As the Pentagon keeps releasing video of bombs destroying parts of Iran, the smoke can’t obscure an increasingly urgent question here at home:
How high a price are Americans willing to pay for this war?
I don’t mean in terms of casualties, as the seven Americans killed so far is a relatively low figure, although each fallen soldier is a tragedy. Each should be honored for their sacrifice, as the first half dozen were in a Delaware ceremony attended by President Donald Trump and other dignitaries.
It’s that the financial turmoil is really taking a toll on the homeland, not to mention around the world. Markets are tanking. Oil prices are soaring. Jobs are declining. And this has fueled doubts about Trump’s decision to wage relentless attacks against Iran – and offering a series of shifting explanations as to why the war is necessary, and why it needed to be launched now.
WHY TRUMP INVOKED REGIME CHANGE IN ATTACKING IRAN, AND THE MEDIA MUST LEARN FROM PAST MISTAKES
All major wars involve sacrifice. But since the president never made a prime-time speech to support his decision, many Americans have the sense that they woke up one morning and were at war with Iran.
Was the goal here to prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons? Or, having wiped out Ayatollah Ali Khameini and other top leaders, was it regime change? Pete Hegseth said the aim wasn’t to topple the regime, but that was contradicted by Trump saying he had to approve the new leader and rejecting the anointment of the ayatollah’s son. If that isn’t George W. Bush-style regime change, what is?
At the outset, the Dow was plunging, the 401ks were shrinking, and gas prices were surging.
In military terms, the U.S.-Israeli attacks on the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism have been a remarkable success, at least so far. But how long will this 24/7 bombardment continue?
HEGSETH ONCE WARNED AGAINST ENDLESS WARS. NOW HE’S LEADING TRUMP’S STRIKE-FIRST DOCTRINE
Hegseth told “60 Minutes” that he and Trump are “willing to go as far as we need to go” overturn Iran’s dictatorial regime, including sending troops if necessary. The War secretary understandably said he wouldn’t tell the enemy whether the military assault would last four to six weeks or longer.
“Short term oil prices, which will drop rapidly when the destruction of the Iran nuclear threat is over, is a very small price to pay for U.S.A., and World, Safety and Peace,” the president posted. “ONLY FOOLS WOULD THINK DIFFERENTLY!”
The president told CBS yesterday, “the war is very complete, pretty much.” That’s a significant shift.
Hegseth argues the media are playing up American casualties to make Trump look bad. Sorry, but there’s a reason many people find this offensive. Journalists cover American military casualties in every administration, and it’s not aimed at any particular president. It’s to honor our war dead. Most of the press is hardly pro-Trump, but these deaths would be major news no matter who was commander-in-chief.
Meanwhile, other Arab nations, under attack by Iran, have slashed oil productions because of that and risky conditions at the Strait of Hormuz, a major choke point for energy shipments.
At the same time, history shows that some political opponents try to exploit American combat deaths, as many Democrats are doing here by refusing to call Iran a terrorist state. When 13 Americans died in an attack at Kabul airport during a chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, Republicans blamed Joe Biden throughout his term. When four Americans died in Benghazi, Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, was hammered for years.
Russia’s role has also been polarizing. The Washington Post, citing a classified report, said the Kremlin is aiding Iran in targeting U. S. forces – in blunt terms, helping to kill Americans.
When reporters raised this with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, she said “whether or not this happened, frankly, it does not really matter.”
The backlash was instantaneous.
WHITE HOUSE SAYS OIL PRICE SPIKE IS TEMPORARY AS TRUMP PUSHES ENERGY DOMINANCE AMID IRAN WAR
There is, at the moment, a growing sense of international uncertainty that has everyone off balance.
I watched for years as LBJ and Richard Nixon bombarded the Viet Cong in what was largely a jungle war, and the guerrillas refused to surrender, betting on outlasting the United States. Ultimately, South Vietnam collapsed and was overrun. The war was all the more pointless because it was fought against the “domino theory” that these small countries would fall in a Communist triumph.
Donald Trump ran as the America First candidate who would keep the country out of foreign wars. He said it was Kamala Harris who would lead the nation into World War III.
The former VP now accuses Trump of “dragging the United States into a war the American people don’t want.”
And the Iran combat, of course, follows another regime change, with Trump ordering the kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro and declaring himself the leader of oil-rich Venezuela.
The furor over Iran has exacerbated a deep and nasty split in the conservative media, with some of its members abruptly changing their rhetoric about foreign wars and others saying the president has betrayed his MAGA base.
SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY’S HOTTEST STORIES
A month from now, six months from now, the decision to wage war against Iran may be seen as a brilliant tactical move or the start of an Iraq-style quagmire. Will Trump be able to say he shut down the mullahs’ nuclear program?
But if there’s one thing that might persuade the president to declare victory and wind things down, it’s the growing economic pain that this war has inflicted on average Americans.
