Iran: questions, no answers
The question at the end is what weighs on my conscience. We are in a very dangerous place.
I remember the clip of John Kerry in the 1970's in a congressional hearing asking the poignant question:
This led Kerry famously to question, “How do you ask a man to be the
last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to
die for a mistake?” Kerry concluded by reminding members of the Senate
that they had the ability to alter American policy in Vietnam.
We don't yet know who was the first to die[1] for this adventurism, but it is certain that there will be more.
While it has been confirmed that Ayatollah Ali Khameni has been killed, it doesn't appear to have de-radicalized the Islamic Republic's leadership, as there was a succession plan.
And Trump's fantasy of the people rising up and wresting crontrol from the hardliners is not exactly happening. In fact, it is looking like this is rallying the population in support against the US and Israel.
Of course, as I suspected, Trump fully believed that this would be as simple as his Special Ops incursion to grab Maduro:
Then he offered a very different model of what the transition of power in Iran might look like, referring repeatedly to his experience in Venezuela after he ordered a Delta Force team to seize Mr. Maduro.
“What we did in Venezuela, I think, is the perfect, the perfect scenario,” Mr. Trump said.
His answer implied that what worked in Venezuela would work in Iran, a nation with about three times the population and a military and clerical leadership that has ruled with increasing repression since the 1979 revolution. Over the past several weeks, Mr. Trump has repeatedly brought up Venezuela as the model of a successful operation and hoped to replicate aspects of it in Iran, identifying leadership that would be more cooperative and friendly to the United States. (from: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/01/us/politics/trump-iran-war-interview.html)
Of course, he's delusional. As the incomparable Daniel Drezner notes:
To put it bluntly, this is analogical reasoning at its dumbest.
Iran is not Venezuela in a variety of ways. Iran has more potent military capabilities, allowing the regime to strike back and kill U.S. soldiers. Trump might claim that the U.S. and Israel can maintain an air assault for 4-5 weeks, but reporting suggests that both countries have limited stockpiles of missile interceptors, and Iran has a stockpile of missiles and drones to fire.
Daniel W. Drezner
Trump has said that he thinks this will be all wrapped up in 4 or 5 weeks, in time for opening weekend for the MLB season.
Uh, sure. But you know who has a say in that? Iran.
Heather Cox-Richardson has some nuggets of wisdom in her missive from March 1:
After yesterday’s euphoria coming from the administration following the first strikes against Iran, today revealed that the administration had not given much thought to whether the strikes were legitimate or what would happen after them. Administration officials did not appear on the Sunday talk shows, relying instead on congressional surrogates. Brian Stelter and Kit Maher reported that journalists have been working around the White House press office, calling Trump directly, and he has been willing to talk.
No shit, they didn't want their craptastic ball-washers from the cabinet getting grilled.
Then this snippet:
Then Welker asked her guest, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), “Is ‘hope’ the plan for the future of Iran?” Graham said: “No, the future of Iran is going to be determined by the Iranian people. The new Iran, whatever it is…our goal is to make sure it cannot become again the largest state sponsor of terrorism.” Welker responded: “But is there a plan to make sure that happens…does the president have a plan to guarantee that that happens?” Graham responded with some heat: “No. It’s not his job or my job to do this.”
Not his job? I guess his job is to fuck shit up and then expect someone else to mop up the mess.
Meanwhile the futures for the markets are down significantly (the DJI is trending down 500 pre-opening), oil is up $10 a barrel, and gold is rising. All symptoms that this is likely to not be transitory.
The Financial Times has some sober economic analyses.
The ability of Iran to project against regional players will cause some turmoil on the markets:
Qatar shut down liquefied natural gas production after Iran targeted its facilities with drone strikes, in the biggest disruption to energy supplies yet from the widening conflict in the Middle East.
The stoppage by QatarEnergy, one of the world’s largest energy suppliers, sent natural gas prices in Europe and Asia soaring by more than 30 per cent, while oil prices rose about 8 per cent due to a near complete halt of shipments through the Strait of Hormuz.
Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, also said it had paused production at an oil refinery after a drone attack.
This seems not good to say the least.
Additionally, the Strait of Hormuz is effectively shut down, as tankers who are loaded and ready to exit are facing a more than doubling of the insurance costs for the shipment - a big deal, and the concern that ships might be targeted.
Shipping through the strait has slowed to a standstill after insurers began withdrawing coverage and a number of vessels were attacked on Sunday, including a tanker chartered by oil company Saudi Aramco that was carrying 500,000 barrels of gasoline.
And then there's the shuttering of the DBX airport, one of the busiest transit hubs in the world:
As well, there have been attacks on soft civilian targets throughout the region.
There was some chatter that the main Arab states had provided back-channel, tacit endorsement of the action, as a way to curtail Iran, a thorn in their sides. But one has to wonder what will the long term repurcussions, and how much pain are they willing to endure?
We shall see...
I will let Mr. Derzner get the last word:
Trump might say he is willing to go on a four-week bomb bender but that seems politically unlikely. Trump is engaging in a war of choice without bothering to explain to the American public why it is necessary. His administration’s efforts to justify the preventive attack do not include evidence. As I have written previously, Trump might not lose his MAGA base with this attack but his overall polling on this attack is pretty awful and will only trend in one direction — particularly if energy prices start to spike, more American troops die and the war spreads across the region.
This gets me to the final point I wanted to make: "Who will be the last American serviceman to sacrifice their life for this mistake?
1 - They wait until 24 hours after the notification of the family, a common decency.
