No attack on Iran—but Trump orders new sanctions
Trump announces new Iran sanctions:
Today’s action follows a series of aggressive behaviors by the Iranian regime in recent weeks including shooting down a U.S. drone,” the president said in the Oval Office, calling Khamenei “responsible for the hostile conduct of the regime.”
The Treasury Department, in a news release, said “any foreign financial institution that knowingly facilitates a significant financial transaction for entities designated under this Executive Order could be cut off from the U.S. financial system.”
Amid the newly announced sanctions, Fox News has confirmed that the U.S. military also carried out a cyberattack against Iran last Thursday even as the president nixed plans for airstrikes in response to the downing of an American drone.
Sources said U.S. Cyber Command launched the cyberattack targeting the Iranian intelligence and radar installations used to down the U.S. Navy drone last week.
Seems to me to be a well-calibrated response.
One of the troubles with regimes such as Iran is that much of the time sanctions only hurt the people rather than helping to topple the government. Iran’s leaders have a very firm grip despite whatever suffering goes on as a result of sanctions, and unless and until the military and elements such as the Revolutionary Guard turn on those leaders, it’s hard to be optimistic:
Whereas the Islamic Republic of Iran Army defends Iran’s borders and maintains internal order, according to the Iranian constitution, the Revolutionary Guard (pasdaran) is intended to protect the country’s Islamic republic system. The Revolutionary Guards state that their role in protecting the Islamic system is preventing foreign interference as well as coups by the military or “deviant movements”.
The Revolutionary Guards have roughly 125,000 military personnel including ground, aerospace and naval forces. Its naval forces are now the primary forces tasked with operational control of the Persian Gulf. It also controls the paramilitary Basij militia which has about 90,000 active personnel. Its media arm is Sepah News.
Since its origin as an ideologically driven militia, the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution has taken a greater role in nearly every aspect of Iranian society.
If you Google the phrase “could sanctions really hurt iran,” you get a host of articles in the MSM and elsewhere saying “they really just hurt the people.” And no doubt they do hurt the people. But I wouldn’t trust the WaPo, the NY Times, CNN, Newsweek, and all the rest on that list to give me the full picture or even close to it.
Here’s a different point of view, from National Review:
The executive order, which expands upon existing sanctions that have effectively deprived Iran of oil-export revenue, freezes the assets of officials serving at the highest levels of the Iranian government, including those assets held by the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini…
…Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin dismissed the suggestion that the latest round of sanctions was “symbolic,” pointing out that order will effectively “lock up tens of billions of dollars” previously held by the most influential people in Iranian government.
And this:
America’s sanctions are hitting Iran hard. Its economy is in shambles. Substantial economic losses are far more painful to the Mullahs than the loss of a missile battery, a radar station, or even 150 troops.
Right now, Iran feels pain while the United States does not…
In fact, we have such a substantial advantage that Iran may calculate that it can obtain American concessions only if it makes the American people feel a degree of anxiety and uncertainty. American casualties can cause such anxiety. Economic disruption can cause such uncertainty. We can’t be sure that Iran won’t lash out again.
I make no pretense of believing that there is a clear, risk-free path of confronting (or engaging with) Iran. It’s a hostile regional power full of enemies who are consumed with jihadist zeal. It has engaged in a long, low-intensity war against the United States, and it has proven that it will endure incalculable hardship to preserve its revolution and maintain its enmity. We are their “Great Satan,” and there is no obvious solution to their anti-American resistance.
Unless circumstances materially change, Iran’s harassment should not be permitted to provoke an escalation. At the same time, however, Iran has to know that it ultimately faces the same risks that it faced in 1988 — when, at the height of the so-called “tanker war,” the mining of an American ship led to a crushing American response that sank or crippled a significant portion of the Iranian navy.
The problem with dealing with Iran is Iran. Anyone who pretends to know for certain what the best course of action would be is fooling him/herself, IMHO. But it seems to me that the middle course we’re taking here is best for now.
One of the major problems is that Europe is eager to do business with Iran. Another is that, for the threat of attacks and/or war to be credible, Iran must believe it to be credible, and for quite some time it has seemed that the US has no stomach for such a thing except in a very limited manner.
Michael Doran has a new piece in Mosaic magazine explaining his view of Iran’s aims. I’d dearly like to read it, but my “three articles free” limit is invoked, so no go. I pass the commendation on to those who may find an interest there.
“What Iran Is Really Up To”
https://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/politics-current-affairs/2019/06/what-iran-is-really-up-to
There are far too many X-factors in Islamic totalitarian countries like Iran to ever believe a shooting war is the best option. If the US can economically & militarily isolate Iran (or any of the malicious actors in the ME) then step away from the mess; and convince those who claim to be our allies to join in, I’m for that.
Why not just Gaddafy them and move on? Iran was offered JCPOA+palettes of money for partial disclosure, has not aborted their efforts to develop nuclear weapons, and has progressed State-backed international terrorism.
Personally, I blame Jimmy Carter for allowing Iran to hold your diplomats as hostages for 444 days. Carter should have given the mullahs 48 hours to bring the hostages to the Terahn airport where they would be collected by the USMC accompanied by a fleet of B-52s with instructions to reduce Qom to rubble should they fail to comply. But I must be an anti-globalist.
Kurt Schlichter has an excellent article on Trump dodging the ambush laid by Iran, the Democrats and the Fredocons:
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/06/24/trump-dodged-an-ambush-by-avoiding-war-with-iran-n2548787
DIME is the best strategy, i.e., use all the tools available (diplomatic, information, military and economic).
And why shed American blood to protect oil shipments to China?
Richard Fernandez write: https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/our-tricky-peace/
Some say “erratic”. I say nimble genius.
anyone who were numb skulled enough to not see through that the deliberated destruction of the Droid was a setup designed by Iran in request of Xi JinPing with the intention to incite an disproportional response from the US and President Trump ahead of the G20 submit should not be commenting on politics.
The purpose of course was for China to gain the moral high ground and thus the resulting advantages over the US and dwindling America’s supports around the world by portray the US as the imperialistic murderer in the subsequent negotiation involving the Trade War. Anyone who tried to egg the President into an over reacting attack that would put America in a disadvantage should be fired and have their advises ignored for eternity.
either they were morons who shouldn’t be advising the President or they were secret assets of Iran or China.
sdferr on June 24, 2019 at 3:26 pm said:
Michael Doran has a new piece in Mosaic magazine explaining his view of Iran’s aims.
* * *
Excellent analysis of the situation so far as I can tell from the Armchair.
I’ll add a couple from J. E. Dyer to the mix.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/06/18/iran-continues-escalation-rocket-attacks-in-iraq-a-political-ultimatum/
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/06/22/on-iran-trumps-unready-government-does-the-right-thing/
parker on June 24, 2019 at 4:14 pm said:
Personally, I blame Jimmy Carter for allowing Iran to hold your diplomats as hostages for 444 days.
* * *
Not the only time we failed to respond as the “strong horse” to Iranian acts of war.
Aesopfan,
Marine barracks in Lebanon. Remember it well.
n.n.,
Overthrowing Gaddfy was stupid. He was trying to make nice with the West. It created the slaughter at Benghazi and created a failed state that allowed a flood of ‘refugees’ to invade Europe, urged on by Merkel.
The NWO leaders of the West have actively encouraged an invasion of our sovereignty. Just look to the southern border. Now people from the failed states are demanding asylum. We are at war although we fail to acknowledge it.
“The problem with dealing with Iran is Iran. Anyone who pretends to know for certain what the best course of action would be is fooling him/herself, IMHO.”
The problem with dealing with Iran is the American Left.
Those in touch with reality will, sooner or later, reach the conclusion that there is only one way to deal with religious fanatics.
No amount of sanctions is going to dissuade Iran’s leadership from its pursuit of nuclear ICBM weapons capability and once they have them… it will be the ‘mother of all game changers’.
There’s only one way to deal with a rabid dog.
The loss of American cities to terrorist WMD attacks may change some minds and finally achieve the political consensus needed.
Dave,
Labeling those who have a different take than you on the issue as “numb skulled” is insulting and counter-productive. China may have been involved but may not have been. I do think it likely that Iran has reassured Xi that they will do nothing that would negatively affect China.
Only the morally obtuse imagine that China can ever validly hold the moral high ground. It’s not a case of we need our allies, it’s a case of they needing America because we’re the only force capable of keeping the Russian bear, the Chinese Dragon and the Islamic sword from their door. They can and do pretend otherwise but count on it; in their heart of hearts they know they need America.
To paraphrase; ‘They don’t want the truth because deep down in places they don’t talk about at parties, they want America on that wall — they need America on that wall…’
Geoffrey:
We lost any moral superiority when we kill 150 people in minimum to retaliate an incident that results in no death. Also will 150 the number Of causalities Iran reports, they will make up any numbers like hamas love to do, one thousand, 10 thousands, who knows, and our liberal media will be happy to corroborate with the number and help our enemies slap the hitler label or mass murderer on trump. Anyone who hastily and either knowingly and unknowingly leading the president into a trap that could ruin his political career while leading us into another dawned out war that will for certain bankrupt America deserves to be called a moron. Iran obviously is begging and provoking for a war, they are obviously in the blink of economic collapse because president’s sanctions are working and in of doing something, advising the president to give exactly what the enemies are begging for is stupid.
Dave,
With all respect, I happen to agree shooting down the drone was not sufficient reason to attack Iranian installations. However, I agree with GB. It is long past time we dropped the hammer down on the mullahs. I will not bore you with the history of the mullah’s trangressions against the norms of international relations. Let’s begin witth taking our embassy in 1979 and holding our diplomats hostage for 444 days. The mullahs are not people one can negotiate with, they respect only cold hearted violence.
Sooner or later it will be neccessary to burn them down, because they will not back down without facing death square in their cold hearted faces. Should have been done 40 years ago.
Dave,
Apparently, you forget the many more Americans that the Iranians have killed since 1979. Nor is the drone’s destruction a case of Americans being killed, it’s a case of an act of war because it occurred over international waters in international air space. An act of war that follows numerous acts of war since 1979.
Iran lies, the media lies. Anyone who believes them is a fool. You will accomplish little worthwhile by catering to fools.
Our enemies have already pasted the label of Hitler on Trump. Accusations of being a mass murderer would be easily refuted and the media crying “mass murderer!” would further drive down their poll numbers.
I guess after the Iranians sink one of our ships with mines… it then won’t be a ‘trap’? News flash! Trump is not a politician and his reelection in 2020 will have nothing to do with political calculation by his supporters. Look at the democrat field, no one who voted for Trump in 2016 is going to vote for any of those clowns.
If Trump loses in 2020 it will be because of massive voter fraud, plain and simple. The dems are the party of anti-semitism, lawlessness, welfare for criminal aliens and infanticide. Those are albatrosses they cannot escape because they refuse to rein in their nutjobs and in that refusal, they own those positions.
Trump will not be drawn into a war certain to bankrupt America. Because there’s no need for boots on the ground. Air strikes using cruise missiles can eliminate Iran’s military and oil export facilities. MOABs can take out Iran’s centrifuges that process uranium. The target must be Iran’s logistical capabilities not its military personnel.
Yes even so, hundreds even thousands of Iranians will die and that is the price the Iranian people have chosen to pay in allowing fanatics to gain control of their nation. The Mullahs have called the tune and they and the Iranian people who placed them in power have to pay the piper.
When simple disagreement arises, careful who you call a moron. Because if what they say is arguably valid, then ironically you reveal yourself to be engaging in moronic behavior.
I don’t agree that Iran’s actions in the Strait prove that they’re begging for a war they know they’ll lose. I do think they’re sending Trump a message; that he’d better back off (like every other Pres) or they’ll make passage through the Strait so expensive that it will create chaos in the global economy. It’s a bluff. A ‘check’ they can’t cash but they’re betting that Trump will fold, as they believe his political fortunes rest upon a robust economy. And the purpose of that bluff has to be delaying any intervention in their pursuit of nukes until its too late.
Quite frankly, I think it’s shortsighted to ignore the 800 pound Gorilla in the room, i.e. the Iranian fanatical pursuit of nukes. Everything they do vis a vis America comes down to that goal. To discount it is to IMO make a huge mistake, indeed what may be a fatal one for perhaps millions.
Parker said,
“Personally, I blame Jimmy Carter…”
Yeah, I have to agree with that. In fact I blame him for a lot of things, including for why the U.S. is still saddled with the archaic and awkward Imperial System of Measurements.
But that doesn’t address the problem of what should be done now.
Typically, the people who make the argument that sanctions only harm citizens of belligerent countries and not their governments are those who would be even more aghast at the proposal of military action. Yet, in their objection, they are utterly devoid of counterproposals.
When pressed for a proposed course of action, their answer is usually “talks” or the equivalent of burying our heads in the sand.
Such people do not understand that successful negotiations derive from the leverage that sanctions or the threat of military force gives to the negotiators.
“Some say “erratic”. I say nimble genius.” I agree. Trump really looks like erratic, but in essence he is a nimble genius. Appearances can be false, and the best winning trick by Trump is to always look less formidable foe than he actually is. His public persona is a simpleton, which produces aura of sincerity and spontaneous, unprepared speech, but it is always very well prepared, with apt labels that stick, easy-to-remember slogans and well calculated messages resonating with the target audiences. That is how he won the election by the ultimate deception of being unelectable.
Roy,
There no argument as far as I am concerned. It starts with a massive display of death and destruction from above where the rubble becomes dust. People die everyday. I want the enemies of my grandchildren to die asap. Period.
Sergay,
Spot on, 5 in the bull’s eye.
Remember how Gandhi described his own path to victory? “First, they laugh at you. Then they ignore you. Then they struggle with you. Then you win.” Trump can say the same about himself. The trick is always to be a one step ahead of the opponent, that is, inside of his OODA loop. Most of the ordinary politicians always try to look bigger and more competent than they actually are. But Trump is not an ordinary politician, and he is doing just the opposite. It is like a chess grandmaster who put on the air of being an amateur when sitting to the game. And when the opponent at last sees the deception, the game is already lost.
Dave,,,:”We lost any moral superiority when we kill 150 people in minimum to retaliate an incident that results in no death.:
The German incursion into the Rhineland in 1936 resulted in no deaths. French/British military action in response would probably have killed somewhere around 150 people or maybe up to a few thousand. It would also have resulted in a German withdrawal from the Rhineland and the very likely fall of the Nazi regime.
Would Britain and France have lost moral authority by responding?
Dave–it seems to me that when people start to talk about things like “occupying the moral high ground,” the discussion is usually about how someone or, say, the U.S. should take some action, or refrain from taking some action, all to win the approval of, say, the “International Community,” or of the UN, which entities have apparently convinced themselves that they are our moral betters, that they exist on a higher moral plane; that they are simply possessed of a superior and higher moral vision than us grubby Americans.
I couldn’t care less about winning the approval of the UN or of the the illusory “International Community”–whoever they are–who, from what I have observed over the years, have turned their backs to all sorts of horrific events and developments around the world when it suited them, and who would gladly see the U.S. eliminated as a force in the World.
The U.S. should do what is in the best interests of the U.S. as, realistically speaking, all other countries do, however disguised as, or they want to tell themselves is, supposedly some altruistic, beneficent, and/or moral action.
The world is a rough place, and the saying by England’s Lord Palmerston about how “England has no eternal friends, England has no perpetual enemies, England has only eternal and perpetual interests,” is the same situation that all nations face, and, “keeping it real,” is unfortunately true.