When It Comes to Reasons for Iran Attack, Trump Offers Something for Everyone

Whenever US troops are sent into harm’s way, there better be a really good reason for it. In the case of Donald Trump’s attack on Iran, there isn’t just one, there are lots; but only time will tell if the American people believe that they are valid.

Things used to be easier for Republican presidents wanting to get involved in Middle East conflicts.

Back in 1990, following Iraq’s invasion of its smaller neighbor, the objective was clear: assemble a broad coalition of nations and protect the oil liberate Kuwait. And that’s exactly what “Operation Desert Storm” accomplished in 1991.

There was no regime change and no lengthy entanglement; the number of casualties was fairly limited, and, as a result of all of that, the conflict enjoyed broad support from beginning to end; and President George H.W. Bush enjoyed a big bump in his approval rating.

Things were trickier for Junior, who made a mess of his shot at Saddam Hussein.

In 2003, George W. Bush’s “coalition of the willing” was much smaller. The number of reasons for invading Iraq, however, was not.

The public was told that it was about getting rid of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), which didn’t exist, and his involvement in 9/11, which also didn’t exist. There was also a promise of being greeted as liberators. In the end, of course, it was all about protecting the oil regime change.

While Americans were initially enthusiastic about the war, that excitement quickly cooled as it became clear that the invasion resulted in a massive quagmire that cost the lives of thousands of Americans and many more Iraqis.

As a result, Bush’s approval rating, which enjoyed a bump at the start of the conflict, plummeted quickly.

Now it’s Donald Trump’s turn.

This weekend, he became the third consecutive Republican president to try his hand at getting involved in a major war in the Middle East.

Ooops, sorry. We meant “major combat operation,” of course.

Once again, things are different. The “coalition” is even smaller this time. In fact, it consists of one partner. However, what Israel lacks in numbers, it makes up for in eagerness to draw the United States in a war of its choosing.

That’s not us talking, by the way, that’s according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Monday, he made it clear that the US got involved because it knew that Israel was about to strike.

“We knew that if Iran was attacked, and we believe that they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us,” he told reporters. “And we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded.”

Rubio suggested that this constituted an “imminent threat,” which requires quite a bit of verbal and mental gymnastics.

But that’s not the only reason for why Trump (claims to have) acted.

In fact, the president and his administration have offered about half a dozen.

Perhaps the one that Trump hopes will resonate best with Americans is that he wanted to prevent Iran from building nukes. Of course, the thing is that, just a few months ago, he had told them that he had “obliterated” Tehran’s nuclear weapons program. The White House still has a fancy website up that says so.

But there is no indication that Iran was anywhere close to building nukes or a delivery system that could reach the US.

In addition, negotiations were ongoing to come to an agreement that would preclude Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

So, if it wasn’t about WMDs, maybe it was about WDs, i.e., Iran’s missiles.

That is another one of the reasons Trump listed on Monday.

Another was to “annihilate” Iran’s navy.

And preventing the regime from arming terrorists.

As for that last point, if the man who killed a couple of people in Austin this weekend really was motivated by the attack on Iran, then maybe the greater concern should be how easily just about anybody can obtain weapons legally in the US.

That’s five reasons so far.

Of course, there is also “regime change,” which is a loaded term because that never works out for the US.

While Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth made it clear Monday that “this is not a regime change war,” Trump told Iranians on Saturday to rise up and overthrow the government, so it’s up to Americans whether they want to believe the former Fox News morning show host or the former reality TV star.

By the way, Hegseth may want to pump the brakes on that “war” talk and get on the “major combat operations” train before Americans figure out that it would be illegal for Trump to declare war on Iran without the approval of Congress.

As for the real reason why the US starts wars in the Middle East, oil, the president kinda spilled the beans on that one, too.

He told Fox News on Monday that his plan for Iran mirrors that of Venezuela, which might simply mean leaving the current regime in place and selling the country’s oil.

Will the public buy any of that? We’ll see. What we know already is that it seems highly unlikely that Trump is going to see a Bush-like bump in the polls. On the bright side for him, his approval rating can’t drop much further as long as his MAGA faithful stick with him, even though he just trampled over another one of their red lines, i.e., no foreign entanglements and no US blood and treasure spilled and spent abroad.