an American drone.
Like all our other foreign adversaries, Iran sees Trump's pattern of bluster and retreat around the world, and they know they can do as they please.
14
Does anyone remember when there were patriots in the Republican leadership that really cared about American interests?
I wonder if any of them are left and how they feel about this Trump guy.
Im not sure, but didn't there used to be a place called west point where they tried to learn from the past and plan for the future? Do we still have things like defense colleges?
To think that these guys in the IRG are running circles around this administration, kinda makes Jimmy Carter look tough in comparison.
6
Our hardliners are no different than Iran's hardliners. Both want conflict. Both do not want peace.
I have no doubt that Iran's liberals and progressives would get along just fine with our liberals and progressives. I would bet the majority of our citizens could be friends with the Iranians. We are all hostages of the hardline conservatives of both countries.
6
this is an excellent outline of tehran's strategic thinking and tactical calculation. both appear to be clearsighted and accurate.
on our side, we have trump's "competing instincts," senior advisors at loggerheads, and calculations based on politics and elections.
no contest.
18
Many from those middle eastern countries want “let’s you and him fight!”
4
Although not a Trump fan, at all, if Iran figures he’ll blink and his blinking keeps us out of another war, let him blink! Not sure, however, an article in the supposedly “failing” NY Times discussing his tendency to blink is such a good idea. Trump might want to show that the Times is wrong by launching a war and saying to the Times “see”. Best to keep quiet about this and probably everything else Trump does.
6
@David Edelstein
If Trump goes to war with Iran he'll be in a mess that he can't climb out of. So I say pop the corn. The shows just getting started. If only we had that Obama agreement still. To bad we don't have a real president l.
7
This article draws its conclusions in part from the unsupported notion that Iran attacked Saudi Arabia's oilfields.
I know of no other way to judge the present and future than by past experience. Mr. Trump and his administration are liars. They lie about everything, no matter the importance or the contrary evidence. Mr. Trump has less credibility than a jailhouse snitch. There has not been a White House press briefing in over six months because his administration can no longer pretend to corroborate the mountain of lies that he spews each day.
As such, I will not believe that Iran has attacked Saudi Arabia without incontrovertible evidence from a neutral party. The words of the Saudi and American governments are equally useless.
16
@RS what would you have to see to believe that it was Iran?
@ambulatrix Nothing that comes from the US, for sure.
“The Saudi air defenses have been proved completely worthless."
I can hear the screaming at the Pentagon from my house.
5
@Bartolo good reply. someone should be reading the newspapers before they put their biased opinion in the national spotlight.
President Trump is by far the most popular foreign politician among Iranians and we appreciate what he has done for Iranians so far. Many Persians were disheartened when Bolton left and Trump started talking about meeting Hassan Key Rouhani.
These attacks are the last dying efforts of a corrupt and dictatorial regime and will NOT unite people behind the Islamic Regime in Iran...They are well beyond that point.
1
The most popular foreign politician?! You clearly haven’t been back in a while. That really isn’t the case.
Trump has never not ‘blinked’. He has no idea how to focus on strategy for anything, except maybe if Iran bombed his properties or affected his personal economy. Even then, you would probably get double talk as to how to respond, as he makes decisions based on how it makes him look to his adoring fans. We are in deep trouble folks, as there are no adults left in the room and this requires so much more than he ever had to offer, even though he believes himself to be the ‘stable genius’. I wonder how he can blame Obama for this one! Lord, help us. This article and others discuss how we could end up in another war in the Middle East or the economy could go into a deep dive. What if BOTH happened? Justice will be served. The day of reckoning will come.
11
Trump always backs down from those who get tough with him. He did that with North Korea's Kim Jong-un, with Russia's Putin and now with Iran. If he doesn't like what his advisers say, he simply gets new ones who tell him what he wants to hear. I think this attack was from Iran, if not directly they surely got the Houthis the bombs. They timed it just before our elections. But in the end, the only thing that will make the Iranians back down are leaders who stand up to them. They saw Carter as weak, and they overran our embassy until Carter was out and gone. I hope the Saudis do not back down; the bomb of the oil supplies has a great potential to disrupt the global market. Before anyone acts, all nations should be on the same page in dealing with Iran.
2
@gmt Yes, because war means "I murder children in school buses and level hospitals, and you sit there and take it." In war, both sides fight. If the Saudis didn't want their facilities attacked by Yemenis, they shouldn't have invaded Yemen.
6
They are not. Nor are many Americans. Trump brought this on himself by backing out of the nuclear treaty. Did he honestly think that Iran would not strike back against the US & Saudi Arabia. SA is no ally!
2
You may wish to research the Houthis a little. They were hardly a-setting round the house, humming happy tunes.
What nameless "American officials" are being cited here? Why should anyone believe these nameless American officials speak for an administration led by a president who doesn't listen or take advice from the military, NSC, State Department or our intelligence services?
And if these American officials who won't provide their names do speak for the president, why would any American believe what we are being told?
6
Put succinctly, the Iranians believe Trump to be a feckless blusterer incapable of action, and one who can not drum up global allied support for a position, if he should at any time surprise the world and take one.
This is the completely predictable result of electing to the Presidency a man who has no understanding of the world and most complex ideas, and has no intention of changing that, or even bothering to be informed and guided by those that do.
We squandered our soft power at a time when we cannot afford hard power, for no good reason other than a minority of people in this country got together an elected a snake oil salesman, because they thought any change was better than the status quo.
Turns out change can be for the worse. #Anyone else in 2020.
25
And Iran’s gets to hold the entire world hostage because they NEED to be able to threaten their enemies with nuclear weapons?
Essentially every country that is not the United States will argue that they will not be bullied by the US military, and that justifies them obtaining nuclear weapons
1
@Garret The nuclear deal froze Iran's ambitions and opened a door to diplomacy for other matters. Perhaps we could have moved onto a deal to limit Iranian missile programs, thus avoiding this incident. But no. Obama negotiated that deal, so Trump couldn't let it stand and singlehandedly scuttled the whole thing. Now we all suffer the consequences of his choice.
5
Dear Garrett,
Unfortunately, every country would be right, with the way the U.S. has thrown its military might around in the last several decades, every country would be wise to obtain nuclear weapons, because that is the only and absolute defense against U.S. invasion.
4
@Garrett If Iran truly needed to have nuclear weapons they would not have signed the agreement that Trump just backed the US out of. That's simple logic. In the long run they need prosperity more.
I don't think Iran did this. Evidence and experience would suggest that it was staged in order to provoke engagement between SA, Israel and the U.S. to bolster Netanyahu and Trump in elections, prevent Bibi from being prosecuted for corruption, be able to sell more U.S. arms to Israel and SA and, perhaps, destroy Iran.
Of course, smart money knows that this would not be globally strategic and that Russia and China would become involved were Iran to be attacked - especially without incontrovertible evidence. We can't trust anything coming from Trump, no matter what the reality is. He ceded that right LONG ago!
10
Was this attack performed to lower the world/US economies so Trump would not be elected?
Maybe the Iranians understand that for Trump to retaliate would trigger a constitutional crisis here, leading the Republican Party to back him, in violation of the separation of powers, and there by destroying our republic. For the Iranians, what could better?
3
This attack was not on the US. The Saudis know how to do this. 18 poorly trained Saudis can fly a jet liner into two of Iran’s skyscrapers and into their military HQ. Then Iran can fight a 18 year war with Saudi Arabia to the point where everyone has forgotten why. Reintroduce mileage standards and reduce our dependence on Saudi Oil. Regain our honor.
38
If Trump starts a war he loses the election, do they know he won’t.
Trump is the Saudi’s best friend. If they ask him to hit back at Iran, at most it would be a limited strike. If they tried to get him to start a war with Iran, they know he would likely lose the election and the next US admin would likely be less supportive of current Saudi leadership, so they won’t.
The Iranians have been able to show the damage they can inflict as well. And call Trump / and the Saudi’s bluff.
Apart from that Trump only cares about himself, and has no problem simply lying about whatever happens. He’ll sell the Saudi’s down the drain in a snap. He’s their best friend, but he’s not really a friend. He doesn’t know how to be a friend.
It’s good to see the Saudi’s humiliated. They deserve it.
There is zero appetite with the US public to defend the Saudi’s. And anyone who starts another war, like with Iran, will get voted out of office.
26
@Timbuk- We can only hope that if this administration starts a war they will be exited post haste. One thing for sure, if they start a draft to fight it there will be massive draft dodging and civil disobedience. But on the upside for all our military reservists there will be lots of overtime.
1
So once again, Trump’s weaknesses were obvious and his adversary Iran manipulated Trump into a corner. For all his bluster and phony bravado, Trump backed down because his political needs do NOT allow for another war.
Iran knew this.
Unlike Trump, Iran, Russia and N. Korea research their options and formulate a strategy likely to succeed. In contrast, Trump uses seat-of-the-pants "gut feel" to make his decisions and announces our foreign policy using Twitter.
The enemy is playing chess, Trump is still playing Bocci Ball on a NYC playground.
In repeated contests, Trump has come up short because he refuses to listen to research and refuses to listen to people who disagree with him. Therefore, we can expect one bad decision after another.
We can only pray that the politics don’t change making nuclear war an attractive option for Trump’s 2020 campaign.
18
@Retire banker
Since there is zero proof the Iranian did the deed and the Houthis immediately claimed the blame, why would there be a discussion about war with Iran over an event that they had no part in? Iran has never attacked another country, yet Israel attacks it when it wants and the US breaks a treaty and illegally freezes Iran's money (yes, it belongs to Iran), and talks trash constantly about a country who decided in 2003 to never made a nuclear weapon and hasn't changed it mind.
You must have noticed: when the US doesn't get what it wants, it punishes, sanctions, threatens, lies about events, blames other countries and leaders without proof and hasn't been in a legal war, according to international law, since WWII.
3
@robroy There was a UN Security Council resolution for the Korean War, so you're mistaken on that one point
What would the Iranian hardliners have to do to provoke more than fighting words from Trump for a day or two? Launch a drone attack on Mar-a-Lago?
4
Iran has taken off their gloves and slapped trump’s face with them.
Trump’s move.
13
@New World" I wish it was ONLY Trump's move. He drags the US behind him.
2
Blowing up civilian oil infrastructure is not hard, in terms of military targets. Imagine how hard it would be to defend every storage tank, every pipeline, etc.
In a way it's good for regional stability for everyone to take a step back and realize how costly and damaging a full scale war would be (if targeting civilian infrastructure is on the table). Of course Iran would be just as vulnerable.
And it's good argument that Iran doesn't need a nuclear weapon to achieve military deterrence. See everyone, they could take out the Saudi's oil industry with conventional weapons.
So let's try to have cooler heads prevail and try to encourage Iran to stop the nonsense. And get back to the negotiating table to end their pursuit of nuclear infrastructure. Then they can rejoin the rest of the world economy.
11
@Mmm If the goal is to get Iran to the negotiating table, why did we trash the deal that was already signed and working to freeze "their pursuit of nuclear infrastructure"? It's a lot of sound and fury to get back to where we started. Seems like Trump just served the world a heap of instability for no purpose other than another poke at Obama's legacy.
2
I have no special affection for Iran but the current US Administration is so dysfunctional and so dishonest that I am impressed by Iran's persistent determination to win this blinking battle with Trump and show who really has guts. They can be a fierce adversary, teaching the "stable genius" a thing or two.
49
The Iranians have Trump's number. They know he's weak at home. They know the American people are sick of wars in the Middle East. They know that he's an isolationist. Trump walked right into this mess.
55
@Frank Ramsey and Trump owns vulnerable properties all over the world. Is it possible that threats to his personal business are now influencing American foreign policy?
1
Bibi should have heeded the adage “Be careful of what you wish for” when he decided to go all in on Trump. Trump is a paper tiger, and he will not commit America’s blood and treasure to defeating Iran for Saudi Arabia’s or even Israel’s sake. And to make matters worse Tehran now believes that.
Too bad that Bibi and Israel did not realize who their real friends in the U.S. were, Obama and the Democrats. Yes, Obama was harshly critical of Israel policy at times, but Tehran never questioned whether or not the U.S. would be there for Israel under Obama. Bibi and Israel are about to find out that everyone is expendable under Trump, and no country is guaranteed safe harbor, even Israel. Just ask Puerto Rico.
30
@Shend: well put.
1
There is something pathetic about this article, in that the theme is Iran is misbehaving and getting away with it, or so we are told by so-called "scholars". There is no evidence that Iran is responsible for the recent incidents in the Gulf. The U.S. has a declared policy of economic warfare and threats of military aggression against Iran. That is where the misbehaving and the danger is. The "scholars" lack depth in their telling about the situation in the "Persian Gulf". The Iranians/Persians may have a word for these scholars - vacuous.
19
@Point of View the "Persian Gulf".. and yes we (Iranians) are responsible for it.
Trump is a big talker (and buffoon) who carries a tiny stick. The Iranians have figured this out and are daring Trump to hit back. Trump may well feel that his bluff has been called, and that he has to strike some Iranian targets to gain some credibility. But Trump can't stick to a single coherent line of policy, which continually undermines American credibility to the point where it vanishes. The risk of miscalculation is high, to state the obvious.
15
Trump is a fool. Sychophants in the White House, Cabinet and Congress praise him. Putin and Kim flatter him but give him nothing. He basks in this praise but achieves nothing. The Iranians know that he is a clueless buffoon. Such is the Trump presidency. We will be lucky to survive it.
31
Maybe there is a 3rd option for Trump. You hinted at two:
1. Trump will not attack full force Iran because he is war-adverse (that is why he dodged Vietnam draft, what bone spurs ?) and because that would destabilize the oil market and increase the chance of a recession in the US, which would be fatal for his re-election. Two good reasons not to respond to Iran's transgressions but, if he sees his approval decreasing further, he may be tempted to draw US in a little war with Iran and play the war card at election time (seems familiar, where have I seen that before ?).
2. Trump could show weakness and relieve sanctions against Iran, but he is too proud to accept humiliation, which could damage much his support among Republicans. If I remember well, all recent presidents who were humiliated in a foreign confrontation by admitting defeat were Democrats. American war prowess is quite a sensitive issue for Republicans and they won't stand for a weakling in the White House.
So, if Trump does not follow option 1 above, then he could go for:
3. no direct retaliation at this time, let the Saudis take care of their war with Iran, but provide them with some military support (paper towels). In that way, he avoids most of the perils of the first two options above. You're welcome, Mr. President ! Why am I doing this ? I don't even like the guy ...
1
@mynameisnotsusan
Paper towels?
1
@mynameisnotsusan The real purpose of these strikes are specifically to dissuade the Saudis from option 3. It's the Houthis and their benefactors in Iran saying "Bite us and we'll bite back where it hurts!" The severity of the strike is a reminder to Saudi Hawks: Invade and watch your profits go up in flames. They won't.
@george sterzinger
that's what he hands out to hurricane victims
1
The master negotiator and his minions have approached every foreign policy issue from the simplistic perspective that because the US is by far the strongest military and economic power, it can bully everyone and impose it's demands.
The maximum pressure campaign has placed Iran in a position where it has little to lose. If it can not sell any oil, why not disrupt other countries oil exports. The Iranians have just taught the Donald that his worldview is simplistic and naive.
Trump has sanctioned himself into a corner. To get Iran to the negotiating table he will need to loosen his maximum pressure campaign which he so far refuses to do for fear of looking weak. The only outcome Trump/Pompeo/Bolton had planned for was total victory and a total capitulation by Iran.
Now Trump risks continued disruption of oil supplies by Iran and sharply higher oil prices. Just the thing to bring about a recession.
Finally, the cherry on the cake is that Trump has managed to make the US appear as the aggressor and the bad guy.
9
@Rap
They were/are hoping for regime change. Revolution. Get rid of the Ayatollahs and Iran will make Qatar look like a ghetto within ten years time.
@P&L Lift the sanctions and Iran will make Qatar look like a ghetto within ten years time.
1
@P&L yup, just like Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and almost every south American country including Venezuela, Chile, Brazil, Nicaragua and ...
I suggest you read up a bit on Iran's 1953 coup where CIA overthrew a democratically elected government. And then try again to convince me that the US government wants the best for the people of Iran.
By attacking Saudi Arabia, Iran just made a colossal mistake because now It will be Saudi vs Iran and the US will not be directly involved.
1
And what makes you believe the Saudis will win? Their air defenses were worthless, their Army and Air Force have not been tested in combat (killing civilians in Yemen and a journalist in Turkey don’t count), whereas the Iranians have fought Iraq and know how to fight.
4
@Qcell Really? Because one strike on one facility cut Saudi production in half. Imagine if the facility was bombed to Oblivion, followed by a few attacks on Saudi water plants. The Saudi economy could collapse.
@A P Duncan I don’t think Saudi will win and neither will Iran. The US will benefit as they try to destroy each other.
poor Trump. if he lets Pompeo and the hawks goad him into military confrontation and it goes well, it could boost his approval (like 9/11 did for W), help him get reelected, but if it goes wrong and we get oil supply disruptions and dead American soldiers, his approval tanks. that's all this is about: his calculations regarding reelection, i.e. it's all about him, not US (or the world's) interests.
11
The Koch memo has gone out to conservative media to switch boogeyman rhetoric to China. If the US would undertake a token retaliation Iran can attack more Saudi infrastructure so wisely we do nothing. By the electin it will be never Iran who on Fox the real bad guys are the Chinese. We are headed for an endless East West cold war. The only question is what side does Russia come down on?
1
This article is a load of incompetent analysis. NONE of these attacks in the last 4 months has been linked back to Iran in any substantial way. And Iran has NO reason to launch attacks. They already have a winning hand and no reason to jeopardize it.
Iran's best response to Trump and the US is to simply work towards building a nuclear arsenal. Checkmate. Case closed.
So who IS behind the attacks? Well, let's see. Can't think of any other countries in the region with a history of black flag operations and a decades-long desire to drag the US into war with Iran?
11
This analysis is just the type of opinion that will be used to justify an American military action against Iran. There is another explanation that makes far more sense but does not fit Trump's agenda:
The Iranians have been restrained in their actions to demonstrate their compliance with the West's drive to denuclearize their country. Until recently they have avoided anything that might be seen as a provocation despite Trump tearing a binding document to shreds.
In the meantime, Trump and his friend in Saudi Arabia have been committing one atrocity after another against a group of people that the Iranians are allied with - the Houthis. Remember, all the terrorists that brought down the World Trade Center on 9/11. They were not from Yemen - they were from Saudi Arabia. Iran has not responded. Nor has the West. I imagine that the Houthis were the ones to pull the trigger on weapons that came from Iran. Is it wrong to respond when tens of thousands of your people have been slaughtered by American weapons supplied to Saudi Arabia and perhaps one million more are at risk of starvation behind a Saudi blockage of their country.
Both Trump and his murderous friend MBS have found that when you decide to terrorize others bombs may rain down on you as well; as also happened to Sadam Hussein and Mummer Gaddafi. We have no treaty to the Saudis. They sell oil but have otherwise been very hostile to our interests. I say, let them suffer the consequences of their terrorism.
12
Time and time again, Trump makes bombastic declarations of war and takes little to no action. Trump lacks the foresight, hindsight and courage required to represent anyone but himself. God save America, because the Republican Party, with all their choke on power, are leading it to ruins.
3
Trump is really good at tweeting and he is ferocious when it comes to instituting sanctions.Beyond that he is complacent and Iran knows that.He is so nonplused by the recent attack on oil fields in Saudi Arabia that he is ignoring the consequences as he spends time in California raising lots of money for his campaign.He is in full campaign mode and has no cares about the fallout of this Irani provocation.The government in Iran know that he is easily distracted.
1
Americans seem to have a short memory about last time they tried to exert control over Iran when they got their own you know what handed to them. Iran is unlike most countries the US has invaded in the past, they are not defenceless. They certainly will not be bullied!
5
Here are the choices as they seem to me:
1. Bomb Iran with Congressional approval which will open Pandora’s Box and let lose all its many unintended consequences.
2. Bomb Iran without Congressional approval of some kind and reap the political and social whirlwind that will blow down the American political system and way of life.
3. Use the U.S. Air Force to militarily support the American proxy states of Israel and Saudi Arabia in attacking Iran and totally shake up the Middle East and our allies.
4. Don’t do much of anything. Our president can then declare at a campaign visit in some red state the greatest victory that ever was or will be. After which he can go play his version of golf.
Whatever path is chosen, be sure of one thing: the price of gasoline per gallon will always go up.
1
They are probably right. Unfortunately.
Its so great to see the Times arguing that the bogeyman identified by the Pentagon is our enemy.
Brings back memories of the run up to the Iraq war.
1
Cannot agree more. Spot on. What is not clear is if the Saudis and Emirates know how bad this is. The core of their economies can be brought to a halt with a few “houthi” drones. We are not talking about a full scale war or even militias. Sleep on it.
1
The real question is why would the EU/France want to re-open trade with Iran?
Hypocrisy hurts.
@P&L Trade is what makes the world economy run. Who wouldn't want millions of customers?
trump = paper tiger. Let the bad guys of the world know about the bad boy of Washington
3
Trump is weak. Iranians realized that. And they will use his weakness to have it both ways : no sanctions and the bomb.
Trump really weakened the west. Putin will rejoice, again.
3
They KNOW he will blink!
1
Iran should realize we need nothing from them. If they choose to return to the Stone Age, so be it.
1
The US interest in ME is served only when that region is stable. An unstable ME not only put at risk oil export from the region, but it opens the door for Russia and China to come in and create anti-US alliances.
When Trump came to office, the Iranians were cooperating with the US. They were fighting in Iraq alongside US forces against ISIS. But Mr. Trump, in order to keep Israel, Saudi Arabia and US Neo-cons happy, went on the path of provocation and bullying vis-à-vis Iran.
He first withdrew from the JCPOAct. Then he imposed on Iranians a set of harsh economic sanctions. And, as his final touch, he tried to impose a "zero oil export" policy on the country.
How a country that is largely dependent on oil export could feed its 82 million population, while it is not allowed to export its oil? Anyone with a little sense could have predicted that the Iranians at some point would ash out. And, indeed, that was what Mr. Trump's advisors - Mr. Bolton and Mr. Pompeo - had in mind. They were hoping that once Iranians show their anger, then the US can use that as a pretext to invade the country and change the regime in Tehran.
Mr. Trump could have worked with Iranians to create a strong central Afghan government. He could have worked with them to lower sectarian tensions in Iraq. He could have coaxed them to ask for a democratic outcome in Syria. These were all in the direction of creating a stable ME. But, evidently, Mr. Trump was not keen on having any of that.
4
It could be a reasonable gamble. The Iranians are in a downward spiral. A war could break that. The Saudis have a paper military - lots of equipment, but no tested fighting force. Their infrastructure is wide open. The Iranians can destroy a fair amount of that. Trump will feel obligated to intervene on their behalf, but yet another war in the Middle East will be deeply unpopular. He would likely then lose the election, and the next president will quickly seek a truce. That will include a resumption of the prior nuclear accord. With the Saudis out of commission, the Iranians will then get good money for their crude. But no matter what, Russia wins. They are already rolling sacks of cash to the bank just from the spike in prices after the strike this weekend.
1
Iran has a secret weapon — secret only from Trump. They know that cheap flattery, a sword dance, and a photo op carry the greatest weight with Trump. As long as Trump believes he can obtain these from Iran, they can do anything they want. Until then, he remains putty in Saudi hands ... as long as Putin has no objection.
13
"The muted reactions from Washington — including the initial response to Saturday’s attack — appear to have validated that strategy, several analysts said."
The US really didn't leave Iran any other choice, did it?
Our hawks say, "See, just as we told you."
I say of our hawks, "See, just as our hawks always are."
7
Call me hawkish- but if we are so determined to avoid a ground war, why not retaliate using cyber tactics? Have we not implicitly and explicitly noted that we have cyberweapons in Iranian infrastructure?
Trump’s blinking is tactical. It’s the lead-up to an election year. He knows he’s going to have a hard time getting re-elected if he gets into a conflict now. But we cannot simply let Iran attack critical infrastructure with no repercussions any longer.
3
@Jacob Klieger: Except...it's not our critical infrastructure.
2
The future of the Gulf belongs to Iran. Saudi Arabia is too weak, and the U.S. is, for most purposes, on the sidelines, and will remain there. Our policy of hostility to Iran and pandering to the Saudis has been a costly mistake. The time to make the move would have been in 2003-05. By that time , we'd removed their most feared enemy, Saddam, opening Iraq to majority Shiite control. Iran was offering to cooperate with us against Sunni terrorist organizations in Afghanistan. We could have, at that time, done one of those Eurasia-East Asia flips, dumped the Saudis, and partnered with Iran in managing the Gulf.
Needless to say, no such thought ever entered the heads of the neocons who gave us the Iraq War and the resulting political chaos in the region.
15
Well, I will give credit to the Iranian Hardliners for one thing. Until "Maximum Resistance" I did not think anyone could ever beat 'Strategic Patience' as the Worst Descriptor ever invented.
4
"Iranian hard-liners have long held a cynical view that American decision makers understand only the threat of force, scholars say."
They are mistaken.
American hawks understand only the actual use of force.
They respond only when hurt badly enough that they are forced to notice.
2
Trump blink? Not with the sage advice of Javanka, Sean, Lou, and Tucker to guide our stable genius in chief.
Besides, who needs US government experts in national security, defense, and diplomacy when Trump can just phone a friend in Moscow whenever he's stumped.
13
@Michael Tyndall. Who is Javanka?
@Jackson
Jared-Ivanka. They're usually joined at the hip inside the administration.
Iran has always been connected to North Korea’s nuclear programs. Iran and Russia supplied North Korea with a lot of help and Russia supplied missile design. Of course they analyzed Trump behavior with North Korea and everyone else.
10
@Samuel
Actually Syria exported their nuclear technologies to North Korea.
@Gabriel It was the other way around: The DPRK exported nuclear technology to Syria.
2
@B.J. Brogan - You are correct. It was a North Korean reactor in Syria that the Israelis bombed in 2007.
Unfortunately, Iran has learned that standing up to Trump works better than pandering to him. This is of course true of all bullies.
By way of a further point, how can anyone trust what Saudi Arabia says about the source of the drones? Saudi Arabia would like nothing better than for Trump to fight its battles with Iran on its behalf. To this end, Saudi Arabia would love for Trump to decide that Iran was the source of the drones. . . .
14
“The Saudi air defenses have been proved completely worthless,” said Michael Knights, a scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “They are not going to be ready for Round 2.”
Yeah? Who took so many billions from the Saudis to sell them an air defense that deliberately left them vulnerable to exactly the sort of attacks that would be used by Israel?
That would be the people who want the US to fight Iran now.
7
What Trump and his minions don't realize that inconsistency in itself is a sign of weakness. The Iranians never challenged Obama this way because he had a consistent policy for dealing with them. I am now afraid that Trump will overcompensate and precipitate a conflict.
19
@Roger. Obama gave them everything they wanted. There was no need to challenge him.
1
Straight reporting on such sensitive issue would be much more productive, rather presenting it as an Op-Ed piece - “slap-the-other-cheek tactic is hardly surprising.” Or, relying on the neocon Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
5
President Trump only backs down from his own fights. He has no problem directing other people to fight from the golf course.
5
All our allies and enemies know that Mr Trump is just a con-man, nothing he says has any meaning. It's unfortunate that sizable section of US electorate seeks to explain Mr Trump's many lies and fabrications.
6
If Trump wanted to score a huge win he could expand the Iranian deal to include ballistic missile testing and reset the clock to day 1.
That gives us 10 years from now to work on getting Iran back into the fold of responsible countries. Negotiate trade deals for military concessions. If Iran gets to the point of being a country that has a significant amount to lose they won't gamble on losing it as often.
5
"President Emmanuel Macron of France has recently proposed a $15 billion line of credit to encourage Iran"
I have not seen the American press describe the important ways that such a line of credit is different from just paying Iran.
Basically, such a line of credit can be drawn on only to pay for things purchased from the EU, only things whose purchase is approved by the EU.
The idea protects against the supposed malign effects of handing money to Iran that might be misused to support things we don't want them to do.
They could only buy things the EU says they should be able to buy, things such as medicine.
Of course, our hawks hope to pressure Iran by preventing delivery of medicine and such. This harkens back to the "Hunger Blockade" of Germany continued long after the end of WW1. It is a method known to bring trouble.
But then, our hawks actually do want that exact trouble. Now they think they may have gotten it. Celebrate?
23
The Israelis terrified he might back out of their war? Let's hope Trump is indeed weak and cowardly if that's what it takes to avert a conflagration.
20
@Cloudy- Trump has put himself in a no-win situation. He will look weak no matter what he does.
3
@Cloudy. Yes, but at what costs? I’m not talking solely about monetary costs here.
1
Perhaps if the US behaved as an honest international actor that did not renege on treaties, the world would be in a better situation.
As for Saudi royalty and their oil fields, from their 911 assault on the US to their war crimes in Yemen, not to mention sawing up a journalist who was still alive, and torturing women, who cares what happens to them?
83
@Paul Jay
Paul, why would the Americans not figure this out?
5
The only reason that the U.S. is so hostile towards Iran, a country that does not threaten our national interests, is because Israel and its wealthy lobby own our politicians and control our foreign policy. There is zero evidence that Iran attacked Saudi Arabia and the Houthis have taken credit for the attack, yet, immediately Pompeo blamed Iran. Trump should end all sanctions on Iran and begin to dialogue and trade with them.
36
Houthis are backed by Iran.
5
@Ray Gordon. You left out the part about Iran having amicable relations with Israel until the 1979 brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power. It was he who declared Iran’s implacable hostility against the Jewish state and set its destruction as a principle goal of Iranian foreign policy.
It should go without saying that Israel is simply the collateral damage in an Iranian strategy to distract its Arab enemies while restoring its long lost imperial glory days. Iran’s anti-Israel stance comes not out of any love of the Palestinian cause in particular or of the Sunni Arabs as a whole. To believe otherwise is to fool yourself.
From what little we know, it appears that the US has consistently and severely circumscribed Israel’s attempts to act in self-defense instead of, as you claim, Israel pushing the US to act against its national interests - which would be quite an achievement to the non-conspiratorial minded.
Finally, it should be beyond dispute that any Iranian action that might destabilize the world economy is absolutely against the US national interest. In fact, it flies in the face of the national interests of every economy that is oil dependent. Among others, we have to assume that China is not very happy with Iran today, no matter how Iran tries to spin things. The US can exercise strategic patience given its economic strength. China? Not so much.
4
@Crategirl
So what Crategirl? Saudis are backed by the mighty USA. Any difference?
Why is Iran said to have "surrogates" and the US "clients?
I thought both countries had " ällies," and some of ours are questionable/
32
@dr. c.c. Allies are independent actors, generally representing an existing state, who act in their country’s national interests.
Surrogates are generally non-state actors who act according to the interests of their political and financial backers.
I hope these thumbnail definitions help in your understanding.
5
Thanks to Trump, the U.S. technically has no allies.
8
@Charlie in NY Does this definition cover the Houthis, the Shiítes of Yemen, who want to be the state? I don't think so. No more than it covers the Sunni government, although it was "democratically elected." We would not call them a "Saudi surrogate."
A surrogate is, rather, a group who are representing not their own interest, but someone else's. The dictionary agrees with me.
1
"signaled a willingness to meet personally with his Iranian counterpart"
But only if they first surrender on all issues, and with the qualification that the US will concede nothing.
So that isn't much of a willingness to "talk." Just to do a photo op. Iran already said they wouldn't play that game, and rightly so.
89
@Mark Thomason
North Korea played Trump for a chump, and his pride has forced him to maintain that things are still going swimmingly, despite all evidence to the contrary. Maybe Iran should take a page out of Kim Jong Un's playbook.
3
I would like to see the Iranians hit that Saudi oil field again. They should try their best to disable the global energy system. Short term pain for long term gains: forcing us to give up fossil fuels and create hundreds of thousands of jobs in renewable energy, destroying the power of the Saudi royal family and getting all that corrupt Saudi influence out of American politics. The disruptions to our lives in the short term are survivable.
49
@KFreelocate and lock the commenter as millions would die should his idea be put into practice.
2
@sebastian Overpopulation is a serious issue as well. So deal with two problems with one stone. Win win!
2
@sebastian You're assuming that either Trump or Saudi Arabia will strike back. I sincerely doubt they will, and this is precisely the gamble the Iranians are taking. They smell weakness.
15
Iran is bleeding silently from sanctions, so conflict is in their interest because it brings a chance of some UN peace conference ending with a deal removing danctions. Simple as that. Thus wise not to get pulled in.
9
Trump knows he will lose base voters if he goes to war. And Iran also knows that is his priority. The Trump character traits that make him such a danger to the United States make him a pushover for foreign enemies of the United States.
41
@WeHadAllBetterPayAttentionNow
He lost this voter because he wont strike them and he makes the United States look weak. I will be staying home in 2020
1
@Gabriel
Vote for Bernie (or whoever).
That'll fix the weakling!
4
I'm no fan of Pompeo, but the timing of this attack a few days after the departure of the mustachioed Iran hawk can't be a coincidence.
9
The Saudi Royal family looked in the mirror and said "why fight? When we know we have no chance."
Saudi military like those other oil rich Arab states is a joke.
I worked in the middle East - in Kuwait and Qatar.
In UAE - I met our trainers who were assisting Emiratis fly expensive American planes.
The joke was these lucky Emiratis are learning - so they can fly to a safe place when Iran attacks.
Kuwait was run over in one day and Saudis could do nothing.
Enemies of these oil rich Arab states know that.
And Saudis in particular hate Iran not because they have oil, culture etc - only because they are shia.
This hatred of shia is across the whole Sunni Arab oil rich world.
In UAE - I knew Emirati bosses who say they would never ever hire a shia - and these were trained in America and supposedly open mind.
This hatred is going to destroy Saudi Arabia.
And we should do everything not get blinded by this hatred.
65
The Saudi Royal family looked in the mirror and said "why fight? When we know we have no chance."
Saudi military like those other oil rich Arab states is a joke.
I worked in the middle East - in Kuwait and Qatar.
In UAE - I met our trainers who were assisting Emiratis fly expensive American planes.
The joke was these lucky Emiratis are learning - so they can fly to a safe place when Iran attacks.
Kuwait was run over in one day and Saudis could do nothing.
Enemies of these oil rich Arab states know that.
And Saudis in particular hate Iran not because they have oil, culture etc - only because they are shia.
This hatred of shia is across the whole Sunni Arab oil rich world.
In UAE - I knew Emirati bosses who say they would never ever hire a shia - and these were trained in America and supposedly open mind.
This hatred is going to destroy Saudi Arabia.
And we should do everything not get blinded by this hatred.
1
Of course Trump will blink. He's demonstrated time and again that he has no stomach for direct confrontation but would rather rage-tweet. He's shown himself to be a feckless coward and unreliable ally. And for that, this nation and the rest of the world are in a more unstable, more dangerous place.
41
Unfortunately, Iran hard-liners are correctly reading the situation: “Iranian hard-liners consider Trump’s inconsistency to be weakness." Trump has all the intelligence and courage of a bully, which makes him woefully deficient in the seriousness needed to negotiate with other foreign powers. Trump has put the nation--and perhaps the rest of the world--in jeopardy. He is not great at making deals or anything else that makes strong leadership possible. We are in big trouble because of the wimp in the Oval Office
19
So the Iranians have humiliated a key American ally? Surely your reporter can't be talking about the corrupt monarchy that provided most of the manpower for 9/11. What's next? The old weapons of mass destruction trick?
101
The Iranians are playing Trump like the tool he is.
They figured him out in about 5 minutes
22
This is completely irresponsible coverage.
Framing the issue as Trump going "soft" and virtually daring him to wage war is nothing but yellow journalism and war mongering.
Taunting Trump with Iranian quotes is even worse.
AAwar with Iran is insane - if Trump "backs down", then don't smear him for it. Do you want war?
36
@Bill Wolfe
Trump has created this problem with all his belicose and hollow threats against Iran and others. Even a fool can see that he's made America into a paper tiger.
Our president is a flagrant liar and after two-plus years the world has figured him and the US to be pushovers. ...and they're right.
Trump has made America a laughing stock.
3
Well, the reason Iran has hard-liners to begin with, is because the US once supported a dictator there, the Shah of Iran. This is what fuelled the Iranian Revolution of 1979. The Shah had been installed by the CIA in a 1953 coup which toppled Iran's then democratic government.
The later Iranian Revolution actually began with pro-democracy protests. There was also a strong communist faction for a long time. The Ayatollah only became the mainstream choice gradually. What united the Iranians of all leanings was frustration with the Shah, seen as a US puppet.
After the revolution, hard-liners did commit abuses of power. However, a moderate faction persisted in Iran. By supporting Saddam in war of attrition against Iran, the US actually helped hardliners consolidate their hold on power.
Nevertheless, Iran has moderated (gradually) since 1979. Laws against women aren't as stringent: they can get divorces relatively easily and have always been able to drive (this right was only recently granted to Saudi women and their country is a US ally).
In contrast to the absolute monarchy of Saudi Arabia, Iran has regular elections for the Majlis (parliament). This at least reflects some recognition that citizens have a role in choosing their government. Two reformists have also served as Prime Minister - Mohammad Khatami in the 1990s and Hassan Rouhani today. Both have attempted to improve relations with the US in vain.
21
@Jack
"What united the Iranians of all leanings was frustration with the Shah, seen as a US puppet."
The average age in Iran is 32 years old. I'm pretty sure they don't remember the shah. What unites them is their belief in Shia Islam
9
@Gabriel The average age today has nothing to do with the Revolution against the Shah, who was a US puppet. US interference always comes back to bite us.
8
@Gabriel
Surely, they do teach history in Iran, and the Chapter on the Shah must be quite a read considering the regime writing the textbooks.
That said, Shia'ism does not make anyone hate the US or West. They do have an unhealthy rivalry with the Sunnis, very similar to the Catholic vs Protestant hatreds of Old Europe.
3
Part of the reason Iran is willing to push the envelope is that they have discovered they have allies in the American media and the American peoples suffering from a Trump Derangement Syndrome. It seems like no matter how Iran pushes things, they are being defended and Trump is being blamed.
The other reason is that the hardliners actually want a conflict with the US. They have been preaching this Anti US and Israel rhetoric for 30 years. They see it as an inevitable part of their progress towards Shia domination.
4
@Kev
Really? How did the alleged Bush Derangement people work out for Saddam? The Iranians either feel cornered or they are being setup by people smarter than them.
@Kev
The problem is Trump has Obama derangement syndrome and pulled us out of the JPCOA without good reason beyond his disdain for our former President -- says many of Trump's early advisors and the world.
3
@Kev Zdrastvitie, Tovarisch, the city is called San Diego.
I think it's pretty clear that the Iranian government has assessed the situation accurately: Trump is all talk and no walk. In order to get relief from sanctions, Iran is free to carry out all sorts of harassing attacks without fear of repercussions from Trump. They've seen that in every single instance of potentially using the U.S.'s military might, Trump tweets very belligerently, and then does nothing. Trump has threatened to take military action against North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, and take further action in Syria, and has carried through on none of his threats. He even just fired John Bolton, who wanted to go to war with Iran more than anyone else.
So I think Iran has gambled intelligently, and they will continue to hit Saudi Arabia's oil production in order to keep up the eternal holy war they enjoy, and to pressure nations into reducing sanctions on Iran. If Trump ever does launch an airstrike, as the article points out, it will be minor and intentionally not leading up to full scale war, and Iran will be able to play the victim and garner more support.
11
We all know Mr. Trump doesn't like being pushed into a corner. That is exactly what articles like this one will achieve.
Trump likes to look strong and after reading an article like this one I won't be surprised that he could be pushed to make the same mistake that previous administrations have made by getting the US into an unwinnable war in the Middle East.
Mr. Trump has until now resisted calls from hawks in Washington. He is the only president since the first Bush who has not started a war.
For once, I support Trump. He should stand his grounds. Nothing good will come out of a war with Iran and the Europeans know that. A war with Iran woukd send millions of refugees to Europe, a number that would pale compared to the what happened 3 years ago. Refugees arrivals that would certainly bring to power more right wings politicians which would destabilize the EU if not put an end to the European Union as we know it.
Mr. Trump should not fall for it. Trillions spent in the Middle East has only brought chaos there from Syria, Libya, to Iraq.
www.pollitis.com
5
Donald Trump, stable genius and master of the art of no deal, strikes again.
Let’s ignore, for the moment, the fact that this whole conflict stems from his petty desire to undo anything and everything Barrack Obama ever did. Let’s focus instead on how he ignored one of the most basic rules of tactical engagement: never leave your adversary with nothing to lose.
The treaty that Obama helped put in place gave Iran numerous incentives to put aside any nuclear ambitions and to forgo any support of extremists who would destabilize the region. Now, if they resume their nuclear program and support violent fundamentalists, what do they have to lose?
There aren’t really any further sanctions that could be imposed. And Trump, for all his bluster, appears unwilling to take military action.
Besides, Iran might actually welcome seeing America dragged into a third simultaneous military conflict in the Middle East. War would bring the U.S. to the negotiating table, which is clearly the goal of all this provocation anyway. And what cards does the U.S. have left to play? Trump has isolated us from the international community and painted us into a strategic corner.
19
Are these "analysts" the same that concluded that Iraq had WMDs? Iran admitted to shooting down the drone. The sabotage of the oil tankers however was disputed, and it certainly looked like a false flag operation. If the Houthis say they did it, why are the "analysts" so adamant that's not the case? Let's ask the Houthis to prove they did it. They may have the evidence.
6
@Ronald Weinstein
Thank you. This narrative is being pushed to us as if we’re blind and dumb. Just because some people want to see Iran/Iranians destroyed, doesn’t mean they’ll succeed with this word play.
3
Tensions between Iran and us holds greater liabilities than benefits. Previous presidents have tried to deal with Tehran. We backed Saddam’s Iraq in its war with Iran. Reagan’s administration turn a blind eye to Saddam’s use of WMDs.
Economic sanctions? Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama employed sanctions. Pressuring Tehran by destroying its economy was SOP.
The Syrian War, 2011 to now, was it really all about democracy? Al Qaeda, ISIS, jihadists from all over the world came to Syria to fight for Democracy? The destruction of Iran’s only Arab ally took precedent over the welfare of Syrian people. Advocacy of democracy might have more meaning if the Arab League was made up of such states and not monarchs and strong men.
After tortuous negotiations, in 2015, we reached an agreement with Iran. Perfect? What is? However, there was hope that as Iran was reintegrated with the international community further progress was possible.
But this challenged the position of two influential states—Israel and Saudi Arabia. Their concerns found their way into our political life. Politicians and policy makers worked hard to undercut the treaty and, with Trump’s election, succeeded in killing it.
There are no clean hands. There are a number of options, none of them promising. As flawed as some thought the 2015 treaty was, the solutions they proffer are much worse. Bombing Iran poses few problems, it’s what comes after that we should fear.
10
The Donald loves being president because he is the center of attention 24/7 even when he is talking nonsense. Unfortunately, everyone around the world can watch television and see what a clown he is.
Can anyone imagine a serious world leader getting into a squabble about the weather forecast? What is the president doing on television talking about the weather and hurricanes? Doesn't he have something better to do? After all the United States already has a functioning weather bureau whose job it is to keep everyone abreast of the weather to say nothing of many local television weather people. But The Donald can't resist doing something to be the center of attention.
Now I doubt that The Donald actually knows or cares anything about Iran one way or the other, but he has to take a tough tone with Iran because one of the key segments of the trump faithful are the Christian Evangelicals. The Christian evangelicals love Israel and Bibi Netanyahu. Bibi says that Iran is evil and a threat, so The Donald has to say that Iran is evil and a threat. I would not imagine that the Donald wants a war with anyone but he will talk tough for the benefit of his base.
The Donald sees the presidency as a continuation of The Apprentice. He loves being the center of attention, the photo-ops, the great deal maker, pretending to engage in negotiations, pretending to make deals, etc.
He has no conception of actual policies and programs.
24
This is what happens when the only consideration in your foreign policy is how it will resonate with your base. Trump and his team don't have a viable strategy. They have backed Iran into a corner while at the same time alienating our allies. If war breaks out who but the US and perhaps the UK would take up the fight? The Saudis have shown themselves incompetent to defend themselves despite the billions in arms they have purchased.
So right now the only options for Trump and Pompeo seems to be to launch limited attacks or sit on their hands. If we attack then we can expect Iran to begin to cripple shipping through the Gulf and perhaps more attacks on the Saudis. The larger problem here is that there is no public support for any more US involvement in that region. Trump's blowhard diplomacy is ineffective and his principle ally MbS is incompetent. This one is a loser plain and simple.
We need to reconnect with our allies and get back to the table to continue efforts to control Iran's nuclear capabilities. War will solve nothing.
16
This author seems to be goading Trump to go to war.
“President Trump appeared to be softening toward Iran.”
So far there is only speculation - even from some that promoted Iraq WMD’s- that Iran is involved. Another take besides the military beltway insiders. The “bonesaw” bin Salmon and Netanyahu were getting anxious that Trump was ignoring their attempt to go to war with Iran and was starting to think rationally with US interests in mind. With the firing of Bolton something needed to be done.
On 9/11 though we were attacked by hijackers 15 of 19 who were Saudi - none Iranian. Why is the us allies with a ruthless regime who cuts up alive a journalist and is bombing school busses, schools, hospitals and other civilian infrastructure in Yemen - causing the worlds worst humanitarian crisis. The US seems to just be the mercenary army for the Saudis and their spread of radical Sunni Wahhabism because of oil, even supplying weapons and air support to the Saudis for the Yemen war - the largest humanitarian disaster in the world.
21
Truth is that Iran is forced to react because of Trump’s maximum pressure. Rationally maximum pressure can no longer be tolerated by Iran due to no fault of their own and the regime can see it clearly that they cannot survive under this situation. Logically, Iran is forced to react.
Truth is also that Saudis do not want a war with Iran even with the support of the US. If a war breaks out so will the taboo of challenging the rule of Al Saud by different tribes within Saudi Arabia.
Finally, there is no managed or controlled war, it will be all out war.
Then be ready to accomodate 40 million Iranian refugess who are eager to get of Iran any ways.
Europeans know that they in frontline of human catastrophe, unprecedented in history.
12
Leave it to the NYT to goad Trump into another Middle East conflict. (Have they ever been discouraging?) And, Trump, is easily manipulated, and it’s coming up on election time.
The Saudi’s spend a fortune on, (U.S.) military hardware that can’t keep four drones from their most important refinery? How about importing some Louisiana duck hunters with some pump shotguns? Pathetic. All we need is Condi Rice yelling about “mushroom clouds."
11
The chickens are finally coming home to roost for that fool in the Oval Office.
There was only so long that Trump could skate by on the economy that Obama restored, on American world leadership, respect, and the network of alliances that the United States has created over decades. There is only so much wanton destruction and ignorant abuse our allies and treaties will tolerate.
Iran is rightly calling Trump’s bluff, after having been a target of his bluster and bellicose actions for nearly three years. The difference now, as opposed to during the Obama years, is that the rest of the world is now WITH the Iranians, and the only allies the US has are the murderous, authoritarian regimes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
132
@Sam Bam And Israel. Don't underestimate the extent to which Israel has been pushing for the US to go to war with Iran for decades.
10
Crazy people on both sides. What could go wrong?
12
Like any cornered starving animal would do, Hard-Liners in Iran will strike back with whatever leverage they have to survive.
Trump summarily reneged on the Iranian agreement, and put draconian economic penalties on the Iranian government,
did the Trump Administration expect them to roll over and die?
52
@Blue in Green Trump being a coward he expects people will be doing what he does in front of a massive resistance:cave in
15
Trump is our very on hard liner, with his very own bellicose strategy.
And apparently there IS NO DRAWBACK for hm.
He can act like a dictator. He can break laws. And there is no one to stop him.
He is a lawless leader.
Please remember, he unilaterally backed out of the Iran nuclear agreement.
He started us down this very predictable path.
America, under Trump and his republican co conspirators is a lawless regime.
44
Iran's government is behaving very much like a group of terroristsholding hostages and demanding ransom (in this case, sanctions relief). Utterly evil, and brutally rational. They are outgunned by the forces that surround them, but they have plenty leverage, because they hold it within their power to destroy things that are dear.
The bombing of the Saudi refineries was a a bit like cutting off a hostage's ear and delivering it as a message to say: "we are losing patience. Hurry up and give us what we want, or else everybody loses."
We can expect Iran to keep escalating until they either succeed at re-opening negotiations, or until they evoke a military response. Both options are losers for Trump, but he is boxed in. Doing neither will becomes increasingly untenable as Iran continues to escalate. So he'd better make up his mind which road he wants to go down, and quick.
10
This reads like a press release from Neocon Central.
Speculative mind-reading like this contributes to war fever. Where is the evidence Iran does not fear being carpet-bombed by the US Air Force and Navy as Iraq was?
Americans are weary of specious pretexts for bloody, trillion dollar foreign wars. Let the Saudis fight their own battles!
We can’t afford to be the policeman of the Middle East (or the world). Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt and students are drowning in debt, but there’s always loads of cash to finance America’s assigned role as World Policeman. The imbecility is infuriating.
103
@Michael Hoffman The 'analyst' on this piece is probably John Bolton.
14
@Michael Hoffman. SO, it’s okay by you if the world falls into chaos as long as we have our Social Security and decrease student debt? How long before the chaos in the world comes tumbling into your world?
5
@Michael Hoffman Right on!
5
Deranged Donald seems to think he can tear up an agreement and demand another one more to his liking. International negotiations and agreements have meaning and it doesn’t include giving in to a nasty piece of work like Trump. Trump wants to freelance so that means Iran can too.
41
Why?
Because they know that the US cannot declare war without Congress approval.
And they have a huge ally in congress called The Squad, which is made up of 4 people, two of which are avowed enemies of Israel, and allies of Hezbola (the support the PLO and the anti Israel movement, both of which are allied with Hezbola)
Trump is very well aware of this.
The way it plays out is Trump goes to congress, shows all the evidence the Saudis, Israel and the USA can provide, and get turned down by Congress based on Omar and Tlaib’s refusal to declare war on their friends in Hezbola.
Then Trump can prove with no doubt that Congress under the Democrats are no friends of our allies in the Middle East.
He then adds that feather to his campaign hat, showing clearly the Democrats do not care about our allies, and would rather side with Iran on their attacks on our allies in the region.
He cruises to re-election, and then attacks Iran anyway to keep his campaign promise to support SA and our one true ally in the region, Israel.
All thanks to the Democrats in Congress, namely The Squad
5
@AutumnLeaf
“...get turned down by Congress based on Omar and Tlaib’s refusal to declare war on their friends in Hezbola.”. Seriously? These four have that much power? They alone can impede the entire Congress?? Sorry, not buying that.
10
@AutumnLeaf no offense but this sounds like Middle Eastern geo-politics 101 as envisioned by a toddler.
15
@AutumnLeaf Wow - this is a seriously flawed argument. I won't even begin to count in how many ways.
7
Of course the hardliners “push the envelope” ... In spite of his Bombast, Trump is a very Defensive and Weak person and President ...
You could see it in his body language and his desire for the “Deal” - at all costs - just as long as he comes out “smelling like a Rose” -
In any case, the Danger is that the Iranian hardliners will continue to push to the point that they will come up against Israel - who will be willing to fight and not cave in...as this will be a War of Survival ...
Then you may have a Major MidEast War of epic proportions that may involve Russia - and maybe Nuclear Weapons ...
3
If Iranian hard-liners think that Trump will back down in the end, they are very likely right. He has done so many times in the past.
The problem is that if this is the one time he decides to strike, in order to prove his manliness, many people will die.
13
What the article doesn't touch on is what happens when a person gets humiliated and is someone somewhere on the narcissist/sociopath/psychopath continuum. It can be decoupled from but also tie in to re-election prospects.
3
Has Trump not proven them to be correct?
2
This attack demonstrates how easily the oil flow from the middle east can be disrupted or halted. Word leaders, including Mr. Trump, need to understand the likely consequences of pursuing war rather than peace with Iran.
14
The US had many chances to just leave Iran and its people alone
1) In 1953, Iran had a democratic parliament. Its leader Mohammad Mossadegh moved to nationalise the country's oil resources. This was unacceptable to Great Britain and the US who toppled Mossadegh in a coup. The Shah was elevated from his ceremonial position to that of a dictator. His secret police - the SAVAK - was trained by the CIA and was known for gouging out the eyes of political opponents.
2) Before arming Saudi Arabia or even Iraq, the US armed Iran under the Shah. At the time of the revolution, the Shah was spending billions on combat aircraft and even wanted an aircraft carrier. But 50% of Iranians remained illiterate while he had grandiose plans for military expansion and lived an opulent lifestyle. High unemployment and inflation following the collapse in oil prices was the final straw for revolution.
3) In the whole scheme of things, the detention (and release) of a few diplomats doesn't justify US behaviour towards Iran. To settle scores, the US endorsed Saddam's war of attrition against Iran. It lost a far higher percentage of its population than the US during WWII. The US gave intel - with Reagan's authorisation - about the whereabouts of Iranian infantry to Iraq, knowing they would likely be targeted with mustard gas, banned under the Geneva Conventions.
4) An Iran Air passenger plane was shot down over the Persian Gulf by the USS Vincennes, killing 200+ civilians including children.
32
@Jack You mean American actions have consequences?
3
@Jack
I'm an Iranian and this is a load of rubbish.
Mossadegh, despite his remarkable achievement in nationalising the country's oil, was ultimately very communist orientated.
Plus, any advances, especially culturally within Iran to date are thanks to the Shah and his father.
The Shah may have been a political dictator but in the end, he did want to pursue policies such as cutting the interest of the likes of BP in the Iranian oil sector.
This in fact prompted the West to bring Khomeini, thinking he will be a puppet and sell the oil cheap/keep the country backward.
Ever wonder why Khomeini was given refuge in France?
Please know your facts and don't insult a previous leader of my country who has done so much.
1
This is all happening because Trump reneged on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [Iranian Nuclear deal]. He did so because his ego prevented him from acknowledging that Obama had achieved an optimal solution.
Trump’s ego and greed makes him believe he can obtain perfection but in reality all he does is create chaos when he is powerless to force others to accept his idea of perfection.
If Trump had kept the JCPOA in place, Iran would have purchased several Boeing planes, have been pumping and shipping oil to the world. If Iran was participating in the world economy, it would want stability instead of warfare.
92
@Ben. Obama, himself, wouldn’t call the nuclear deal an ‘optimal solution’, but it was the best option he had. Didn’t he also warn Trump in the Oval Office at their first meeting that Iran was the greatest threat in foreign diplomacy?
6
IMO, no one should be picking sides in this game of risk but if one were to view it purely as game, regardless of the hostage and death to America, we should've made amends with the Persians instead of the Arabs. If Saudi Arabia can be made to come to peace with Israel, Iran could as well, and over time have them demolish their own theocracy.
2
Why would anyone be naive enough to believe the story about Iran launching this attack? Perhaps it is true. But right now, the evidence offered is not evidence at all and there is a lot of hedging in the language of the US and the Saudi's. Saudi Arabia and Israel have been false flagging and making false claims for several years now as they try to goad the US to do their dirty work in Iran(what else is new). There is no reason at all to believe anything that has come out so far in regard to this incident. If anything, it seems the only true claim is that Iran may have made and sold the weapons. If that is the criteria for Iran perpetrating the attack, then the US has been attacking people around the globe for decades now.
30
It would be easy to knock out all the electric power plants in Tehran, and keep the Iranian government in the dark as long as we wish. It would also be easy to tell Iran that if this ever happens again, ALL of the electric power plants in the country will be bombed. I like the idea of Iranians sitting by candle light back in the 19th century where they belong. And then there is always the water supply.
3
@bullone - Bside of that record might be no Saudi oil for the duration of our lifetime.
1
@bullone
Yea then they can just bomb and mine the Persian gulf and half of the world can go without electricity! The wins keep on coming.
4
"The muted reactions from Washington — including the initial response to Saturday’s attack — appear to have validated that strategy, several analysts said."
Trump is weak, this is why I'm staying home in 2020. I voted for him make the United States the number 1 military power in the world. The only difference between Obama and Trump is Obama apologized to all the Middle East countries. The Iranians won. for god sakes he has the number one military in the world building fence.
Disgruntled Ex-Trump voter
6
@Gabriel If you are really, really angry at Trump, you could vote for the Democratic candidate and double your impact. Just saying . . .
8
@Beerfelden
Im mad at Trump but I don't hate my country enough to vote Democrat
1
@Gabriel If you voted for him once, shame on you for not knowing what a liar he is. The election is a binary decision - either you vote for him or you vote against him. Staying home you have nothing to complain about.
1
"Tehran, they said, has concluded that its recent aggressions have effectively strengthened its leverage with the West and in the region."
That's a long overdue conclusion, especially in the Middle East, given our constant dismissal of anyone who takes the initiative towards resolving any conflict peacefully. Case in point are the Palestinians, who, according to Harvard's Sara Roy, saw their leverage diminish substantially as they decreased their resort to violence. Our message is loud and clear, "play nice and you will most definitely regret it." Sadly for us, others seem to be catching up to our disdain for peace.
16
@Rilke. The Palestinians are a “case in point” but not for the point you are making. Their problem is to avoid dealing with the hand they’ve been dealt in the real world thereby, to use the apt formulation, never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity. While their corrupt leaders all live in the lap of luxury, those they claim to represent are the victims of their callous duplicity. That these leaders have also benefitted over the decades from the misguided prejudices of their Western cheerleaders merely compounds the problems faced by ordinary Palestinians.
Those leaders have shown no interest in building a stable (forget democratic) state of the Palestinian people but obsess over the destruction of the neighboring state of the Jewish people. The linkage argument that put them at the political center of discussion has been exposed as the sham talking point it always was. Reality has intruded, and their erstwhile Arab brethren have shown no qualms in abandoning their Palestinian pawns while looking to their own survival against renewed Iranian ,and to a lesser extent Turkish, moves toward regional hegemony at their expense.
Given the Palestinian penchant for terror abroad and antidemocratic practices at home, you have an unusual definition of what constitutes “playing nice.”
2
It seems that since at least the 1953 Iranian coup orchestrated by the US, we have continued to underestimate and bungle our relationship with Iran. Instead of viewing them as a potential ally, at least in business, we have treated them with contempt and as an enemy. President Trump is blundering down that same path at an accelerating rate.
70
@NJMike -- factually speaking, 1953 worked. The Shah was a firm ally in power for 25 years till he was too humane to put down a rebellion in the old Iranian way and was overthrown.
But we are not in 1953 (thankfully).
@sumit Oh, he was too humane. His Israeli-trained Savak was also too humane. They wouldn’t grill dissidents alive. They would first kindly skin them.
7
The Trump adminsitration ought to realize that there are no cheap and easy ways to effect regime change in Iran, and that attempts to impose maximalist solutions are bound to expose the limitations in the application of force and power.
Of course, the US can beat Iran in a total war scenario. But, the US public has little stomach for another limited, but lengthy, war.
60
@Outerboro
"Of course[?]"
The US could not beat the Viet Cong nor the mujahideen.
What's next, the nuclear option?
Not.
Trump's bluff has been called.
29
@Outerboro, stomach for war? Thousands of our young men and women have died without an end to the Iraq "war." We're still losing our young in Afghanistan You're right indeed we have little "stomach" for with tens of thousands of dead Americans in Iran. And how many millions of others would die in the ME, friends (if we actually have any) or foes? Total war? Have the army fellas learned how to keep a radioactive atmosphere away from everyone but Iranians? No. We have enough problems now, for God's sake. Let Saudis do their own dirty work.
10
@Outerboro. The last country that surrendered to the United States was Japan in 1945. We will never defeat Iran anymore than defeat the Taliban, the North Vietnamese, the North Koreans, the Iraqi Sunnis, Al Qaeda, etc. the days of defeat and surrender passed a long time ago. We can destroy their homes and slaughter their people, even occupy their country but we will never beat them. I just wish the neocons had gotten the memo, and join the rest of us in the 21st century.
10
“[Trump] saying, “I know they want to make a deal.”
Based on...? The famous, all-knowing “gut”? Honestly we’re seeing yet another big talk bluster (“locked and loaded”) followed again a day or two later by a “well, never mind” approach. How can the Iranians fear that? So long as they push just hard enough to be vexing and not actually directly attack the US (like hitting one of our ships, for example) thus truly forcing Trump’s hand, they can continue to play these games, for they recognize the aimless lack of actual strategy or policy for what it is.
Very sad.
111
Who could possibly trust what Trump’s position is with foreign policy? Not only does he lie all the time but he just said publicly at the G7 summit that his negotiating style is ambiguous to say the least. Even if the man is sincere (I don’t think he possess that gene by the way) based the thousands of lies that he has uttered for 73 miserable years means his word means nothing. It is also painfully obvious that he is gunning for any shred of public adulation he can get and of course the possibility of a Nobel Prize to help his flailing campaign to get re-elected. I’m not even sure if he knows the prize is not a physical trophy like an Oscar award but he no doubt has a place on the mantel for it already.
While the entire world knows he can be played and our adversaries can take whatever they want because he is such a sucker on the world stage. The Iranians know Trump doesn’t have the stomach for another Middle Easy conflict, but an ambitious guy like Trump filled with such vanity cannot help fantasize over the attention and controversy he creates by simply existing in our air space.
147
@Ted Siebert I agree with you but there is a medal and a diploma when you win the Nobel.
7