239 Comments
User's avatar
Linda Roberta Hibbs's avatar

Unfortunately, we do , but where to start is another question? What makes him hate and want others to hurt, so much.

Expand full comment
Hope Marston's avatar

No. We do NOT have to go to war. This “man,” Donald Trump, will never care for the people of this country. He cares only for what strokes his ego.

Expand full comment
Adam Vayle's avatar

It must be very difficult to be a Never Trumper Neocon these days. The strike on Iran’s nuclear capabilities is something they’ve wanted for decades. Now, Trump makes one of their dreams come true, and suddenly he’s a little less unfit for office. Is that all it takes?The contradictions must create a lot of inner turmoil for them. I would suggest they resist the temptation to praise an action they are intellectually in favor of without considering how this was done, including ghosting Congress, the questionable circumstances under which it was justified, and the long term ramifications that may or may not materialize.

Expand full comment
Susan Rennie's avatar

Will the dogs really dive from that dock?

Expand full comment
Chris Gay's avatar

But he IS president and we ARE at war. How do you fix that with a Congress that's afraid to stop him?

Expand full comment
Alexander C-S's avatar

He really must be mad. All the colors have drained out of his face.

Expand full comment
Chris Gay's avatar

Just ran out of bronzer.

Expand full comment
Alexander C-S's avatar

There's a surplus at Mar-a-Lago, sources say.

Expand full comment
Victoria Joyce's avatar

Trump had also talked of no more pesky elections going forward. But he was just funning.

Expand full comment
Peter  V's avatar

well, sadly, Crystal is usually wrong about most of his projections, or at least he has been for the last 30-40 years I've had to listen to him.

Expand full comment
Victoria Joyce's avatar

Don’t you just love, AutoCorrect

Expand full comment
Peter  V's avatar

It's the new AI

Expand full comment
Peter  V's avatar

Trump has broken new linguistic ground with his use of the word "Fuck". It can be a noun, a verb, an adverb, an adjective, an expletive, an exclamatory and it has not been used in a president's speech up to this point. It makes Dan Rather's use of the term "Trashed" back when he was doing the national news seem inadequate, but time does march on.

Expand full comment
Peter  V's avatar

If you give me a sharp knife and a piece of soft pine, I could whittle you a better president than the one we've got.

Expand full comment
Christine Cahraman's avatar

We cannot normalize this regime, they are all liars and must be defeated!

Expand full comment
Charlie's avatar

Thanks Charlie. I was also disappointed with Bill's take on Trump's unconstitutional use of our military to commit an act of war. This was just plain wrong.

Expand full comment
Harley "Griff" Lofton's avatar

Thank you for this critique of Mr. Kristol's almost incoherent position.

Expand full comment
Perry Clark's avatar

There's an inconvenient fact we might recall: a broken clock is right twice a day.

The dilemma is real: support Trump's action in doing pretty much what can be done to knock Iran's incipient nuclear capability (almost literally) back to the Stone Age, or don't support the action because, well it's Trump, and stretching governmental norms and the laws of the land in a manner that increases Trump's opportunity to aggrandize himself and accrue power is always, no exceptions, a bad idea.

Trump didn't produce (or even bother to present) significant, potentially persuasive evidence that Iran was "getting too close" to having a nuclear weapon, or if he did, it was somehow overlooked by pretty much every sentient being on the planet.

But that doesn't mean they weren't. Iran had progressed in fits and starts, pauses and pushes, towards having the technology and enough amounts (as in, enough for a bomb or three) of enriched plutonium in secret stashes, with no outside inspections, behind doors numbered 1, 2, and 3, for nuclear weapons. It has been a widely accepted open secret for decades that Iran has been working on developing nuclear weapons.

Just how close were they? Hard to say. Combing back through news reports and analyses over the last few years can lead one to conclude that the answer to the "When will they have a bomb?" question is anything from a maybe a year or two to a few weeks. So, the threat is/was real, though its proximity can be debated.

Then there's the question of opportunity. In matters of international affairs, a broad array of entities and events including, of course, acts of violence often called 'war', there are many factors to consider, ranging from the basics of "What things can we actually, really, physically do?" to the nuances of intergovernmental and alliance relationships, global context (what else is happening or might be affected or effected by some particular action?), international and domestic opinion, and costs, of blood, treasure, and reputation.

I, too, am an OG Never Trumper, from back when most everyone wasn't taking him seriously as a candidate to occupy the White House and the golden escalator thing was still a good way off. If Trump's for it, I am reflexively inclined to oppose it.

Sometimes, that reflexive opposition is wrong. Trump, like a broken clock, and with about the same frequency, gets things right now and then. While we can, and should, argue about the secondary, add-on effects of his non-congressionally-sanctioned act of war and his flouncing about proudly on the world stage afterwards, we should also consider the possibility that this was, all things considered, not entirely a bad idea. Maybe even a good one. As much as I hate to admit it.

Expand full comment
Keneke Tamanaha's avatar

Never forget. Trump is a bumbling fool. He’ll screw up anything, if given the chance.

Expand full comment
Ilene Fischer's avatar

We have an even bigger problem that needs to be addressed and made visible. https://open.substack.com/pub/thewomenpost/p/vice-president-kamala-harris-won?r=jijup&utm_medium=ios

Expand full comment