Trump Just Made a Shocking Admission About His Iran War

"I guess, the worst case would be we do this and somebody takes over who's as bad as the previous person-right? That could happen. Of course, it is always a risk of war that it spawns a world more treacherous than before-and if war is forced upon us, if we have to wage it in self-defense or some other urgent interest, that might be a risk worth taking. But this war is a war of choice."

"Military officers and intelligence officials have said that Iran posed no imminent threat-contrary to Trump's initial claims. Indeed, in a letter to Congress on Monday justifying the war, Trump himself makes no such assertion. Therefore, if it seemed a fair possibility that war would displace the current Iranian regime with leaders who are worse, then going to war anyway was a bad move."

"Trump and his top advisers discussed who might rise to power if the current regime were toppled. Analysts presented a few possibilities: the Revolutionary Guard, the elite military unit that is at least as thuggish and anti-Western as the current leaders; a more moderate, pragmatic faction of the Guard; or perhaps no one in particular, just chaos and civil war."

President Trump's approach to military action against Iran reveals fundamental strategic flaws. When questioned about worst-case scenarios, Trump acknowledged the possibility of worse leaders replacing current Iranian leadership, contradicting responsible war justification. Military officers and intelligence officials confirmed Iran posed no imminent threat, contrary to Trump's initial claims. Trump's own congressional letter avoided asserting an imminent threat. Since this represents a war of choice rather than defensive necessity, the acknowledged risk of destabilizing outcomes makes the decision problematic. Reports indicate Trump and advisers discussed potential successors, including the Revolutionary Guard or chaos, yet proceeded despite these concerning possibilities.

Read at Slate Magazine