A post was merged into an existing topic: Speculation for and/or Consequences to the US and Elsewhere for Engaging in the Bombing of Iran and Other Targets
Ace reporters Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman get the inside scoop on the OP. In fact they are prepping a book that covers the subject: “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump”. Gifted
It walks through the thin decision making process which, using the framework of Daniel Kahneman, involves a President who can think fast (intuitively) but not slow and methodically. Readers of the above article should do so critically. Rubio helpfully distinguished between destroying Iran’s missile program (do-able they thought, which is partly true, partly false, which means that Trump only absorbed the first part) and regime change (which Rubio termed as bullshit). Note that consequences, i.e. the blocking of the Strait, received short shrift.
Proper war policy involves getting a little bit granular. Trump sees things not from 30,000 feet, but rather satellite height. He doesn’t do memos. GW Bush’s decision making process was highly problematic, but I don’t think he would have started an Iran War without considering things that any casual viewer of CNN would. Here is a partial list of incidents regarding the Straits of Hormuz from wikipedia. The full list goes back decades.
U.S.–Iran disputes, threats to close the Strait
I say a war like this can’t occur without a sidelining of expert opinion. Which is indeed what happened, very much connected with the cognitive limitations of the President and the appointment of supine courtiers. The Republican business class and political class - the gatekeepers - failed us.