TA的每日心情 | 擦汗
2026-3-17 22:01 |
|---|
签到天数: 1133 天 [LV.10]大乘
|
沙发
楼主 |
发表于 2026-3-16 12:04:37
|
只看该作者
Partisanship on Iran Is Dangerous for America
T; o9 B8 I: _7 P! QTrump is doing the right thing for the U.S., and we Democrats should judge the war on
4 `, b; M2 P* @the merits.
: ^4 l$ X9 a i9 m/ \! E4 LBy David Boies 2 {% @. J$ ~1 m0 \3 E+ _: d
March 12, 2026 1:34 pm ET % }) C) Q) [7 o0 T1 I, s
, y4 g2 O7 ~8 G% J- z8 N) l8 Z& U
Every past president since Bill Clinton, Republican and Democrat alike, has declared that 9 m; C7 x# r% Q* z5 ~, }; w
Iran couldn’t be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Not one acted to prevent it. 8 n _ T& g) |! p5 _
Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran’s role in terrorism against
0 z% @& ?) [( U+ wAmerican citizens, interests and allies. Not one acted to stop it. Instead each president 8 H. T# H: |: Y/ ]4 d t8 S3 T
left his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more complicated threat to 1 i8 }7 E# z, z4 z
address.
4 p/ `. p3 b9 e: `# d1 E* F2 H% o" k! k; Q) P2 X0 M
Last June President Trump undertook a limited military operation designed to interrupt 6 E$ T |2 w& w& k
Iran’s development of nuclear weapons and discourage the country from continuing its
7 ~5 U4 _ c8 xnuclear program. In the face of Iran’s refusal to forswear nuclear weapons and evidence ' p; [: ^& B4 k, D0 D5 h' ^! c
that it was rapidly increasing the number, sophistication and range of its missiles, Mr. & i8 j2 y4 k) F3 r* @ N
Trump began the current military campaign. $ Y- P; f4 I @" G( W2 ~
! A0 d1 Q8 Y/ A7 c, g4 C4 OIf he hadn’t acted, his successor would have been left with an even more dangerous B# `& f" \( U7 S: M
choice than his predecessors left him. Three or four years from now, the Iranian missiles : n( J! Z* n& D6 \8 E
now hitting Iran’s neighbors could be hitting Berlin or London, perhaps even New York
% n# X0 `) d9 C) ^, B4 V! ?or Washington—perhaps with a nuclear device or at least a dirty bomb. : u. [3 H$ w% C( R
) r- X1 u: T- L$ x5 M! G' `( YNo sensible person wants a war, a president least of all. Wars destroy lives, waste 6 r8 T, V% a4 U9 `0 ]- [" X+ s
treasure and usually are unpopular. But the widespread hostility to this military action t' h9 q) |2 p& {% |1 u6 u. Y0 H
seems untethered to any serious discussion of the merits. What is the alternative?
% [: l/ B( T: s6 D3 c2 q9 P( r! _, O m
Obviously, few are prepared to say it is simply to permit religious madmen who swear
! W o: |3 ]3 Z3 M“death to America” and back up their threats with terrorism to secure nuclear weapons 3 }5 z W/ [" \% p4 D: s
and the capability to deliver them. The scope and scale of Iran’s response show how
4 s/ D( S. x+ Z! ` rmuch its military capabilities have progressed, and how dangerous it would have been; m! w+ A, ^6 j/ K) s8 C8 P
to permit them to increase further. : x6 B5 ?: B3 k# i; S, s2 C& a7 Y
$ q0 ~* F9 Z- o, _$ {% a f
For three decades we have tried everything that each president could think of. We’ve ' @; ]1 M3 C9 e1 O7 M- D E6 Q
tried being nice, talking tough, moral suasion, negotiated agreement, economic 0 n' w6 i6 u' w* a p s
sanctions. None worked. The problem is that there is only one language Iran’s leaders
* P4 I( x( L. o# `- X8 J6 Tunderstand.
& \0 ~; n: r: K0 [* a3 r) {8 Q G. o8 b I
I understand some of the hostility to Mr. Trump’s action. The isolationist wing of the
3 P2 Z. v$ N! \Republican Party and the pacifist wing of the Democratic Party each are wrapped in the
* |, ?% W2 F$ yfantasy that we can afford to ignore the capabilities and intentions of enemies because 4 F, j) @2 o6 A# {( Q2 i5 ~& a
they are thousands of miles away. Two hundred years ago that view was credible. One
- g3 R+ A" h# [hundred years ago it was plausible. Today it takes only one missile carrying a nuclear or
+ s" ~( l/ G+ r) z' J4 ~8 y. @, [dirty bomb to get through our defenses, or one such device smuggled into this country, ) n4 z0 |# n% L8 s# u5 g
to devastate a city.
9 g/ |3 K0 Q% J1 }/ Z7 L7 K# L7 z6 l* }9 e8 X# t0 |
I also understand—and deplore—the fringes of both parties that apparently hate Israel
3 y) u& \# u- x& K& sand Jews so much that they oppose any action to neutralize Israel’s enemies. , {% Q B6 x+ S' y: i- a2 t- O$ u
! _: T9 x1 `1 {1 K% P& m. nWhat is harder to understand, and particularly troubling for our country, is opposition 7 {/ E- I+ H" ~6 g" W. Q- D- [
rooted simply in antipathy toward Mr. Trump himself. We used to say that politics stops ' `) r% s8 Q. h) f
at the water’s edge. That was never completely true; the willingness to bludgeon a
5 O h7 |! q, E+ Wpresident over foreign policy for domestic political gain is as old as Vice
* I1 P; p2 c( Z! f% I8 U2 DPresident Thomas Jefferson’s attacks on President John Adams. Yet for most of our $ ?* r0 B9 }' P' F% r0 k
history we have given the president the benefit of the doubt. . v5 A, b) F/ j* D& C' B
( ^* P$ e' u9 Q1 E5 RMore important, criticisms have historically been based on policy differences over the
/ ~5 s( M! B6 H( ymilitary action at hand, not knee-jerk opposition to the president himself. Many # \9 ^6 ~3 d6 J N' W+ t- t
Republicans supported Mr. Clinton’s military actions and President Obama’s surge in
. _6 n" k# F# o& d* I cAfghanistan; many Democrats supported President George W. Bush’s actions in
) r5 t4 P+ v$ v( r! uAfghanistan and (at least initially) Iraq. More Republicans than Democrats probably
2 P5 o/ U- e1 E5 Y! R$ ^# Usupported President Lyndon B. Johnson’s actions in Vietnam.
6 r/ W, v, a6 ?( V9 A8 r/ G! a
1 d" i, _( A$ V, ~ QMore important still, even when we believed a president’s actions were misguided, we ; o, @2 C4 t; m" _& X! @9 M0 N
almost always wanted him to succeed if possible. Some efforts to curtail what the , T! O/ }" C) \- X
president is doing in Iran seem motivated simply by a desire not to give him a win—
Q# H Z9 b1 Meven if it means a loss for America. P& \0 i& m9 J( t2 S/ i7 {( I: f
0 w! G5 B j1 b' @6 ]& H: jWhen North Korea invaded South Korea President Harry S. Truman acted to stop it. It
8 e) I" ? c9 [was so unpopular that Truman didn’t seek re-election in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower was
! {9 K% l/ ^, }) z2 welected on the promise that he would go to Korea and end the war. But while Truman ! |! c0 ^) I9 n+ n+ J8 M
was president, lawmakers on both sides supported Truman, even when he removed the
7 |: w1 u& e5 vpopular Gen. Douglas MacArthur from his command.
. J1 e6 n$ p- k6 C- y, Y1 H! F% x
' U8 G5 W0 D! v1 ?. `Truman’s successful defense of South Korea began a four-decade bipartisan effort to 1 E0 O7 n. ^+ G" d; A2 Z/ \7 t
contain, and ultimately end, communism as a global threat. One wonders what the ' F8 f6 Q5 D1 a) V8 K
result would have been if he faced a country as divided and partisan as today’s.
/ G4 j9 N* q" oRepublicans, including Mr. Trump, bear a share of the blame for the divisiveness and 7 }& v* Y! W! v8 d% m) ?9 t/ F
extreme partisanship that has stunted our ability to cooperate and work together. Those [, _& L, k2 G. h' S: U
of us who generally oppose Mr. Trump but who recognize the threat Iran poses need to , m5 l8 K7 l# C0 c1 |
support the military action not because we owe anything to Mr. Trump but because we
3 T1 d% m2 S ?$ }2 Zowe it to ourselves, our country and our children. 6 e1 ^: { B- e" r
# }% z/ B# ]( r! C
If we opposed the war and succeeded in pressuring Mr. Trump to curtail it before the ; N9 A: F. V; W
mission is accomplished, we would have the satisfaction of defeating someone we
, u' Q# J. `+ o# @, Bgenerally oppose, which might help ourselves politically. But America would be worse ; V, z2 X4 ^( t* i1 L' h! x2 l
for it. + x/ o4 C" r! A! R
) I) l9 y! b1 V) @" M" [; q
America’s national security is too important to hold hostage to partisanship. We ( Z U9 c" ?5 L
Democrats need to begin by asking what our position would be, and why, if the action ' r/ I; Z- T! }: P; t, k# ^
had been taken by Mr. Clinton, Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden. I’m not counting on it, but 5 A3 ^ z( {1 `, n5 }' Y
maybe in 2029, when a Democrat is in the White House, our Republican neighbors will
1 y, }+ x' M& f% H3 D Y9 Xreturn the favor, and judge that president’s efforts to keep our nation safe on the merits
4 U0 z, i7 e9 {. Aand not merely obstruct. 6 c. Z- ?1 e Y, Z1 b: U, Q$ ^( V
* _0 r% P0 K( b6 pIf we believe that Iran presents a serious threat, we need to support the president on
) h. i& ~- [* L+ {" Ithis issue. There’s plenty to disagree with him about, and we don’t need to like or & k6 v2 T. A5 }0 i C
admire him. But on Iran we should be on common ground. Not primarily because we 8 f: w" y2 x9 W, X$ g
want to reduce partisanship in foreign affairs—although that is conceivable. Not % _) |1 G( F2 J" L
because the voters will reward us for a more measured response—although I hope they * A7 D; i6 J" N- O& F/ V, b
will. But because it is the right thing to do for our country, our children and the
# W( I# Y6 c5 F! FDemocrat who will succeed Mr. Trump as president. + c9 v# w+ i: D/ p
4 _. N9 H3 t9 ~* K% D2 G9 z l
Mr. Boies is a founding partner of the law firm Boies, Schiller & Flexner |
|
雷达卡
收藏
分享
淘帖
支持
反对
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2026-3-16 13:12:57
。 对普金而言导弹丢到中东比丢到乌克兰划算多了