The question has been raised on SST of the true import of DJT's remark to the little guy from ABC that Iraq did not attack the US on 9/11 but that he thinks he knows who really did. By process of elimination it is easy to understand of whom he speaks; not Israel, not Saudi Arabia, not Turkey, not the Vatican, probably not the British (joke).
Iran? Bingo!
After all, Iran is revealed as the source of all evil, something like the Nazis but potentially more dangerous (another joke) and at some points in history Iran has helped Sunni fanatics; Hamas, AQ field men trained by Hizbullah in Lebanon ...
Ah! Hah! If that is so then the general purpose AUMF can be tortured into providing legal authority for Trump to order any level of lethal military activity against Iran for however long he wishes to continue it, or until January, 2021, whichever comes first.
Trump has no clue whatever about anything not analogous to a real estate deal or business public relations with the public. A combination of excessive Tee Vee 24/7 news and "briefings" from Bonkers Bolton and his crew seem to have convinced DJT that to be "the man they thought he was" he must punish Iran. My guess is that the first blow will be air strikes east of the Hormuz Strait against facilities supposedly the locus of such horrors as a SAM-7 attack against a Raptor drone from the fleet. (BTW, the SAM-7's effective range is such that drone must have been in Iranian airspace).
And BTW, pilgrims, Ole First in his Class is down in Tampaland today jawboning the leaders of CENTCOM (Mideast), and SOCOM (badass commandos worldwide). Why is he there? The Secretary of State has no constitutional or legal role in dealing with the armed forces. That being the case one can only think that there is push-back from senior commanders over the prospect of war with Iran and that Trump has been persuaded to let him do this unprecedented visit to wheedle or threaten his way into their acquiescence. pl
https://www.vox.com/2019/6/14/18678809/usa-iran-war-aumf-911-trump-pompeo
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pompeo-meet-u-s-commanders-amid-growing-crisis-iran-n1018356
Here's an interesting side piece that we saw coming here a long time ago...
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-in-israel-with-netanyahu-at-her-side-miriam-adelson-places-her-bet-for-2024-1.7376446
Posted by: eakens | 18 June 2019 at 12:26 PM
Even Bellingcat is skeptical. Bellingcat.
https://washingtonsblog.com/2019/06/officials-worldwide-ridicule-claim-that-iran-attacked-tankers-in-gulf-of-oman.html
I find myself agreeing with Bellingcat on something. I feel so dirty and ashamed.
Posted by: prawnik | 18 June 2019 at 12:47 PM
Oh, Iran did it. Not sure whether to laugh or cry. Have we really sunk this low as a society? Apparently, yes, and so I reckon that when the Hegemon breaks (three years? four?), the consequences for us will make life in Moscow in 1995 look positively luxurious by comparison.
Posted by: O'Shawnessey | 18 June 2019 at 01:13 PM
Trump may be ill-informed but he's acutely aware of what is- and more importantly, what is not- in his political interest, at least on an intuitive level. And the political risk of war with Iran is too high, the outcome too uncertain, for him to strike Iran over tankers, drones and a few inconsequential rockets in Bilad. He'd fire Bolton before risking a war that might cost him reelection. Unless Iran raises the stakes to a level that provides Trump political cover with his base, I'd wager we see negotiations before bloodshed.
Posted by: Erkenntnis | 18 June 2019 at 02:31 PM
hallabina - Shanahan withdrew his name from confirmation process today. IMO he did it because DJT let Pomp circumvent his authority.
Posted by: Turcopolier | 18 June 2019 at 02:53 PM
It’s depressing that the rest of the world may be coming to consider the West, which laid the foundation and built the structure of the modern world as
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf
The term “nonagreementcapable” is horrible.
Posted by: Cortes | 18 June 2019 at 02:58 PM
What is absolutely certain (at least to me) is that the world does not need another US led war.
Posted by: David Solomon | 18 June 2019 at 03:18 PM
If Trump wants to lose his re-election, he'll be swayed by Bolton & Pompeo into foolishly attacking Iranian assets. Iran is not Assad who was willing to take the hits even if it was based on false pretenses. The Saudis and Bibi will be miscalculating if they believe Iran will sit tight. While they may eventually be destroyed, the initial conflagration will help Bernie & Tulsi to get a lot of airtime as they will be the contrary opposition voices.
Posted by: blue peacock | 18 June 2019 at 04:14 PM
I would assume that Trumps staff are selling him the “very quick surgical strike that will produce instant results” option. This is what was contemplated by Germany in both world wars. Everyone knew a long war would be economically ruinous, so they just eliminated such a possibility from their thinking.
Posted by: walrus | 18 June 2019 at 04:23 PM
Let us hope you are right. But if not, Trump would not be the first head-of-state to gin up a war in order to bolster his chances for re-election.
Posted by: Eugene Owens | 18 June 2019 at 05:16 PM
The same foreign policy agenda has been followed since the 1990s. No matter who was/is President. 100% certainty regime change of Iran is part of this policy. Some may point to the Iran Deal Obama made but it was only a hunting blind. On his watch Libya was destroyed and the attempt to destroy Syria by arming Salfaist was approved by him. The President's are cowed by the extreme external pressure imposed on them by a certain faction. Probably the only way to get elected and self-preservation of political career and maybe biological life comes into play.
Posted by: Harlan Easley | 18 June 2019 at 05:22 PM
Eugene,
Only the neocons and Israelis want a war. Trump would not only lose but given his failure to 'drain the swamp' and recent pronouncements by Pelosi, Gildebrand, Harris etc., he, his family and political supporters would be further investigated and jailed. All the more reason to fire Pompeo and Bolton before they allow their own animus to destroy his foreign policy and by extension any chance at re-election.
Posted by: Fred | 18 June 2019 at 06:03 PM
if violence arrives i expect the window to begin soon... june 26-7 thru july 8-9.
watch the gold price, the cycle is right for a short powerful upthrust through 1360-64 june monthly close which if it occurs leads to something bigger. the move thus far is telegraphing something just over the horizon which will be used as the raison d'etre for golds advance.
Posted by: ted richard | 18 June 2019 at 06:54 PM
We should start referring to the Persian Gulf as the " Gliewitz Gulf". Trump wouldn't get it, of course. Would Pompeo and Bolton get it? The level of their anger upon hearing "Gliewitz Gulf" would indicate the amount of their getting it.
This is a good time for any Democratic Nomination-pursuer to start running explicitly on having America re-enter the JCPOA and also on declaring non-belief in the building "Iran Diddit" narrative. Such Democrats could use phrases like " Remember the Slam-Dunk?" . . . " Remember the Powell UN Speech?" " Remember the Yellowcake?" . . . " Remember the Curveball?"
The Catfood Democrats all support the Iran Diddit narrative. But 3 of the Decent Democrats might well oppose it. Gravel and Gabbard would certainly oppose it. Sanders "could" oppose it in public if he is willing to take a Las Vegas gamble.
Posted by: different clue | 18 June 2019 at 07:07 PM
For what it's worth, here is a ~5 min clip of Pompeo being interviewed by MSNBC.
Mike Pompeo: ‘President Trump Does Not Want War’ with Iran https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/06/18/mike-pompeo-president-trump-does-not-want-war-with-iran/
Tuesday while speaking to reporters after meeting with U.S. Central Command leaders at the command’s headquarters in Tampa, FL, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said President Donald Trump did not want to go to war with Iran.
Posted by: Valissa | 18 June 2019 at 07:35 PM
I'm not at all convinced Trump's base is against striking Iran. They've been conditioned to think Iran is the source of all evil as have many across the political spectrum. If Trump thought a strike would be enthusiastically cheered by his base in one of his "Triumph of the Will" rallies, he'd be inclined to strike. If he thinks such a strike would produce an uptick in his poll numbers, he may also be inclined to strike. OTOH, he is a bullshit artist full of bluster and bluff. That may be enough to keep him from being stupid in the Gulf.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 18 June 2019 at 08:14 PM
Trumps base only gets him so far. He needs all the people that voted for Obama last time that swung over to him for his anti war stance.
Posted by: eakens | 18 June 2019 at 11:21 PM
When I hear people saying: “President Trump does not want war with Iran “ I think to myself: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".
Posted by: walrus | 19 June 2019 at 03:33 AM
use to watch these videos by Vesti News to get an idea what is going on in Russia, at least at level of public opinion. But we have more problem than history but good Articles
Posted by: patrick | 19 June 2019 at 06:52 AM
Some here need to do a little research into ied's used in iraq.There are many us veterans with.........
to-deaths-of-500-u-s-troops-in-iraq-afghanistan/
Posted by: Anonymous | 19 June 2019 at 07:55 AM
Anonymous
War should not be waged because of a desire for revenge. To do so is childish. Should we seek revenge upon Germany, Japan or Vietnam? The Iranians supported our enemies during the Iraq resistance to our occupation? So what? Perhaps we should bomb Tokyo again. My mother thought so but she was ignorant and childish.
Posted by: turcopolier | 19 June 2019 at 09:23 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trumps-defense-nominee-addresses-violent-incident-between-ex-wife-son-amid-fbi-vetting-process/2019/06/18/e46009de-190b-11e9-a804-c35766b9f234_story.html?utm_term=.39974960e1e7
An awful story that set the scene for Shanahan's withdrawal, the Pompean usurpation was the final trigger.
Posted by: Turcopolier | 19 June 2019 at 09:35 AM
TTG,
As part of Trump's base and as someone in communication with other members of Trump's base, we don't want a war with Iran or anywhere else in the world. We want a border wall/illegal immigration/cessation of foreign invasion and existing illegals deported. That's where we want to see our military directed.
Trump's a BS artist? Well the economy is doing pretty well do in large part to his wise deregulations and general pro-America stance; and no one is confiscating our guns or mandating that our sons take female hormones and wear dresses; or confiscating our hard earned money for "reparations". If that represents BS, I like BS. Can you tell me which of the Democrats isn't a major socialist BS artist (this should be interesting)? Oh yeah, why of course! Tulsi's going to take on the Borg successfully - in between socialist policy implementation - if we give her a chance. Okie dokie.
Posted by: Eric Newhill | 19 June 2019 at 09:56 AM
You keep saying things that made me wish we had the "like" button. To agree with you is a bit arrogant. You don't need my agreement. A "like" button says that I appreciate your insight.
Posted by: Bill H | 19 June 2019 at 09:59 AM
In 2003, the Bush administration piously insisted that they were seeking a peace with Iraq, even as it was obvious that they were seeking any excuse for war.
Posted by: prawnik | 19 June 2019 at 10:51 AM