Trump can't afford to go to war with Iran

the noise of The war drums increasingly louder in Washington: A Marine strike group the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln is located in the Red sea, B-52 long-range bombers are the same if in the Region, on Wednesday it became known that the US Aussenamt personnel from the Embassy in Baghdad and the U.S. Consulate in the Kurdish city of Erbil for security reasons, would like to pull it off.

a military confrontation in Washington with Iran? Bluffing the Trump Administration, or the President wishes to take, under the pressure of the hard-liners in our own ranks, in fact, military action against Tehran? Such a decision would be the biggest political miscalculation since the US Intervention in Iraq, which is considered to date the most serious errors of American foreign policy in this century follow.

memories of 2013 will be awake

So some of it is reminiscent of the dramatic months before the beginning of the war in March 2003: relying on secret information now unspecified threats will be reported, which could justify an American response. In 2002, the Neocons invented to President George W. Bush from the Iraq of hazards that did not exist. You billowed and verdonnerte the CIA for the selective Interpretation of findings.

Whether uranium from Niger, al-Qaeda's presence in Iraq, Saddam's weapons of mass destruction: The statements of Washington were all far-fetched. They served the purpose, to provide reasons for War and to justify an Intervention in Iraq.

The history likes to repeat itself occasionally, a military engagement of the United States with the Iranian Ayatollahs would be neither tragedy nor Farce, but a politically suicidal task for Donald Trump . George W. Bush knew the Public 2003: 9/11 was alive in the American consciousness, to the unconventional war in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in 2001 and 2002, a "traditional" war with tanks and divisions.

The war fever recognized at the time Congress

Many media at home and abroad – in Switzerland, the NZZ, as well as the "world week" – who fell for the Propaganda of the Bush administration. And in the United States, a war broke out in fever, which also affected the initially hesitant Congress. U.S. allies in Europe, reported that while skepticism, several of them followed the Texan "war President" in his quixotisches adventure. It cost hundreds of thousands of people, selling millions and catapulted Iraq into Tehran's Orbit.

Donald Trump is in a hardly comparable Situation: the falcons as his security adviser John Bolton, the confrontational foreign Minister Mike Pompeo, as well as the chief of a military action against Tehran competent Central command, General Kenneth McKenzie would have to lead a war for a President who a majority of Americans distrusted.

Could not build George W. Bush in the Winter of 2002/2003, high approval rates, so Trump can. And Bush had a fairly United Nation, Trump ruled a divided and polarized country.

senators criticize the flow of information

Only in the case of a clearly demonstrable Iranian Aggression, the President may hope, therefore, that the consent of the Governed to a war against Tehran. And the Congress had been folded in 2002, so he will not do so in 2019. Already the dam of both parties values on Wednesday senators about the lack of Information about the alleged threat posed by Tehran. None of the democratic presidential candidates would approve also of military action against Tehran is not one.

As unforgettable remains, what political damage to Hillary Clinton suffered because of their approval of Bush's war in Iraq. This is also why they lost the 2008 nomination for the democratic presidential nomination. US media give Trump is also not a carte Blanche for military action against Iran. On the contrary, The President and his advisors would have to let unpleasant questions like, hardly supported the liberal media, Trump at one of his instigated the war.

so Why is the President, hard-liners such as Bolton and McKenzie, as well as warmongering US should give in to allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia, and the hoped-for escalation in the Middle East operate? Trump's political fate would be sealed, his re-election unlikely. The economy would collapse, the stock markets implode. And Donald Trump would have been deprived of his best arguments for an electoral victory in 2020.

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 16.05.2019, 10:44 PM