.jpg)
I can guess as well as anyone.
Trump wants to project American power, but he is risk averse. He does not want to put any American lives at risk and he does not want to get involved in wars with no clear way out.
On the other hand, he agrees that Iran should never have nuclear weapons, and he seems to agree that Iran had a clandestine nuclear weapons program.
He also wants to tell the world that when he sets a deadline for action, he means it - including the 60 day negotiation deadline with Iran. He views himself as a master dealmaker, and if he perceives (correctly) that Iran was just using those nuclear negotiations to buy time and had no intention of dismantling its path to an atom bomb, then there must be consequences.
The most important factor is that Israel has already destroyed Iranian air defense systems and has greatly damaged Iran's ability to launch a massive missile attack.
All of this points to Trump deciding to drop a GBU-57 30,000 pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator or two on the Fordow nuclear facility, destroying or damaging most of what remains of Iran's uranium enrichment program.
It is a low-risk move that would support Trump's desire to frame the US as a nation no one wants to mess with. It strengthens the US position in every future negotiation and deal. It makes US threats around the world, a key component of Trump's negotiation strategy, more credible.
Not to mention that the symbolism of using the largest non-nuclear weapon in the world, dropped by a US-built B-2 stealth bomber that no one else has, fits Trump's personality to a T.
Together with Israel's strikes on Natanz, assassinations of Iran's leading nuclear scientists and attacks on weaponization facilities, this can virtually end Iran's nuclear program.
The risk/reward ratio is tiny. The worst that can happen is that Iran shoots a few missiles at US military interests in the Middle East, and the chances that they would hit successfully become lower every day that Israel continues to destroy their launchers and missiles. The US would strike back, get some private assurances from Iran that they won't attack the US again, declare victory and go home, sort of how Trump dealt with the Houthis.
There is also a small chance that Iran's proxies in Iraq and Yemen would attack US interests in the region, but their orbit is around Iran, and a clear defeat for Iran makes them less likely to risk their own power bases with a large US counterattack.. Hezbollah already made its calculation of not supporting Iran militarily in this war. While the Houthis are a wildcard, usually self-preservation wins out over solidarity with an "axis of resistance" that is weakening by the day.
Using America's muscle in such a spectacular and public way would not only cripple Iran’s nuclear ambitions but also signal to North Korea, Russia, China and others that Trump’s deadlines are non-negotiable.
Trump isn't interested in regime change or giving Iranians freedom. But virtually destroying what is left of Iran's nuclear program with US-made bombers and bombs definitely fits in with his America First philosophy.
|
"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022) |
 |
Buy