The Iran Question dominates the news.
Most papers and programs have numerous takes at the top of the page or the hour devoted to Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear program; President Trump’s demand that Iran unconditionally surrender, and the government of Iran’s defiance; and Trump’s latest statements vaguing up “his decision” to bomb Iran.
And in a man-bites-dog angle, I’m going to agree with The New York Times.
Specifically, the editorial board’s “America Must Not Rush Into a War Against Iran,” run yesterday.
Where the Times is right regards not the disputed facts and theories about the conflict, but whether the United States military, under direction of its Commander-in-Chief, should bomb Iran.
That is not merely open to debate but must be debated.
Many in Trump’s base oppose any involvement: Trump was voted into office to stop the endless wars.
But it’s not just the matter of politics. It’s a constitutional issue: “An unprovoked American attack on Iran — one that could involve massive bombs known as bunker busters — would not be a police action or special military operation,” the Times declares. “It would be a war. To declare it is not the decision of Mr. Netanyahu or Mr. Trump. Under the Constitution, Congress alone has that power.”
And if we wince at the idea of our dysfunctional Congress grandstanding and bloviating about such a weighty matter, consider this: the congressional debate must occur in a context where Americans debate. We debate; the People.
After all, we end up playing lots of heavy roles in these things.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with Krea and Firefly
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts