"Again, as with most of the other limited number of opinion pieces I start topics with, no one here will be able to dispute the assertions therein ..." Somewhat misplaced arrogance, old boy. (You really should pick your sources more carefully. Alister Heath is rarely reliable or correct). I will - once again - counter your assertions: Error 1: Heath contradicts himself. While lauding the US's destruction of Iran, he admits that, "I don’t know how this war will end", so leaving open the possibility that all this destruction and economic turmoil caused by it is all for nothing. What kind of victory is that? Error 2: Hardly a convincing argument. The author implies that Trump has some sort of Master Plan and that " .. the idea that Iran would move to block the Straits of Hormuz was the best-rehearsed risk in geopolitics". If that is the case then - given the ongoing problems in the Straits - that plan has gone horribly wrong. Error 3: The degrading - rather than removal - of Iran's military capabilities and of the regime is now counted as success? This is moving the goalposts: Total destruction of Iran's military capabilities and regime change were the original objectives. Error 4: The error was including this section. Heath's argument amounts to some of Trump's opponents use contradictory arguments against him, therefore Trump must be right: I think that the problem here is obvious. Error 5: If 'Error 4' was embarrassing, Error 5 plunges even lower depths of logic! The fight against Putin is justified, therefore the fight against the Iranian regime must also be justified!!! Part of this justification seems to depend on the cost of 'net zero'????? .... No, me neither. Error 6: No doubt anti-semites are against Trump's actions but that, in itself, is obviously and clearly no justification for a war: Heath suggests that Israel will stop this war when Trump says stop. There is little indication that will be the case. Error 7: An obvious rebuttal comes to mind. Unfortunately, there are no end of countries where human rights are abused. Why isn't military action taken against Myanmar for example? Or China? Or Russia? Obviously, any action against the latter two nations would get very messy but that shows the fragility of trying to play the 'moral' card to justify this war.
