"In the least charitable and probably accurate view, President Trump went to war with Iran out of a delusional faith in himself. He believed that the worst-case scenarios that have deterred past presidents from attacking Iran wouldn't come true for him, because he is Donald Trump.
In the most charitable and probably accurate view, the president had reasons to believe that all of the catastrophic warnings about the most hair-raising consequences of an attack wouldn't come to pass this time. The 12-day war, which Israel and the United States fought last June, demonstrated that they could strike Iran without provoking catastrophic retaliation. Having endured that assault on the country's military infrastructure, and then wave after wave of protest by its own citizens, the Islamic Republic was isolated and weak. So why shouldn't Trump exploit that fragility to land a death blow against a murderous adversary?
I could nearly convince myself of these arguments, except that almost no other foreign-policy question has been studied harder over the past 20 years or so than the likely effect of U.S. military strikes on Iran. The many years spent pondering and preparing for a potential attack on Iran are the reason that the first days of the war were, for the most part, a bravura display of American power. Yet all of that study also pointed out the risks: spiking oil prices, the spread of violence throughout the Middle East, civilian casualties of the sort now evidenced by an apparent U.S. missile strike near an Iranian elementary school.
When past presidents balked at the possibility of war with Iran, they weren't just dodging a hard choice; they were deterred by all of the obvious reasons a conflict could perilously spiral. Nobody should be shocked that the expected is now coming to pass."
The Obvious Is Taking Its Revenge on Trump - The Atlantic https://archive.ph/2026.03.11-133202/https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/03/iran-war-trump/686314/
In the most charitable and probably accurate view, the president had reasons to believe that all of the catastrophic warnings about the most hair-raising consequences of an attack wouldn't come to pass this time. The 12-day war, which Israel and the United States fought last June, demonstrated that they could strike Iran without provoking catastrophic retaliation. Having endured that assault on the country's military infrastructure, and then wave after wave of protest by its own citizens, the Islamic Republic was isolated and weak. So why shouldn't Trump exploit that fragility to land a death blow against a murderous adversary?
I could nearly convince myself of these arguments, except that almost no other foreign-policy question has been studied harder over the past 20 years or so than the likely effect of U.S. military strikes on Iran. The many years spent pondering and preparing for a potential attack on Iran are the reason that the first days of the war were, for the most part, a bravura display of American power. Yet all of that study also pointed out the risks: spiking oil prices, the spread of violence throughout the Middle East, civilian casualties of the sort now evidenced by an apparent U.S. missile strike near an Iranian elementary school.
When past presidents balked at the possibility of war with Iran, they weren't just dodging a hard choice; they were deterred by all of the obvious reasons a conflict could perilously spiral. Nobody should be shocked that the expected is now coming to pass."
The Obvious Is Taking Its Revenge on Trump - The Atlantic https://archive.ph/2026.03.11-133202/https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/03/iran-war-trump/686314/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
