“Praising Trump for calling off a military strike feels perverse,” writes T.A. Frank, “and yet war-hungry Washington can still make him look sane”
saved 150 lives, and possibly the world, by persuadingto call off a military strike on Iran. That’s a pretty good story to tell when you reach the Pearly Gates, even better than one about having policed the discourse at Media Matters. But Carlson’s intervention, however fortunate, was a bit like someone saving the goldfish infrom a fall. The reprieve is temporary.
This week Trump has imposed further sanctions against Iran’s regime, and in the past days, the world has had no shortage of commentary lamenting his foreign policy. But it’s worth distinguishing the two primary perspectives on the matter. The first is, in essence, dovish. It says that Trump should never have messed with Iran in the first place. He should have left the nuclear treaty in place and tried to improve relations rather than fraying them further. The second perspective is hawkish.
In the age of Trump, many hawks and doves have found their way to one another, driven by shared dislike of the president. This also leads to a blurring of their differences at times like this, since both sides can agree that Trump is erratic and that White House policy is a mess. But if peace is their priority, then the doves, who nowmake up the majority of Americans, must ask themselves some hard questions about whom to befriend—or at least whom to spurn less.
Let’s take a closer look at the dove’s headache. Anyone who supported Trump out of a belief that he would be the peace candidate has long ago been set straight. Trump has threatened military action all over the world and fired missiles at Syria on a whim. His policy toward Iran has been especially belligerent and destructive. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the nuclear deal with Iran, was working, and there was no indication that Tehran was attempting to produce weapons.
But then we come to Trump’s critics from the hawkish side. These are the ones who lament Trump’s near-strike on Iran mainly because it was canceled. “The more that adversaries think Mr. Trump’s threats of force aren’t credible, the more they will seek to exploit that knowledge,” scolded theas if restraint were Washington’s signature quality. “Weakness is provocative,” offered RepresentativeDonald Rumsfeld.
Brasil Últimas Notícias, Brasil Manchetes
Similar News:Você também pode ler notícias semelhantes a esta que coletamos de outras fontes de notícias.
Democratic debate: Will Donald Trump be able to stay on the sidelines?
Consulte Mais informação »
Donald Trump reacts to Iran calling him 'mentally paralyzed' by threatening 'obliteration'President Donald Trump claimed that 'Iran leadership doesn't understand the words 'nice' or 'compassion,' they never have.'
Consulte Mais informação »
Donald Trump threatens 'overwhelming force' against Iran if it attacks 'anything American'Donald Trump said he would use 'overwhelming force' against Iran if it attacks the U.S. again, a threat that comes days after he called off strikes.
Consulte Mais informação »
Donald Trump suggests EU commissioner 'hates the U.S. perhaps worse than any person I've ever met'Trump suggested the EU Commissioner for Competition is opening investigations into U.S. tech firms out of malice.
Consulte Mais informação »
Donald Trump's new economic sanctions are a 'war crime,' Iran's U.N. ambassador claims'How can we start a dialogue with an administration who is threatening Iran?' asked Majid Takht Ravanchi.
Consulte Mais informação »
Iran says Donald Trump's Middle East policy is all about selling weapons, sending more troopsIran's U.N. envoy said new sanctions were 'yet another indication that the U.S. has no respect for international law and order as well as the views of the overwhelming majority of the international
Consulte Mais informação »