34 Comments
User's avatar
Susan Sullivan's avatar

I agree. This is a war fighting to save the free world!

Irwin Weiss's avatar

"I am still astounded by the political critique of this war, which for many boils down to a simplistic equation: I dislike Trump or Netanyahu, therefore I oppose the war. "

I totally agree with you. I can't stand Trump for a bunch of reasons. But, here he is right and I support the war effort.

People have lost their ability to think critically. People react reflexively, as you state, like a knee struck by the physician's hammer. But, geopolitical thinking is more complicated than a reflex.

EFS's avatar

I can't speak for anyone but myself; I do support the war with Iran, but I do not support Donald Trump. His administration has ignored our Constitution, directly caused the maiming of both American citizens and legal immigrants, and shamelessly supported one of our historical adversaries.

I think it is dangerous to assume that there is any pure motive in his actions. That said, I am pleased that the people of Iran are being supported, and that Israel is not fighting this battle alone.

If that's confusing, it's because these are confusing times.

Alison's avatar

I think you're the one who is confused. Donald Trump has done more for the American people and the world during his short time in office than all the American presidents in recent history. What exactly is so bad about him?

Stephen F Bergen's avatar

Trump has divided Americans more than any President in American history. A megalomaniac and convicted felon has no business being our President. Whatever he did over his 5 year stint as President so far was to enrich his and his families pockets and to he'll with ordinary Americans. Republicans need to wake up and start holding Trump accountable. History will show that Trump ranks as our nation's worst president.

That all being said, the Iranian regime needs to be destroyed, but Trump, by allowing his ego to start this war, and it is a war, lost his opportunity to demonstrate that he could have been seen and supported globally as a leader. He lost that war with America and the world.

John Galt III's avatar

Wow, Tucker Carlson just showed up here.

Go away.

EFS's avatar

You are not required to agree with me. I think my comment was clear, and I don't feel compelled to elaborate.

John Galt III's avatar

Of course you don't wish to elaborate, because what you said was nonsense.

Stephen F Bergen's avatar

You are 110% right. Had Trumpster gone to Congress, followed the law and Constitution, the support and attitude of the American people would be behind him. He missed his opportunity to demonstrate real leadership. He just wanted to reinforce his ego and belief he is a King. Bad for him, bad for America, bad for Global democracy.

John Galt III's avatar

So you seriously think Kamala Harris would give a damn if Israel was nuked by Iran?

You are delusional.

John Galt III's avatar

"His administration has ignored our Constitution"

The only presidents who have hated the constitution are Democrats. Stop sounding like AOC and Nancy Pelosi.

John Galt III's avatar

Jerusalem and Tel Aviv vs. Tehran

Israel is bombed by Iran with missiles and drones and the people wisely go into shelters as Iran's missiles are meant to kill them.

I have now watched dozens of Iranian self-made videos of the bombings of Iran by the American and Israeli Air Forces. It's like a daily and nightly fireworks show for the Iranian people. They know they are safe. They watch the explosions, pan their cameras for more explosions while dancing, laughing, cheering, filming and often eating dinner outside on their high rise patios. It's the craziest thing I think I have ever witnessed.

Liat Kirby's avatar

Indeed, the political critique of this war is astounding. All the questions being put by media to 'experts' and politicians start from the premise of 'international law' and the fact that this is an assault on Iran by the US and Israel. Calls for de-escalation and resuming negotiation. No mention of Iran as a terrorist state; in fact sweeping to one side the fact that their Revolutionary Guards are now considered terrorists officially in many countries, including Australia where I live.

I will say that the Australian government, with its poor track record thus far in regard to Israel and its Jewish community, has actually reminded people that Iran is governed by a terrorist regime that has been an active threat to many countries and killed and oppressed its own people. A short while ago it sent the Iranian ambassador back home, breaking diplomacy connections, but that was only because it was found that Iran had been behind the arson attack on the Adass Synagogue in Melbourne.

I viewed a video yesterday of an Iranian group, holding their flag with the lion depicted, in a city street in Ireland. They were celebrating the death of Khomeini and under enormous abusive attack, verbally, by a crowd of white Irish pro-Palestinian devotees, decked out in their keffiyehs - it was interesting to observe that many of these useful idiots were older, white-haired men and women, so it's not only the young.

That says it all, really. We live in a world where common sense and reality are becoming non-existent, except to a minority, and the table has been turned on history, facts on the ground, ethics and morality as we once knew it.

John Galt III's avatar

Great comment and rational as well.

Steve S's avatar

This one is easy for me, I support Trump and support America's leadership in this war, with Israel providing incredible support and partnership.

Dawn's avatar

Very well done Sir! I hope the team of Israel and the US will continue to be successful and keep the rest of the world safe from this evil regime!💥✝️💕🇮🇱🇺🇸🙏😺

Freedom Lover's avatar

I think that it is already perfectly clear that the "international system." Has agreed to tolerate the actions of the Mullahs and every other bad actor in the world. In short the "international system" operates to shield monsters and harm their victims. It is long past time that the walking corpse of "the international system" be buried and something new created that actually helps mankind rather than harms it.

Mr. Ala's avatar

Obviously this is the Mullahs’ War.

Martin Sinkoff's avatar

עם ישראל חי! Thank you Josh. חג פסח שמח! ⭐

Olaf's avatar

It’s the EPSTEIN WAR

ryan's avatar

Anti Americanism and Israelophobia are so entrenched in msm and in academia that it is the default position. Add to that the personal loathing people feel for Trump and Netanyahu. The result is the fawning obituaries for Khameini. Same as Baghdadi and Solemeini. The murder of civilians by the Tehran ganster regime should have the "progressives" in the streets....instead a memorial was held for Khameini in Wash Sq Park....out numbered for a change by the Iranians celebrating the take down of that murderous regime. And "the love of my life" racist mayor 's wife is noteworthy for having celebrated Oct. 7th. In light of this disgusting inversion I don't have much to add to your analysis. For me unlike WWII this is not TV newsreels or text books or family memories.....I've live through all of this. Sirens in Tel Aviv on the TV....my friend running to her bomb shelter

Dan Henry's avatar

Nothing more tiresome than the endless hasbara propaganda - a tsunami of mendacity.

Most quantified research that distinguishes between Sunni and Shia “Islamist” or jihadist groups finds that the overwhelming majority of such attacks and deaths over the past several decades are attributable to Sunni groups, not Shia groups.

If you look at the deadliest Islamist groups since 1979 in one comprehensive study, the top five are the Taliban, Islamic State, Boko Haram, Al‑Shabaab, and al‑Qaeda; all five are Sunni, and together they are credited with over 80% of victims of Islamist terrorism in that dataset.

https://www.fondapol.org/en/study/islamist-terrorist-attacks-in-the-world-1979-2024/

Harvey Tessler's avatar

To claim that this war, in part, stems from the original Iran nuclear deal assumes a lot of hypotheticals. It’s more straightforward to say that Trump ending that deal, removing China n Russia from the deal, removing any inspections from Iran’s nuclear activities led directly to Iran’s revitalizing their nuclear capabilities… and thus fulfilling every US President’s promise to never allow Iran a nuclear weapon, in this case starting a war. I am wholly in favor of removing the Iranian Revolutionary regime. I’m cautiously watching this war unfold, knowing that wars in the Middle East rarely achieve their goals. I’m praying for success. I’m also tired of the retort that if you are against a Trump policy, you “hate” Trump, as if that disqualifies your policy objection. It always seems like a distraction to having a real discussion to weigh the risks n advantages of this policy. This WW has plenty of catastrophic risks despite the great benefits of ridding the world of the evils of the Islamic Revolution of Iran. And those should be debated.

Rational Lib's avatar

"What happens if the regime in Tehran is allowed to continue its trajectory unchecked?"

What would've happened is you had an 86 year old leader of a very unpopular faction in Iran whose time had passed. When Khamenei died (which would've happened within a few years tops anyway), the obvious choice for Iranian leaders was to replace him with a more moderate leader who could appease the masses.

Instead, Trump and Netanyahu martyred him so now we get another hardliner in the form of his son. And is that son going to be more tolerant towards the people who killed his father in a sneak attack during negotiations? Don't count on it.

And who does that outcome work against, exactly? Another hardliner works against the people of the US, the people of Israel, and the people of Iran, all of whom have to be under threat and spend more of their efforts and resources on war. But does it work against Trump, Netanyahu, or the Iranian hardliners? On the contrary, this endless war gives them all an external enemy to justify their continued rule.

We need to stop looking at this as US + Israel vs. Iran. We have some leaders out there who are corrupt and authoritarian, and we have some people yearning to be free. Those are the two sides.

Netanyahu, Trump, Khameinei (both father and son) - all corrupt authoritarians. No one really denies that.

It's all of us against all of them.

Harvey Tessler's avatar

It’s hard to believe your hypothetical of what would have happened after Khameini died of natural causes. After 47 years, there are plenty of powerful hardliners. Predicting a moderate to assume power ignores both their history and the ideology of the regime. The decision to go to war has enormous risk that is rarely being discussed. But the potential benefits of getting rid of the regime are historic for Middle East geopolitics. Whether it was worth those risks is left to be seen, depending on the execution of this decision - and that is yet another risk given the competence of the Trump Admin

Rational Lib's avatar

Perhaps. But if I were a detached Iranian leader trying to keep myself in power, I'd absolutely be going with a more moderate figure just to make ruling easier and to make sure my head stays attached to my body. I don't think the massive crackdown on protests was comfortable for them and I'd doubt they want to repeat that. Maybe ideology changes that, who knows.

In any case I see little path for the outcome of this war to be anything other than the worst outcome, a very anti-US, anti-Israeli, authoritarian leader. That's always the reaction when people are struck, just like in the US after Pearl Harbor or 9/11. Foreign attacks bring people together against the attacker and make them more willing to support authoritarianism. And given the lack of protests in Iran, it seems that rule is holding true here as well.

John Galt III's avatar

80% of Iran want nothing to do with their hated crooked Shia Muslim Regime.

John Galt III's avatar

Iran hasn't had a "moderate" leader ever. You totally misunderstand the Twelver mentality of radical Shia Clerics.

You have a lot to learn. try to learn forst, then comment.

Rational Lib's avatar

Try to learn first, then go to war would've been a wise decision for the administration. As it turns out they didn't even bother with a plan first.

Richard Hacker's avatar

See my comment of two days ago.