So the OP says it “seems like all the plot points coming together for an epic tale of utter humiliaton on the world stage” and the thread title says we’re about to “go into a foreign policy death spiral”. What would that look like? What indicators should we be watching to be able to look back in a year or two and say, “yup, the OP really nailed it”? Does USA get kicked out of NATO? Something less dramatic / definitive? What?
How about this? Trump drums up a war against Iran on even weaker reasons than the war against Iraq, and just about everyone else in the world comes down on Iran’s side.
Trump realizes that there’s no point in the United States unilaterally imposing sanctions against Iran if other countries are willing to work with Iran. So Trump belatedly calls on other countries to join in with American sanctions. And those other countries say no because they see that Trump’s policies are incoherent.
Okay, that’s a good start, what does “comes down on Iran’s side” look like? Strongly-worded letters? Joining their Iranian brothers in taking up arms against the wicked imperialist Americans? Something in between? Little Nemo suggested they might blow off sanctions. Perhaps ceasing international military exercises with the US military? F-35 sales plummet? They revoke American visas? Kick us out of military bases in their territory?
Followed by global sanctions, freezing of U.S. assets overseas, widespread boycotts of U.S. exports and large-scale disinvestment. That’s what happens when you’re the bad actor.
If those things don’t happen (and I think they’re exceedingly unlikely to happen), will it be safe to conclude that the OP was wrong and President Trump is not a bad actor?
A little of column A, and a little of Column B.
Really, any action that we take, no matter how small, is a huge slap in the face to US prestige in the world. The US has had some problems post-9/11, with going a bit over the top, but in general, their traditional allies still gave them the benefit of the doubt, and assumed honest intent, even if we disagreed with some details of US policy. But in less than two years, Trump has trashed all that.
And even a small movement, the “Strongly-worded letters” you mention, might be just the thin edge of the wedge that starts driving the US and the rest of the world apart.
Yes, if you don’t immediately beat the crap out of the biggest bully on the block, you obvious don’t think he’s a bully.
Even with all the crap Trump has pulled, the US is still the dominant power in the world, and even if the rest of us all immediately agreed to start isolating them, it would take years, probably decades, to do that. You don’t undo 80 years of political, military and economic connections overnight. Well, I suppose we could, at the cost of an economic disaster that would make the Great Depression look like Boom Times.
But once that process starts, it will also be hard to stop. Given a decade or two of people disengaging from the US, and you may come to regret letting Trump try to push everyone around.
I agree that they’re highly unlikely, because I can’t believe even the toadiest of Trump’s coterie will let him launch an unprovoked war against Iran. But if he does, the U.S. (not just Trump) will be the “bad actor,” and we will all suffer the consequences.
So no, those things not happening does not in any way vindicate Trump’s foreign policy performance so far.
I’m still having a hard time imagining a casus belli beyond them damaging oil tankers, and it would seem to me that the appropriate and proportional response might be to hit Iranian Navy facilities along the coast, along with any supporting infrastructure, airfields within range, and surface-to-air missile sites and radars within range of the installations.
Anything else seems like pointless escalation- it would be highly dumb to actually invade Iran. There’s not an opposition party we’re trying to prop up, there’s not a pretender to the throne, or anything like that. We’d be invading to do what exactly?
While I suspect the actual warfighting segment would play out similarly to the fighting vs. the Iraqi Army, we’d be in a worse position than in Iraq afterward, because instead of a power vacuum and subsequent insurgency, we’d be facing an even more pissed off populace who would be more united than the Iraqis were post-Hussein.
So I imagine it would be somewhere along the lines of an Operation Praying Mantis combined with fairly extensive air strikes on land. Possibly with punitive type strikes further north.
Let’s hypothesize momentarily that later this week President Trump has just had enough. Perhaps it was one mean tweet too many, or the beady little eyes of the spokesperson on TV, but for whatever unjustified reason you want to imagine, President Trump decides, “that’s it, we’re doing this” and orders the USAF and USN to bomb the IRGC out of existence. A massive bombing campaign ensues. What does the rest of the world do?
Do you think it will be “Followed by global sanctions, freezing of U.S. assets overseas, widespread boycotts of U.S. exports and large-scale disinvestment”? I don’t think that’s likely, even if the hypothesized military action doesn’t have the EU’s seal of approval. Do you though?
In general, I think you’re right (about an air sea war rather than a ground invasion), but the line “Anything else seems like pointless escalation” struck me as odd. If you’re going to be bombing bases and military targets, you might as well bomb their known nuclear facilities too, and set their program back a bit, right?
I don’t think the world would sit idly by if we launched a completely unprovoked attack on Iran. It’s beyond my powers of projection to know if all the consequences I mentioned would actually happen, but I believe there would be painful consequences – and furthermore, I believe we would deserve them.
I think there’s a massive excluded middle between “sit idly by” and “global sanctions, freezing of U.S. assets overseas, widespread boycotts of U.S. exports and large-scale disinvestment”. I don’t expect they’d all collectively do nothing, but neither do I expect their action would take the form of sanctions, seizures, boycotts, and divestment. I think it’d be something between those two extremes, probably more towards the milder side, at least for the countries that matter.
Refusal to participate in Trump’s bullshit embargoes, leaving Iran economically better off than they were before Trump started beating his flabby chest.
Refusal to support U.S. military by denying to the U.S. bases from which to stage attacks. (Staging including any transport operations.)
Withdrawal of support, including exchange of intelligence, with the U.S. in what would be a more legitimate opposition to Iran’s idiotic war against Israel.
Eventually, refusal to join with U.S. on any joint operations, anywhere, on the grounds that the U.S. has become the newest rogue/bully nation.
Possibly more support for Putin and China in all sorts of international situations.
All so that Trump and Bolton can feel like they are strong.
Stick to the actual topic and leave personal shots to The BBQ Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
And that right there highlights exactly how fucking stupid US policy under Trump has become.
If you wanted to “set their program back a bit”, you should have stayed in the Iran nuclear deal that was actually working to keep their program in check. Every single observer except That Idiot Donald Trump and his enablers said that the program was working. You threw that all away over a bullshit talking point you used to score points against the Democrats.
When Iran re-starts their nuclear program, perhaps with a bit of help from North Korea, they’ll be completely justified, and you’ll have only yourselves to blame for it.
The nuclear deal ship has sailed. The war with Iran one has not yet left the dock. But if it does, your plan would be … what exactly? Bomb them a bunch, sink their “navy”, really piss them off, but leave them with intact nuclear enrichment facilities? That strikes me as a special kind of stupid.
I don’t think the President has the authority to order that bombing. Not like that stopped either Clinton, Obama, or Trump before. But just because they flouted the War Powers Resolution doesn’t mean Trump should.
~Max
“My plan” would be *don’t start a stupid fucking war for no reason in the first place. *
“Not responsible for advice not taken”. You voted for this fucking idiot, it’s on you what happens. How about you focus on what you should do, instead if what you think I should do?
Sure, I agree, we shouldn’t start wars “for no reason”. If, however, we find ourselves in a war, which is the scenario I was discussing when you took issue with my post, don’t you think it would make sense, at that point, to damage their nuclear infrastructure too? Or do you still think it would be “fucking stupid”?