Iran
Regardless of what happens from here, the Trump/Vance administration’s decision to launch a war of choice was a mistake of epic proportions (at least they got one of the words in the name of the operation right!). Let’s just call this what it is: an unmitigated disaster.
For one, it’s another example of unchecked executive overreach. The U.S. Constitution entrusts Congress with the power to “declare war,” not the president. We're not saying that this means Congress must authorize every single use of American power, specifically when he or she is responding to attacks on our nation or forces, but when a president launches a war of choice – especially when a substantial portion of America’s military is involved and American lives are on the line – the president must go to Congress and Congress must authorize it. < It’s also not smart for a U.S. president to proceed in these circumstances without the buy-in of the American people, but Republicans will have to answer for that in the next few elections. >
Even if you disregard what the U.S. Constitution clearly states, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 only allows the president to initiate hostilities when there has been a declaration of war or a specific authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S., its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
… and don’t even get us started on international law, which the Trump/Vance administration has repeatedly blown right through. It was bad enough in the Caribbean Sea and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, where they conducted lethal and illegal boat strikes, and Venezuela, where they illegally abducted a head of state, but Operation Epic Fury is another ballgame altogether.
Regardless of what you think of Iran or Venezuela, the United Nations Charter – which the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved in 1945 and President Truman ratified on behalf of the United States – requires member states to refrain from the threat or use of force “against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” (Iran and Venezuela both joined the UN in 1945 as two of the original founding members and remain full members today.)
The Charter does recognize exceptions, most importantly the right of individual or collective self-defense and military action authorized by the UN Security Council. But absent a valid legal justification under the Charter, using military force to overthrow another country’s government would violate the Charter’s prohibition on the use of force and its foundational principles of state sovereignty and political independence. Likewise, using force in another state’s territory to attack its political leadership must have a valid basis under international law; the fact that the intended target is a head of state does not, by itself, create an exception to the Charter.
< We understand there are those who would argue that there were “valid legal justifications” for the recent violence in the Caribbean Sea and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, Venezuela and Iran – we just vehemently disagree. In the Caribbean Sea and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, the Trump/Vance administration ordered the execution of people who were not at war with the U.S. and who were not afforded due process. In Venezuela, the Trump/Vance administration launched the military operation under false pretenses. In Iran, the non-violent JCPOA was working before Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the United States, plus the administration’s 2026 self-defense claims make no sense because there was no imminent threat from Iran (more on this in a minute). >
Worse, President Trump has repeatedly threatened what are – by any measure – war crimes. The most wicked example of this started in his expletive-filled message on Easter Sunday 2026 that managed to offend pretty much every country and every religion: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.” This gem was followed two days later with: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”
This is beyond disgraceful.
… and quite possibly one of the worst things a U.S. president has ever threatened. We were so saddened by this – and wanted to express our heartbreak for the people of Iran and America eloquently – but couldn’t find the right words.
But, as usual, Peggy Noonan could, God bless her: “I want to talk about why (Trump’s posts) were so horrifying. They constituted hitting a new bottom, a new and infernal, face-lit-by-flames bottom, in world communications. The posts weren’t showbiz, they were sinister. You destabilize the world when, as the American president, you say such things. You make all the babies in this delicately poised, always knock-down-able world less safe. You rob your own nation of a claim to moral seriousness in the military action in which it’s engaged: You are saying we’re not trying to protect life but plan to attack, and in the attacking kill noncombatants who are members of the targeted civilization.”
“The moral high ground is relinquished. You lower the bar for all potential response. You encourage violent action by trumpeting your readiness for it. It bolsters the position of your enemies – their animus is justified, their commitment deepened. It allows them to pretend they’re fighting for the continuation of their people and not only the continuation of their regime… It is not sentimental to care about this; it is babyish to think it means nothing.”
Without question, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was a bad man. His regime inflicted systemic human rights abuses against its own people and massacred thousands of protesters. Iran’s leaders imprison, torture, and execute political dissidents, and severely oppress women, LGBTQ people, and religious and ethnic minorities. They thrive on terror and repeatedly vow death to America and Israel. Iran has caused trouble for decades, sponsoring Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and other proxies as they wreaked havoc and killed Americans.
But let’s be clear on two things: One, the Iranian people should never by punished for the sins of their leaders (it’s shocking this even must be said). They have suffered enough, to say the least.
And two, there was absolutely ZERO reason we had to attack Iran when we did – right now, right this second. There was no imminent threat; no involvement from Congress; no support from allies; no coherent justification for the American people; no tangible goals; no clear objectives; no plan for helping Americans safely leave the region; no coherent strategy to help the Iranian people build a legitimate state; no discernable endgame; and little regional American expertise, thanks to the fact that the administration has fired dozens of career diplomats – leaving several strategic posts in the Middle East vacant for over a year – plus, U.S. State Department and FBI employees, many of whom were Middle Eastern, counterterrorism, and counter-intelligence experts.
This entire fiasco makes us look like complete amateurs. Just hours after greenlighting Operation Epic Fury – as he used Mar-a-Lago as a home base for monitoring the unfolding attack on Iran between greeting guests at a charity event – President Trump was also posting updates on social media. These updates, posted on the White House’s official social media accounts, included videos combining real footage from the Iran war intermingled with scenes from the Call of Duty video game and clips from superhero and anime films, as well as movies like Top Gun and Braveheart.
Phrases like “wasted,” “Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue,” and “JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY” were shown over images of explosives, along with plenty of American flags and fire emojis. Audio clips from the video game Mortal Kombat – saying things like “flawless victory” – and song lyrics including “kaboom, kablow” played in the background. One video showed footage of a real missile strike, before cutting to a scene from SpongeBob SquarePants, where SpongeBob asks, “Do you want to see me do it again?” – before cutting to a clip of another strike. Another showed a scene from the video game Grand Theft Auto with the caption: “Ah shit, here we go again.”
We look ridiculous. It’s embarrassing and horrifying in equal measure. You can’t improvise war plans as you go along, which is exactly what happened. A war room is not a fake boardroom filled with D-level celebrities who all read from a pre-written script. This is the real world, where real people can get really hurt… and where real people are the ones who pay for ignorance and incompetence.
And now we are stuck in yet another astronomically expensive quagmire in the Middle East.
When Winston Churchill was young – way before he became Britain’s prime minister – he wrote these brilliant words: “Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the Master of Policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.”
Inevitably, even if we left Iran today, the Trump/Vance administration has unleashed forces that will continue to spill across borders, disrupt energy markets and global trade, and could lead to asymmetric terrorist attack retaliations.
As concerning, the reputational damage this has caused us is immeasurable. The haphazard and irresponsible way this war has been executed has only accelerated the new worries many around the world already had about America’s reliability. Even more people around the world now view the United States as untrustworthy, unpredictable and undependable, as the polls earlier in the chapter revealed. Our influence and legitimacy continue to rapidly erode.
It’s true that by operational standards, the Operation Epic Fury initial military strikes achieved substantial successes. But more than six months in, Iran’s nuclear and ballistic-missile programs have been severely degraded, not destroyed. Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst who is vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute, summed it up nicely for the Wall Street Journal: “The Iranians have shown a remarkable ability to innovate and reconstitute their forces quickly. They are a much more formidable opponent than most Middle East militaries other than the Israelis.”
But what the United States has or has not blown up is beside the point. Of course a withering air campaign of cruise and supersonic ballistic missiles carried out by the best military in the world has had successes. But the least important part of war is blowing things up.
Operational success doesn’t necessarily equal victory. It reminds us of a story U.S. Army Colonel Harry G. Summers Jr. once told about a conversation between him and North Vietnamese Colonel Tu. Colonel Summers: “You know, you never defeated us on the battlefield.” Colonel Tu: “That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.”
… meaning that, while the American military won virtually every major tactical battle against the North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong, those victories meant little because the North Vietnamese faithfully pursued the strategic goal of just surviving the war until – after spending roughly $168 billion (over $1 trillion in today’s dollars) and losing 58,220 American lives – the United States finally just left.
Donald Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth, and congressional Republicans can’t seem to grasp that the Islamic Republic wins this war by doing nothing more than surviving. Their ability to withstand an onslaught from two of the world’s most powerful militaries is the greatest victory they have had since taking power in 1979.
The Trump/Vance administration has now replaced military action with an economic one called “Operation Economic Outcast” (insert: eyeroll emoji) – – which begs the question, why didn’t they just do that in the first place – – but it will likely also fail since Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent named severing Iran’s economic lifelines and pushing it toward global isolation as goals, but failed to articulate how long the campaign will last, what would constitute success, and precisely what conditions Washington would accept as an end state.
Not to mention that the Islamic Republic’s leaders have had experience withstanding American sanctions for decades. In fact, the government, says Ali Madanizadeh, the economy minister, “has been planning to confront U.S. sanctions for a long time and is fully prepared for new sanctions.” He even alluded to a secret two-year plan they have in place for dealing with harsher sanctions.
Plus, as The Wall Street Journal points out, “the experience of Western sanctions and economic pressure on autocracies such as Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and Syria shows the challenges facing Washington in trying to bend Tehran to its will. Indeed, the strongmen ruling such countries have historically used a mix of violence, economic adaptation and political suppression that enables them to withstand economic pain for years, if not decades. Autocratic countries adapt in various ways. Sanctions typically push activity underground, creating flourishing black markets for goods, services and even people. Dictators also use outside pressure to rally their populations, especially among elites.”
In the end, the success of “Operation Economic Outcast” will depend largely on whether the Trump/Vance administration can convince Iran’s main trade partners – above all China, but also countries such as Turkey, Iraq and Russia – to join. This looks to be easier said than done. Beijing, which buys the overwhelming majority of Iran’s oil exports and has long maintained economic ties with Tehran despite U.S. sanctions, has already denounced the new measures and said it would “take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard its own rights and interests.”
Iran is already warning Gulf states against participating in the new sanctions campaign. Its new national security chief, Mohsen Rezaei, has threatened the interests of Gulf states if they join the American pressure campaign and warned that Tehran would seek to prevent “even a single drop of oil” from leaving the Persian Gulf. He also said that any country that becomes a partner in imposing economic restrictions on Iran would be regarded as an enemy.
Even though the objectives for why we went to war have been a constant moving target – they at times have included destroying Iran’s military capability; preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon; breaking its regional proxies; protecting the Strait of Hormuz; protecting the Iranian people; creating an opening for regime change; “getting back” at them for trying to “kill” Donald Trump; Iran’s past transgressions against America; and even achieving “world peace” in general – after almost seven months of bombastic threats, scorched-earth bombing, whipsawed markets, panicked allies, and widespread civilian terror, nothing has been accomplished. Literally nothing.
In fact, in many ways Iran now has more advantages than it had before the conflict began. Two months before the war started, the leaders of Iran – headed by an 86-year-old leader with major health issues – were struggling to contain one of the most perilous moments of their 47-year rule as their economy tanked and citizens rebelled.
Two months after the war started, Iran had learned they had the power to inflict substantial global economic pain by weaponizing the Strait of Hormuz – which is more leverage than their nuclear program ever was – and the same people who had been rising against them were forming human chains around infrastructure that support civilian life, waving Iranian flags and holding up banners.
On September 4, 2026, The New York Times reported that “Iran has grown more confident in its ability to attack targets in the Middle East and appears determined to continue the conflict for months to frustrate the United States, according to U.S. intelligence reports in recent weeks.”
“The intelligence reports, according to people who have read them, suggest that Iran’s hardline government might be contemplating a significant escalation. Iran has emerged from months of the on-again, off-again war with a far better understanding of its military strengths and is more sure of its capabilities, according to officials briefed on the intelligence.”
The article continues: “U.S. officials also believe that Iran-linked hackers were most likely responsible for cyberattacks on more than 100 water systems throughout the United States in late July. Though there were no indications any system was degraded in a way that made water unsafe to drink, the attacks in some cases led to disruptions that required manual overrides and precautionary boil-water advisories.” < Naturally, the president of the United States blamed Minnesota Democratic governor Tim Walz for the cyberattack on his state’s own water systems – without an ounce of evidence, of course. >
Despite President Trump’s absurd claim that there has been regime change in Iran – – “We’re dealing with a much different regime than before; we’re dealing with different people. They’re smarter, they’re sharper, far less radical. We have regime change.” – – the Iranian regime is not only unchanged but more hard-lined and emboldened.
The new leaders – including the newly appointed supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, son of Ali – are considered by experts to be particularly close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), reinforcing the growing influence of Iran’s security establishment over the country’s leadership. And unsurprisingly, the Iranian leaders are even angrier and more resentful than they were before the United States and Israel – in the case of Mojtaba Khamenei – killed his father, mother, wife, at least one of his sons, his sister, her husband, and their young daughter.
In fact, The New York Times reports that “American intelligence agencies believe that Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, is far more interested than his father and predecessor in pursuing a nuclear weapon, according to officials briefed on the assessments. Ayatollah Khamenei’s father, who was killed at the start of the war in an Israeli attack aided by U.S. intelligence, had sworn off developing a nuclear weapon. While American officials long asserted that Iran wanted to be capable of building a nuclear weapon, many believed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s hesitancy was genuine.”
“U.S. intelligence agencies believe that Mojtaba Khamenei and the harder-line government that emerged after the United States and Israel killed many of Iran’s previous leaders have ambitions to develop advanced nuclear weaponry… If the U.S.-Israeli war has made Tehran more, rather than less, likely to pursue a nuclear weapon, it would amount to one more grave consequence of the killing of the supreme leader and the steps toward regime change the Trump administration initially pursued.”
The fact that the Iranian government is still in place and that Iran’s chain of command is still functioning should be no surprise to anyone who bothered to study Iran before bombing them, because its political and military systems contain layered and overlapping centers of authority, along with constitutional and institutional mechanisms designed to preserve continuity after the death or incapacitation of senior leaders. As a result, removing individual officials – even those at the very top – does not necessarily dismantle the system itself.
This tracks with a classified report by the National Intelligence Council – completed about a week before the U.S. and Israel launched their 2026 attacks and was reported on by multiple news outlets – which concluded that even a large-scale military assault on the country would be unlikely to topple its theocratic government, even if Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in a U.S.-led military operation.