A very good analysis. I note the emphasis in Trump’s first statements/posts on this now being the time for Iranians to seize power. I think those Trump are close to have convinced him the regime in Iran is close to collapse and these attacks will push it over the edge, enabling Trump, going into the mid terms to present a quick victory. In reality, the lesson of history is that air attacks actually consolidate the regime in power.
There are a few other points that need considering:
1. China gets (got!) most of their oil imports from Iran and Venezuela. This is part of the shaping operation to cut China off at the knees to deter it from attacking Taiwan in the next couple of years.
2. It is significant that none of the Democrats' congressional leadership who were briefed in the past few days on Iran have disputed the need to cripple Iran, only objecting that it was done without Congressional authorization (a real problem to be sure, but not one that started with Trump) and that it poses the risk of a forever war. All of the opposition on the merits is coming from the backbenchers like AOC, who are not the sharpest lightbulbs on the racetrack.
I think you are discounting the strategic reasons to go forward with the strike. And Trump doesn't want to say them out loud because he doesn't want the Chinese to lose face and feel compelled to respond.
I get the sense that if Trump is going to take any path on China it’ll be Nixon’s. I hear you on the moves he’s making there but don’t discount the personal diplomacy factor too which seems quite buddy-buddy.
Trump seems to me the kind of man that the Chinese know they can flatter, bribe, and ultimately buy.
A very good analysis. I note the emphasis in Trump’s first statements/posts on this now being the time for Iranians to seize power. I think those Trump are close to have convinced him the regime in Iran is close to collapse and these attacks will push it over the edge, enabling Trump, going into the mid terms to present a quick victory. In reality, the lesson of history is that air attacks actually consolidate the regime in power.
There are a few other points that need considering:
1. China gets (got!) most of their oil imports from Iran and Venezuela. This is part of the shaping operation to cut China off at the knees to deter it from attacking Taiwan in the next couple of years.
2. It is significant that none of the Democrats' congressional leadership who were briefed in the past few days on Iran have disputed the need to cripple Iran, only objecting that it was done without Congressional authorization (a real problem to be sure, but not one that started with Trump) and that it poses the risk of a forever war. All of the opposition on the merits is coming from the backbenchers like AOC, who are not the sharpest lightbulbs on the racetrack.
I think you are discounting the strategic reasons to go forward with the strike. And Trump doesn't want to say them out loud because he doesn't want the Chinese to lose face and feel compelled to respond.
I just don’t see Trump as being all that anti-China or really caring about deterring them. What does he care about China retaking Taiwan?
Obviously, we cannot know what he feels. We can only see what he does. And his every strategic move has had obvious bad effects for Chinese power projection, and has been consistent with the 2026 National Defense Strategy which explicitly aimed at deterring China: https://media.defense.gov/2026/Jan/23/2003864773/-1/-1/0/2026-NATIONAL-DEFENSE-STRATEGY.PDF
I get the sense that if Trump is going to take any path on China it’ll be Nixon’s. I hear you on the moves he’s making there but don’t discount the personal diplomacy factor too which seems quite buddy-buddy.
Trump seems to me the kind of man that the Chinese know they can flatter, bribe, and ultimately buy.
100% spot on, nothing more to add.
"It sucks having to read stuff from people like Matt Walsh and agree with it"
That's something I never thought I would do in my entire life.