A vocal group of Washington hawks wants President Trump to order one more round of strikes on Iran, reopen the Strait of Hormuz by force if necessary, declare victory, and walk away. Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen and Fox News analyst General Jack Keane are among the most prominent voices making this case, but their argument doesn’t hold up.
Thiessen, for instance, has argued Trump should launch a final push against Iran’s remaining military targets, claiming the U.S. was only about 14 days from completely destroying Iran’s military capabilities and that any peace deal would simply give Tehran a veto over America’s ability to declare victory. He has also faulted the June Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Vice President Vance helped negotiate for leaving the war unresolved, in a Washington Post column titled “Trump’s Iran strategy is working. His vice president’s isn’t.”
But their finish-the-job argument raises an obvious question: why would the Iranian regime stop its attacks after one more U.S. military campaign, when the fanatics running the country appear willing to burn it down rather than fold? Why believe two more weeks of bombing will destroy all 1,000 of Iran’s remaining missiles? And if the U.S. calls off the war after a two-week campaign, isn’t it more likely that Iran simply resumes firing at its neighbors? What’s the plan then?
Thiessen and Keane are also in no hurry to end the Iran war. They don’t seem concerned with Trump’s promise to end it quickly or how a prolonged conflict will affect the November midterms.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member