Peloni: Tony Badran, a foremost authority on the Levant and new editor at Tablet magazine, criticizes the Trump administration’s strategic endgame for the war with Iran, named Operation Epic Fury, as it remains unclear and internally contradictory. Trump described the justification for the war by condemning the Iranian regime’s five?decades long hostility toward the United States, describing the campaign as both a punishment for Iran’s “Death to America” state policy as well as a chance for the Iranian people’s “hour of freedom.” However, despite this initial rhetoric, Badran highlights that Trump’s stated goals have since become ambiguous as he has both signaled limited, punitive objectives and floated broader visions for regime change.
Badran relates this emerging uncertainty with Trump’s historical skepticism of nation?building and his preference for decisive, limited military actions. He outlines several possible Trump post-conflict options including maintaining a weakened IRGC regime with which negotiations might resume (“Venezuela option”), decimating Iran’s command structure leaving internal forces to determine the country’s future, or a hybrid approach that risks strengthening the IRGC under U.S. protection.
Badran correctly criticizes the misguided possibility of any strategy which preserves IRGC influence, explaining that it would merely maintain a regional threat which would undermine American interests. Instead, he challenges that the preferable course should include a sustained campaign significant enough to dismantle Iran’s strategic military infrastructure and IRGC leadership, following which the US should withdraw to allow Iranians to the opportunity to determine their political future.
The consequence of this lack of clarity in Trump’s wartime messaging as described by Badran is a critical mistake. It will only lead to the IRGC becoming emboldened by the apparent lack of US resolve to see the battle thru to the finish, thus strengthening the resolve of IRGC leaders to NOT surrender. So the war will go on, straining Trump’s commitment in the midst of a political year in which many of the top MAGA talking heads are themselves allied with Iran against Trump. Trump needs to maintain a strong commitment to maintain his initial war aims, or face an inevitable defeat as the Iranian regime need only not surrender to ultimately survive. And let us make no mistake about this: If the Iranians fail to be defeated, there is no victory to be claimed by the US as the threat against America will persist.
Thus, the vacillating war aims advanced by Trump have the real potential of making the Venezuela option in Iran something of a likely forlorn inevitability, and this would be quite unfortunate for everyone.
Donald Trump is sending contradictory signals about the point of Operation Epic Fury. The goal should be simple: Dismantle the IRGC.
Click Link to Read Article
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/iran-endgame-donald-trump
I will never understand why any freedom loving person would agree to engage in talks with proven Jihadists. Yet American leadership has done this over and over again hoping to become the KING of the pack who guarantees Middle East peace. It’s a fool’s game.
Donald Trump is sending contradictory signals on purpose. Keep them off-balance and strike where and when they least expect it.
@dreuveni
The problem with this is that US prevarication will not act to keep the IRGC off balance but to embolden them into believing Trump’s initial claim in starting the war is not true, ie that they face a choice between surrender and death. So the war will go on, straining Trump’s commitment in the midst of a political year in which many of the top MAGA talking heads are themselves allied with Iran. Trump needs to maintain a strong commitment to maintain his initial war aims, or face an inevitable defeat as the Iranian regime need only not surrender to win.
“in which many of the top MAGA talking heads are themselves allied with Iran”
if you are on the side of Iran then you are not MAGA. Period. Full stop.
@John Galt IV
I don’t disagree with you, and I have repeatedly made the point that Carlson and his growing enterage of aligned anti-MAGA MAGA talking heads are in fact acting on behalf of the MAGA opposition, but it remains to for the MAGA faithful to divorce themselves from Carlson et al, and that has yet to take place, both with Trump as well as within the wider MAGA base.
@Peloni I think Trump is also keeping domestic opposition off balance by confusing them after the debacle of his first term.
AI Overview:
I’m referring to the industrial safety padlock, obviously.
Both Obama and Hilary were Alinskite organizers. Obama was a trainer.