However, this morning he's decided to escalate into the scale of Hulk Hogan during his 'New World Order' phase, known in the art of professional wrestling -- i.e., a subset of the art of dramatic performance -- as a 'heel turn.'
That's a ridiculous thing to say. For one thing it's obviously not a credible threat. Even if it were true that he was going to bomb every electrical plant in Iran, plus all the bridges, plus all the water treatment facilities, it wouldn't kill the civilization. It would create a lot of problems; it would probably kill a lot of people indirectly, especially the elderly and the very young (who are especially sensitive to waterborne diseases and/or require electrical power for life-sustaining equipment like oxygen concentrators). Empty threats lessen credibility, and credibility is the currency he is spending.
Secondly, while this is the same nation that firebombed Dresden and Tokyo, carried out Linebacker II and secret wars in Laos etc., even those attacks didn't rise to the level of attempting to kill a civilization. The US military has trained for the mission of civilization-killing, of course, in the context of Mutually Assured Destruction. There's no similar threat that would justify such an action here. It would be genuinely immoral to attempt such an action. Destroying the regime is highly desirable and would be of benefit to the whole world; destroying the civilization is another question entirely.
As I was telling Dad29 yesterday, I don't take President Trump very seriously; I don't expect his rhetoric to match reality. I doubt he thinks seriously about what he is saying himself. For the most part we just roll with it, because most of what he says isn't that important anyway. Probably this isn't either; just more hot air like the rest of it.
All the same, we have a professional military that is excellently executing a complex mission in a highly praiseworthy manner. Trump and Hegseth deserve credit for eliminating the poisonous leadership of the Afghanistan Withdrawal era, which has allowed the healthy levels of the military to perform at their best again. Now it would be the path of wisdom to let them do their jobs without adding this kind of rhetorical nonsense. If the threat were to be carried out, it would be immoral; if it is not, as it is almost certain not to be, it degrades the very coin the President wants to spend to settle the matter.
UPDATE: It occurs to me that Trump's phrasing matches that of the Oracle of Delphi's to Croesus. Fortunately Trump is not a prophet. Still, one might wonder what would happen to our own civilization if it were to carry out such a threat. No foreign power nor collection of them could threaten us; as Abraham Lincoln said, "All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years." That remains so.
What we might do to ourselves in the wake of such an action, however, is far less clear.
8 comments:
I think one of the issues with assuming everything coming from Trump is bombastic is the tendency to also assume he isn't choosing his wording with some level of precision. Yes, he doesn't always help his case but even when he attempts it (Charlottesville for example) his opponents will misquote and misconstrue his wording so he's between something of a rock and hard place. I don't think the passive voice 'civilization will die' was an accident. If he was simply thoughtless spewing invective it would have been closer to something like "we're gonna murder you bums!" As a couple of us noted on the Althouse thread about this same Truth post, FDR could have said something similar about the Nazi civilization (such as it was) and that didn't result in extermination of the German people, and the WWII Allies had a lot less ability (and maybe less will) to avoid civilian casualties than our current forces do.
The more he picks his words with care, the more responsibility he bears for them.
It's long been said that his enemies take him literally but not seriously while his supporters take him seriously but not literally.
Grim, I think you're onto something with where he learned his political rhetoric.
- Tom
I don't think he merits being taken seriously or literally. The only argument for him is how much worse both sides of the establishment parties are. One of them actively tries to destroy American culture and identity through mass migration, while engaging in tax theft and fraud on an industrial scale; the other side is a fake opposition party whose only interest is in giving people the illusion of choice, foiling any actual attempts at reform, and engaging in submissive sexual practices for the pleasure of corporate donors. Actually, the two establishment parties have that last one in common.
It's important to hate them all, as a matter of perspective.
I think he should be taken seriously because he makes things happen in a way no one else does. That may or may not be a good thing. You may well take him seriously and hate him for it all. He is a disruptor; many Americans voted for him just for that reason, to blow it all up.
- Tom
One 'net post speculates that Trump was using Sun Tzu method. He issues a horrific threat in order to (literally) see what the enemy's actions are in response. Did they clear certain areas? Move their troops to- or from- ?
Sheesh.
The US military likely did use it for that, though I don't know that I believe that Trump has been reading Sun Tzu. However, recognizing the opportunity is a part of the military science.
It's similar to the MOP bombing of a hardened intelligence structure during the WSO rescue period. Reasoning that the top intelligence people would probably be in the office for a high-stakes event like the chance to capture an American hostage, we hit it with penetrator bombs. Was that a brilliant 4D chess move by the President? Probably not; I imagine that the interagency came up with that one and brought it to the politicos for approval (which might have been needed at a very high level given that the B2 is a strategic weapon, as is the MOP).
However, you have to give them credit for having the sense to say yes to the opportunity. If Braxton Bragg had seized his similar opportunity during the rout at Chickamauga, Sherman might not have had the army to march on Atlanta the next year.
Another thought: did other nations infer that Trump's stupid "a civilization may die" remark meant nukes?
We know better--we think.
But should Iran and lots of other countries discount those words 100%?
Post a Comment