Great analysis John! I've thought as well, "why so much concern over Iran while ignoring North Korea?" I guess, in the final analysis, it really doesn't matter what any of us think since, in the United States, the President is the commander-in-chief of the military and can start wars whenever he wants, whether or not the majority of our country agrees with him. Do I feel safer because we've stirred up the hornets' nest in Iran? Can't say that I do. And, I think the majority of Americans at this point no longer believe in pre-emptive wars that shed American blood and treasure for future threats that may or may not exist. As a country, we just have to accept that we'll never be completely safe, make alliances, and use soft power to influence countries to be on our side.
"the President is the commander-in-chief of the military and can start wars whenever he wants, whether or not the majority of our country agrees with him". That's usually the case anyway. There was hardly a mandate for Roosevelt, who was snookered by Churchill ("Roosevelt lied, people died!"). Nor for Wilson.
Americans are somewhat civilized. We don't like wars. But it often is not our choice. Evil always gets a vote.
This is a critically important distinction: North Korea is a totalitarian dictatorship, but it is not a religious theocracy. Iran, by contrast, is governed by a revolutionary Islamic theocracy whose leaders view the global spread of their ideology as a religious mission. In such a system, martyrdom in pursuit of that mission can be regarded as honorable and spiritually exalted.
The two answers to the question raised here are super easy and don't require a lot of deep geopolitical thought.
Edward Jay B. nails the first answer in his comment above about the religious theocracy running Iran who would happily use these weapons as soon as they're available and they've told us that! (When a bad actor tells you exactly what they plan to do with their weapons, you should believe them.)
The second reason is also obvious. We hope to prevent Iran by from EVER having nuclear weapons. We can't do that with North Korea, we can only be ready to turn them into a sea of glass if they do something stupid.
An important and welcome reminder of what happens when you think soft diplomacy can halt a hellbent nuclear state. Many columns ridicule Trump for using Witkoff and Kushner to negotiate. Clinton used Albright, that "expert," who thought an autographed NBA basketball would solve the problem.
"The paradox of the moment is that the war launched by the U.S. and Israel, designed to cut down the threat from Iran, actually has shown that Iran can, at a moment’s notice, exert a far wider power over the global economy by driving up the cost of not just oil but also fertilizer, liquified natural gas, helium and aluminum." I disagree. Yes it give them that momentary advantage, but our military and Israel's will find a way. For all of the undiagnosable Trump personality disorders, even half-assed efforts at castrating Iran have major advantages. The biggest risk to a nuclear Iran coming along would be a Democrat administration that thinks like Madeleine Albright. Though maybe Vance does too.
W'ere in for exciting times. In the scary sense. But Trump, for one thing, really got the IRan threat right. Whatever may have been his reasons. And Israel knew it all along.
Great analysis John! I've thought as well, "why so much concern over Iran while ignoring North Korea?" I guess, in the final analysis, it really doesn't matter what any of us think since, in the United States, the President is the commander-in-chief of the military and can start wars whenever he wants, whether or not the majority of our country agrees with him. Do I feel safer because we've stirred up the hornets' nest in Iran? Can't say that I do. And, I think the majority of Americans at this point no longer believe in pre-emptive wars that shed American blood and treasure for future threats that may or may not exist. As a country, we just have to accept that we'll never be completely safe, make alliances, and use soft power to influence countries to be on our side.
"the President is the commander-in-chief of the military and can start wars whenever he wants, whether or not the majority of our country agrees with him". That's usually the case anyway. There was hardly a mandate for Roosevelt, who was snookered by Churchill ("Roosevelt lied, people died!"). Nor for Wilson.
Americans are somewhat civilized. We don't like wars. But it often is not our choice. Evil always gets a vote.
This is a critically important distinction: North Korea is a totalitarian dictatorship, but it is not a religious theocracy. Iran, by contrast, is governed by a revolutionary Islamic theocracy whose leaders view the global spread of their ideology as a religious mission. In such a system, martyrdom in pursuit of that mission can be regarded as honorable and spiritually exalted.
The two answers to the question raised here are super easy and don't require a lot of deep geopolitical thought.
Edward Jay B. nails the first answer in his comment above about the religious theocracy running Iran who would happily use these weapons as soon as they're available and they've told us that! (When a bad actor tells you exactly what they plan to do with their weapons, you should believe them.)
The second reason is also obvious. We hope to prevent Iran by from EVER having nuclear weapons. We can't do that with North Korea, we can only be ready to turn them into a sea of glass if they do something stupid.
The quality of this essay makes it a questional News Item feature. What is being asserted here beyond conventional wisdom pablum?
An important and welcome reminder of what happens when you think soft diplomacy can halt a hellbent nuclear state. Many columns ridicule Trump for using Witkoff and Kushner to negotiate. Clinton used Albright, that "expert," who thought an autographed NBA basketball would solve the problem.
"The paradox of the moment is that the war launched by the U.S. and Israel, designed to cut down the threat from Iran, actually has shown that Iran can, at a moment’s notice, exert a far wider power over the global economy by driving up the cost of not just oil but also fertilizer, liquified natural gas, helium and aluminum." I disagree. Yes it give them that momentary advantage, but our military and Israel's will find a way. For all of the undiagnosable Trump personality disorders, even half-assed efforts at castrating Iran have major advantages. The biggest risk to a nuclear Iran coming along would be a Democrat administration that thinks like Madeleine Albright. Though maybe Vance does too.
W'ere in for exciting times. In the scary sense. But Trump, for one thing, really got the IRan threat right. Whatever may have been his reasons. And Israel knew it all along.