US News: Take It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster - PressFrom - United Kingdom
  •   
  •   

US NewsTake It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster

13:40  16 may  2019
13:40  16 may  2019 Source:   msn.com

Change UK are left red-faced after switching to new Twitter name - only to find a Brexit supporter has hijacked their old one and renamed it 'Cringe UK'

Change UK are left red-faced after switching to new Twitter name - only to find a Brexit supporter has hijacked their old one and renamed it 'Cringe UK' The new political party was set up by seven splinter Labour MPs in February under the name 'The Independent Group'. Read more: Who is standing for Change UK in the European elections? (Evening Standard) A month later, they registered as a political party for the European elections - changing their title to 'Change UK - The Independent Group'. The latest rebrand has seen the group change from @TheIndGroup to @ForChange_Now - presumably to avoid being confused with change.org again. Change UK tweeted earlier today: 'Our website's updated to VoteForChange.

The Iraq War of 2003 was undone by blithe assumptions, cultural ignorance, and careless planning. But compared with the accelerating drive to confront Iran , the Iraq War looks like a masterpiece of meticulous preparation. The project of a war with Iran is so crazy, it remains incredible that Donald

A war with Iran would also undoubtedly put the US’s regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, at risk, although Bolton and Pompeo seem determined to bring “Nobody wins from this, a big war would be a disaster for the Middle East,” Sazhin told RT. With Washington and Tehran mutually declaring each

Take It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster © Kevin Lamarque / Reuters George W. Bush walked past crew members of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003, to declare major combat in Iraq over.

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

The Iraq War of 2003 was undone by blithe assumptions, cultural ignorance, and careless planning. But compared with the accelerating drive to confront Iran, the Iraq War looks like a masterpiece of meticulous preparation.

The project of a war with Iran is so crazy, it remains incredible that Donald Trump’s administration could truly be premeditating it. But on the off, off chance that it is, here’s a word of caution from a veteran of the George W. Bush administration: Don’t do it.

Iran Tells Trump: Don't Wait for Us to Pick Up the Phone

Iran Tells Trump: Don't Wait for Us to Pick Up the Phone Iranian officials rebuffed President Donald Trump’s suggestion that they call him to try to defuse frictions as the U.S. ratcheted up its actions against Tehran. Several top Iranian aides and lawmakers predicted Sunday that the current tensions wouldn’t lead to war, calling the U.S. deployment of an aircraft carrier, warship, bomber jets and missile defenses to the Middle East a propaganda stunt. Antagonism between the countries, already high, has worsened this month since Trump eliminated exceptions to U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A senior political analyst based in the United States dismissed the possibility of any military conflict between Iran and the US, saying “While he may be a capitalist, nevertheless he is a realist and understands that war with Iran would be a disaster for the US and at this time he is

"A war in Iran would , in my view, be many times worse than the Iraq War ." The senator said that he was working to build a coalition in Congress to force President Trump to ask Congress for authorization if he wants to engage in military action in Iran . Congress authorized Mr. Bush to take action in Iraq in

I supported the Iraq War in 2003 because I believed the Bush administration’s case that Iraq was again actively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. (A first program had been destroyed by Israeli warplanes in 1981; a second had been halted by UN inspectors after the Gulf War of 1990–91.)

Yet the goal in 2003 was bigger than denuclearization. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was both oppressing his own subjects and menacing his neighbors. By replacing Saddam’s regime with a more humane and peaceful successor, the U.S. could set the Arab Middle East on a path to a better future—contributing to America’s own security after 9/11.

Take It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster © Getty Had the U.S.-led coalition against Saddam achieved those things, the world would indeed be a better place. It is an unknowable question whether, with more resources and wiser decisions, those things could have been achieved. It is also a futile question. The American political system of 2003 was not going to provide more resources, and even in retrospect, it is difficult to identify what wiser decisions could have delivered better success in Iraq.

Donald Trump Stokes Iran War Fears, Warns 'They Will Suffer Greatly'

Donald Trump Stokes Iran War Fears, Warns 'They Will Suffer Greatly' "We'll see what happens with Iran, if they do anything it will be a big mistake," President Donald Trump warned.

Significant opposition to the Iraq War occurred worldwide, both before and during the initial 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States, United Kingdom, and smaller contingents from other nations

Is the prospect of war with Iran sufficient reason for the western democracies to stand up to Trump at last? Is this emerging new “axis of evil”, linking Trump, Putin and Assad, the ultimate abomination that finally forces our leaders to say enough is enough? War with Iran could make Iraq look like a walk in

To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you go to war with the decisions you have made, not the decisions you wish you would have made with better hindsight.

I believe that those of us who advocated the war, whether inside or outside government, carry lifelong responsibility for that advocacy. You do not disburden yourself of that responsibility by changing your mind after the fact. What matters to posterity are the things you said and did at the hour of decision. You cannot revoke the irrevocable.

I still think President Bush did right to warn the world of an “axis of evil” in his 2002 State of the Union address, a speech to which I made some modest contributions. (I tell the story in a memoir, The Right Man.) Back then, it was controversial to claim that North Korea was proliferating weapons technologies to Iran and Syria, or that Shiite Iran armed and supplied Sunni Hamas. These things are now universally known. But the step from describing the problem to acting on it was large and inadequately considered.

British General Contradicts U.S. Claim of Increased Threat From Iran-Backed Militias

British General Contradicts U.S. Claim of Increased Threat From Iran-Backed Militias The Pentagon responded with an unusual rebuke of an allied senior officer

Iran - Iraq War : Iran - Iraq War (1980–88), prolonged military conflict between Iran and Iraq . Estimates of total casualties range from 1,000,000 to twice that number. Fighting was ended by a 1988 cease-fire, though the resumption of normal diplomatic relations and the withdrawal of troops did not take place

A war with Iran would also undoubtedly put the US's regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, at risk, although Bolton and Pompeo seem determined to bring "Nobody wins from this, a big war would be a disaster for the Middle East," Sazhin told RT. With Washington and Tehran mutually declaring each

_______________________________________________________________

More on this story:

UK-US row over threat in the Middle East (Independent)

Foreign Office in 'crisis mode' over US-Iran tensions (Sky)

US orders evacuation of embassy in Baghdad (New York Times)

_______________________________________________________________

Inside the Bush administration, we thought we were ready to remake Iraq for the better—but we were not. We were ignorant, arrogant, and unprepared, and we unleashed human suffering that did no good for anyone: not for Americans, not for Iraqis, not for the region. Almost two decades later, the damage to America’s standing in the world from the Iraq War has still not been repaired, let alone that war’s economic and human costs to the United States and the Middle East.

The idea of repeating such a war, only on a much bigger scale, without allies, without justification, and without any plan at all for what comes next staggers and terrifies the imagination.

The Trump administration is very probably bluffing in its current menaces to Iran. President Trump dislikes foreign military interventions and has tried to withdraw American forces from Syria and Afghanistan. It seems unlikely that he would willingly launch a major war against a near-nuclear state of more than 80 million people. But bluffs do get called—and then the bluffer must rapidly make some hasty calculations. Wars of words can escalate into real wars, real fast.

Iran's supreme leader makes uranium enrichment threat

Iran's supreme leader makes uranium enrichment threat Iran's supreme leader has issued a veiled threat in the same speech in which he stated that "no one is seeking war," saying it wouldn't be difficult for the Islamic Republic to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels amid rising tensions with the United States. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, meanwhile, ordered all non-essential, non-emergency government staff on Wednesday to leave Iraq immediately amid escalating tensions with Iran. Washington did not publicly provide any evidence to back up claims of an increased threat from Tehran.

Take the “deal or war” perspective. The prospect of the U.S. having to use air power against Iran does sound pretty bad. Well, it did sound bad, back before the U.S. was using air power in Iraq . Well, yes, it does matter quite a bit. A war with Iran would be a huge change for the worse for the entire region

Since the inauguration, the White House has taken several ham-handed escalatory steps that bring into question whether Trump and his most radical advisors are begging for war with Iran . This would be a disaster of epic scale, perhaps eclipsing the nightmare of the Iraq War .

If the goal of some inside the administration is to goad Iran into striking first—thus forcing Trump’s hand—that’s a ruse that risks igniting a conflict much bigger than the one with Iraq, and one even less likely to succeed.

In 2003, Vice President Dick Cheney’s now notorious promise, “We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators,” had solid basis in plausibility. Shiite Iraqis had risen in arms against Saddam Hussein’s regime after the Gulf War of 1990–91. By 2003, Iraqi Kurdistan was a more or less autonomous region, hostile to the regime. The Iraqi government was regionally isolated: friendless and feared. Its military and security forces were broken and unreliable.

Take It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster © Getty Standing up a new Iraqi regime post-Saddam looked like a plausible project. A large Iraqi diaspora had formed a National Congress. Oil prices in 2003 had slumped to historic lows, promising a surge of new revenues to rebuild a post-Saddam Iraq once oil markets returned to more normal levels.

To invade Iraq, President George W. Bush asked for and got a congressional authorization to use force. He sought and received enabling resolutions from the United Nations. He built a military coalition that included not only the United Kingdom but many other allies, notably Australia, Poland, and Spain. U.S. allies who opposed the decision to use force—notably Germany and Canada—nonetheless pledged postwar assistance to a post-Saddam Iraq. Bush mobilized domestic public opinion behind him as well. More than half of Americans approved of the decision in the months leading up to the war, a number that rose to two-thirds on the eve of the conflict, and hit three-quarters the day after hostilities began. Leading Democrats in Congress—including the future presidential candidates John Kerry and Hillary Clinton—cast their vote in favor of the effort.

Foreign Office 'in crisis mode' over US-Iran tensions

Foreign Office 'in crisis mode' over US-Iran tensions Britain's Foreign Office has gone into crisis mode because of rising tensions in the Gulf between the United States and Iran, Sky News can reveal. At the moment the level of crisis is at the lower end with a small number of additional staff focusing on Iran, and additional reports being produced by officials. However, this level could be increased if the situation in the region worsens, sources said. "We are going into crisis mode," a Whitehall source said, describing it, for now, as "pretty light touch".

Think of this as a tactical pause—not that the surge’s architects and supporters saw (or see) it that way. Sadly, that panel still epitomizes respectable thought on the Iraq surge and what followed from it . Memory is a tricky thing. As historian Dale Andrade wrote, “No matter how the war in Iraq ends

Unlike Iraq , Iran is a maritime power bordered by the Caspian sea to the north and the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman to the south. If the United States were to engage in a military conflict with Iran , it would probably require significant manpower that would otherwise be used to check bigger powers

None of this was sufficient to bring success. But it was all a lot more than has been done to prepare for a conflict with Iran in 2019.

Trump has no legal authority of any kind to wage war against Iran—not from Congress, not from the UN. He has no allies, and has in fact imposed trade punishments on the European Union, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and many others, above and beyond the escalating trade conflict with China. America’s most militarily capable ally, the United Kingdom, is paralyzed by the Brexit process, which Trump did everything in his power to urge forward.

The supposed provocations by Iran cited by administration sources as the reason for a U.S. response look petty, even assuming they are genuinely Iran’s doing.

Iran is a formidable state, home to a great civilization. And while the Iranian regime has acquired even more regional enemies than 2003 Iraq, its interests also converge in ways Iraq’s never did with the interests of other major powers, Russia most of all.

Take It From an Iraq War Supporter—War With Iran Would Be a Disaster © AP Photo Iran’s theocratic state rightly inspires protest and complaint inside Iran. But there’s no evidence that Iranians would welcome military action by foreigners against their cities and military. The regime can mobilize shows of support and participation when it wants to. It rules by repression, not by terror. The regime has demonstrated global reach, sponsoring terror attacks in Europe and Argentina. U.S. officials have alleged that Iran even planned an assassination attempt against the Saudi ambassador to Washington in 2011. If the U.S. attempts surgical air strikes, Iran has proved it can retaliate against American allies. And if the Trump administration intends outright regime change, it has evidently done none of the requisite planning.

Iran Threat Debate Is Set Off by Images of Missiles at Sea

Iran Threat Debate Is Set Off by Images of Missiles at Sea Iran Threat Debate Is Set Off by Images of Missiles at Sea

The eight-year war between Iran and Iraq cost billions of dollars in damages and claimed millions of lives, but resulted in no real benefit to either side.

War with Iran would be a painful and pointless disaster . It would make the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like warm-up acts. Such behavior is not unique to Iran , however. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Trump’s strongest supporters in the region and Jared Kushner’s business

The administration has not made any public case for war. What would that case sound like, if anybody bothered to articulate it? By 2003, Iraq had spent more than a decade repeatedly cheating on the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the first Gulf War. It had menaced Kuwait again in 1994, carried on forbidden military operations against the Kurds, been caught in a clandestine chemical and biological program in 1996, and evaded sanctions via a complex system of bribes and payoffs.

But in 2019, the U.S. is the international scofflaw. It ripped up a multilateral nuclear arms–control agreement with Iran. Whatever that treaty’s deficiencies, few inside the U.S.—and nobody outside it—deny that Iran complied with its terms. Iran’s behavior in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza is vicious and destructive, as it has been for decades. But where’s the casus belli here? What declared-in-advance U.S. red lines has Iran tripped? Any U.S. military action will look to the world like a bolt-from-the-blue act of aggression. It will look that way for the excellent reason that it’s precisely what it would be.

In any conflict with Iran, the U.S. would find itself without allies except for Israel and the Gulf states. The Trump administration would find itself even more isolated politically at home. Most Americans do not support, trust, or respect Trump's leadership. There is no Colin Powell–like figure in this administration, no senior official who commands respect across party lines. Pitifully few people in this administration command respect even within party lines. The administration’s record of casual incompetence at minor tasks raises terrifying questions about its capacity for a gigantic undertaking like a land war against a Central Asian state.

Even as a bluff, the war talk violates the rule: Don’t threaten to do something so obviously stupid, nobody will believe that you would actually deliver on your threat. You get the worst of all worlds in that case. The threat will not frighten, because it will not be believed. That, in turn, will either push you to do the obviously stupid thing you never intended to do, or force you to walk away from your threats and expose yourself as a bullying blowhard.

Faced with relentless American pressure, Iran starts to hit back

Faced with relentless American pressure, Iran starts to hit back Tehran is seeking to exact a cost for U.S. sanctions that have battered its economy, but it wants to avoid all-out war.

Unlike Iraq , Iran is a maritime power bordered by the Caspian Sea to the north and the Gulf and the Gulf of Oman to the south. US war games have suggested that speedboat suicide attacks and missiles could be surprisingly effective against the American military.

If you will not do it, you should not talk about it. If you are thinking about doing it, stop. And if you are talking without thinking? The U.S. and the world have had more than enough of that from Washington, and not only since January 2017.

Faced with relentless American pressure, Iran starts to hit back.
Tehran is seeking to exact a cost for U.S. sanctions that have battered its economy, but it wants to avoid all-out war.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 3
This is interesting!