Reasonable Optimism on Iran – Sleep Well
President Trump was frustrated by the military actions of Iran and Israel following his announcement of a ceasefire among Iran, Israel and the United States.
Coterminous with the announcement and last-second maneuvering by Israel and Iran were assessments relayed by the always reliable Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin that the military actions against Iran had set their nuclear program back but “two years.”
Subsequent to that assessment, well-situated unnamed sources say, according to The New York Times, “… the Defense Intelligence Agency report indicates that the sites were not damaged as much as some administration officials had hoped, and that Iran retains control of almost all of its nuclear material, meaning if it decides to make a nuclear weapon it might still be able to do so relatively quickly.” All of the officials speaking through The New York Times spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the fact that findings of the report were classified.
The White House said these findings were simply “flat-out wrong” and motivated by personal animosity toward President Trump.
Further grist countering those who wish to sleep soundly at night, according to Slate, “The chief of Iran’s atomic agency said on Tuesday that the country will rebuild its nuclear program; the IRGC will spur, perhaps spearhead, that effort.”
Worried enough yet? Russian President Dmitry Medvedev “claimed that multiple countries are ‘ready to directly supply’ Iran with nuclear warheads as a result of the U.S. strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites.” President Trump angrily contradicted him.
Finally, the IAEA Chief, head of the agency Iran just voted to oust from their country, said 900 lbs of enriched uranium at 60% may have been ferreted away, but 60% is not 90, and we still need to account for every ounce of uranium. I taught, among other areas of rhetoric, credibility studies. Whom should you believe given these contradictory findings?
With all of the sources of information and all of the varying motives of people to challenge the sitting president’s takes, I would suggest that you go with President Trump.
At the end of the 13-day Cuban Missle Crisis, with a solution seemingly at hand, there were endless critics who came up with dark hypothetical happenings that included Russia’s retaining a Cuban covert threat, and no one could relax for months.
If Iran were to rebuild their nuclear threat, there would be no Trumpian hand blocking Israel’s immediate efforts to finish the job they started 12+ days ago. Moreover, the Trump Administration would not accept the humiliation.
Furthermore, the Iranian Mullahs would be in further danger from revolution from within, as they may be presently regardless. Additionally, there is no President Biden to replenish their coffers in light of the humiliation now completed.
It won’t happen, it says here.
Richard E. Vatz https://wp.towson.edu/vatz/ is a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of political rhetoric at Towson University and author of The Only Authentic of Persuasion: the Agenda-Spin Model (Bookwrights House, 2024) and over 200 other works, essays, lectures, and op-eds. He is the benefactor of the Richard E. Vatz Best Debater Award at Towson. The Van Bokkelen Auditorium at Towson University has been named after him.