I report you decide. You may or may not be able to get to the full editorials through the links. Most likely you can through the NYT.
WSJ: “Trump Enforces His Red Line on Iran”
****************
Crucially, he called on the people of Iran to rise up and depose the theocratic regime that has terrorized and murdered them for 47 years. “When we are finished” bombing, Mr. Trump said, “take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be, probably, your only chance for generations.”
***
These war aims mean that Mr. Trump is enforcing the red lines he drew when the regime slaughtered its people as they protested in January. He said he’d come to their aid, and now he has. He also gave Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ample chance to strike a deal on nuclear weapons and its missile force, but the ayatollah refused and now he is reportedly dead.
Mr. Trump has unduly criticized his predecessors for “forever wars” in the Middle East, but he understands deterrence. In Yemen, Iran in June, Venezuela and now in Iran again, he has taken action against manifest threats in his second term that Barack Obama and Joe Biden refused to take. U.S. deterrence collapsed, and the world’s rogues took advantage.
**********************
Critics also claim the war is “illegal” because Congress hasn’t voted for it. But the Constitution gives Presidents ample room to use military force against threats to U.S. security. Members of Congress may demand a vote on a War Powers Resolution that could block military action after 60 days. We think the War Powers Act is unconstitutional. But by all means let’s see who in Congress wants to side with Iran given all the Americans its forces have killed over the decades.
*************************
The most glib criticism is that the President who claims to be a peacemaker has contradicted himself by using force against adversaries four times in 13 months. But Mr. Trump inherited a world in which an axis of U.S. adversaries had formed and was on the march. He is pressuring that axis at its weakest links—in Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba. In doing so he is sending a message to China and Russia that the costs of testing Mr. Trump militarily are considerable.
************************
Mr. Trump didn’t begin a war on Saturday. He is fighting back against an Iranian regime that has been waging war against the U.S., Israel and the West for decades. The threat is the regime itself, and let’s hope it falls.
NY Times: “Trump’s Attack on Iran is Reckless”
Now he has ordered a new attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran, in cooperation with Israel, and it is much more extensive than the targeted bombing of nuclear facilities in June. Yet he started this war without explaining to the American people and the world why he was doing so. Nor has he involved Congress, which the Constitution grants the sole power to declare war. … His rationale is dubious, and making his case by video in the middle of the night is unacceptable.
Among his justifications is the elimination of Iran’s nuclear program, which is a worthy goal. But Mr. Trump declared that program “obliterated” by the strike in June, a claim belied by both U.S. intelligence and this new attack. The contradiction underscores how little regard he has for his duty to tell the truth when committing American armed forces to battle. …
Mr. Trump’s approach to Iran is reckless. His goals are ill-defined. He has failed to line up the international and domestic support that would be necessary to maximize the chances of a successful outcome. He has disregarded both domestic and international law for warfare.
*************************
The regime has wrought misery since its revolution 47 years ago — on its own people, on its neighbors and around the world. It massacred thousands of protesters this year. It imprisons and executes political dissidents. It oppresses women, L.G.B.T.Q. people and religious minorities. Its leaders have impoverished their own citizens while corruptly enriching themselves. They have proclaimed “Death to America” since coming to power and killed hundreds of U.S. service members in the region, as well as bankrolled terrorism that has killed civilians in the Middle East and as far away as Argentina.
Iran’s government presents a distinct threat because it combines this murderous ideology with nuclear ambitions. Iran has repeatedly defied international inspectors over the years. Since the June attack, the government has shown signs of restarting its pursuit of nuclear weapons technology. American presidents of both parties have rightly made a commitment to prevent Tehran from getting a bomb.
We recognize that fulfilling this commitment could justify military action at some point. For one thing, the consequences of allowing Iran to follow the path of North Korea — and acquire nuclear weapons after years of exploiting international patience — are too great. For another, the costs of confronting Iran over its nuclear program look less imposing than they once did.
***********************
Mr. Trump’s failure to articulate a strategy for this attack has created shocking levels of uncertainty about it. The attack has succeeded in killing a brutal dictator, but it remains unclear what comes next. Mr. Trump has offered no sense of why the world should expect this regime change to end better than the versions in Iraq and Afghanistan at the start of this century. Those wars toppled governments but understandably soured the American public on open-ended military operations of uncertain national interest, and they embittered the troops who loyally served in them.
Now that the military operation is underway, we wish above all for the safety of the American troops charged with conducting it and for the well-being of the many innocent Iranians who have long suffered under their brutal government. We lament that Mr. Trump is not treating war as the grave matter that it is.
Leave a Reply