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
8 a( J0 R, U( G" Z8 M# ^Trump is doing the right thing for the U.S., and we Democrats should judge the war on & k) `+ R! a+ E, S
the merits. / L" U2 l8 i/ T2 J" v1 t5 n0 y3 G. @
By David Boies
( u7 x: u2 c, t/ C3 k, r. ~0 PMarch 12, 2026 1:34 pm ET
8 Y( j: [) J$ D5 q' W n& F3 f: u$ m+ t4 \4 z8 l! U2 p" `) S
Every past president since Bill Clinton, Republican and Democrat alike, has declared that * d8 G! L. d( G+ H: N5 i
Iran couldn’t be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Not one acted to prevent it.
, s% s" o! o, v! y% KEvery president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran’s role in terrorism against & f+ O8 T* L/ |/ B) \
American citizens, interests and allies. Not one acted to stop it. Instead each president
. }+ N% R) H# @- [left his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more complicated threat to
& V/ ~$ M2 j+ y+ Oaddress. 8 V7 J8 }$ y* t5 x1 j
- {) G. u+ g; }; k N
Last June President Trump undertook a limited military operation designed to interrupt # [1 T, @5 |' b7 j4 S/ p1 N
Iran’s development of nuclear weapons and discourage the country from continuing its 6 ^5 t+ N! N5 L2 z, S0 v+ l9 U
nuclear program. In the face of Iran’s refusal to forswear nuclear weapons and evidence
9 B0 F+ b" X6 c9 ^* ithat it was rapidly increasing the number, sophistication and range of its missiles, Mr. : G1 }3 b8 a! c
Trump began the current military campaign.
, x! k7 w% n, b7 }9 a. A3 k. Q! o
If he hadn’t acted, his successor would have been left with an even more dangerous 5 C6 v3 d3 i# C- z2 E8 g
choice than his predecessors left him. Three or four years from now, the Iranian missiles + M! ^0 T) W9 }- Q/ q
now hitting Iran’s neighbors could be hitting Berlin or London, perhaps even New York
/ g8 L- s) y* Hor Washington—perhaps with a nuclear device or at least a dirty bomb.
9 I1 _2 N( m7 z: Y4 s" d6 ^5 I' W6 W6 t- }
No sensible person wants a war, a president least of all. Wars destroy lives, waste + D+ L9 Q$ W" @# t+ R: x
treasure and usually are unpopular. But the widespread hostility to this military action
% K) i) F J6 \! r: ?seems untethered to any serious discussion of the merits. What is the alternative? ; L9 Q8 i7 |* B0 H/ C( p
# f6 Y, I7 c. M: O5 N- V }5 |Obviously, few are prepared to say it is simply to permit religious madmen who swear 4 M2 D3 L: X# \* y% q
“death to America” and back up their threats with terrorism to secure nuclear weapons
% Z/ R( d& {# }9 ?! cand the capability to deliver them. The scope and scale of Iran’s response show how / E8 o5 A9 K" u% [
much its military capabilities have progressed, and how dangerous it would have been9 m7 Q6 D1 }# _' k+ x9 |
to permit them to increase further. 1 j. q. b4 U$ J/ y8 u/ y' |
/ }* A) w7 ~8 h4 G, Z3 zFor three decades we have tried everything that each president could think of. We’ve
& l" s7 v( ?4 @* ~" `! @! T6 {tried being nice, talking tough, moral suasion, negotiated agreement, economic
' D0 I$ _. [/ A7 J3 h4 F4 _8 Vsanctions. None worked. The problem is that there is only one language Iran’s leaders
& z5 x1 \, [6 \) G' y4 Z4 wunderstand. # q+ w- J9 v; p
% e9 q" f$ ~ R# F1 b |, s. PI understand some of the hostility to Mr. Trump’s action. The isolationist wing of the
- k) u% p0 N1 X1 T) oRepublican Party and the pacifist wing of the Democratic Party each are wrapped in the
$ C5 Z( i8 L& g# i: cfantasy that we can afford to ignore the capabilities and intentions of enemies because
+ x* P1 e& \0 q6 |. Vthey are thousands of miles away. Two hundred years ago that view was credible. One
. \' [7 f. ]" Dhundred years ago it was plausible. Today it takes only one missile carrying a nuclear or 0 Y' N% M7 f- G& e3 e$ w y/ i
dirty bomb to get through our defenses, or one such device smuggled into this country,
8 p h6 B& f5 N' k1 ~2 j ]to devastate a city.
) Y8 L% }: e1 l& F& b5 b6 b" }/ B0 |- w) ~! W- J; {$ c
I also understand—and deplore—the fringes of both parties that apparently hate Israel l1 Z7 b3 N g' l1 _
and Jews so much that they oppose any action to neutralize Israel’s enemies.
& T, e- U" ]) E5 Y: p/ j7 F
q0 D) U2 j( P* a+ u1 mWhat is harder to understand, and particularly troubling for our country, is opposition
! [: G& e- W* T0 B9 w. _3 Srooted simply in antipathy toward Mr. Trump himself. We used to say that politics stops " C, ^, ^$ O6 y$ v$ Z! k4 g
at the water’s edge. That was never completely true; the willingness to bludgeon a
9 r2 K; G# ?! t% `6 ^) g, lpresident over foreign policy for domestic political gain is as old as Vice
9 Q/ }6 {$ a0 B6 IPresident Thomas Jefferson’s attacks on President John Adams. Yet for most of our 0 _- \3 z2 {! M6 z- L; F% b* ]/ J
history we have given the president the benefit of the doubt.
- W7 T9 W- x1 A& ?- M7 Z+ k' Y* A! N& s
More important, criticisms have historically been based on policy differences over the
: k& F3 }# I7 F: W3 Y$ mmilitary action at hand, not knee-jerk opposition to the president himself. Many / r) }( D5 V3 |4 Y0 O
Republicans supported Mr. Clinton’s military actions and President Obama’s surge in * I' w" E, V+ c* `) ]0 |; t
Afghanistan; many Democrats supported President George W. Bush’s actions in
* K( T" u% b0 l" }Afghanistan and (at least initially) Iraq. More Republicans than Democrats probably # q) u3 o9 r. H
supported President Lyndon B. Johnson’s actions in Vietnam.
9 s- }8 I& T7 k6 l/ _+ z0 J
$ E4 `2 ?4 ^& w- [+ e& U, X! zMore important still, even when we believed a president’s actions were misguided, we * J% v X1 b5 }8 S) S- F
almost always wanted him to succeed if possible. Some efforts to curtail what the 3 ]' ?; A/ E R
president is doing in Iran seem motivated simply by a desire not to give him a win—
5 c5 v. g+ W" G. yeven if it means a loss for America.
4 c6 ]- L! L) Q/ v; b7 m# `, T0 O9 ^
When North Korea invaded South Korea President Harry S. Truman acted to stop it. It
0 j! P" ^9 c- v) U: i$ x5 p+ Nwas so unpopular that Truman didn’t seek re-election in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower was
+ P( w% @; S1 qelected on the promise that he would go to Korea and end the war. But while Truman
1 Y0 J2 w' H M% n+ r) T- Owas president, lawmakers on both sides supported Truman, even when he removed the
( v* k1 o# l; p, g1 S2 Z2 spopular Gen. Douglas MacArthur from his command. , Z0 x9 L$ j4 X, z! P+ @/ I
) x* w8 f7 L$ l4 {) q; ^' @Truman’s successful defense of South Korea began a four-decade bipartisan effort to
0 f. d8 }+ r. Ycontain, and ultimately end, communism as a global threat. One wonders what the
! G/ W6 v. `& ? J, g) iresult would have been if he faced a country as divided and partisan as today’s.
/ M6 [& C3 S3 }1 W% E, M1 P9 ORepublicans, including Mr. Trump, bear a share of the blame for the divisiveness and 0 k: I& b9 u' A, R# R
extreme partisanship that has stunted our ability to cooperate and work together. Those
* d: r. T! y/ E7 zof us who generally oppose Mr. Trump but who recognize the threat Iran poses need to
; v2 ?# Z/ J( I1 y& Csupport the military action not because we owe anything to Mr. Trump but because we S' r' m4 f( k' E8 b# O0 j) ^
owe it to ourselves, our country and our children.
+ `. `, h% l# Z4 }1 x" p8 {! f# H8 ^6 {" ?5 v1 t+ L
If we opposed the war and succeeded in pressuring Mr. Trump to curtail it before the
7 P8 h! U4 f* I' a/ }; jmission is accomplished, we would have the satisfaction of defeating someone we $ v( ^! l# Z. L3 D
generally oppose, which might help ourselves politically. But America would be worse : _( i$ D( s, a* W, B! ^! ?0 |+ f
for it. 8 w+ z1 K4 `3 \: y2 R* C0 g4 H
" k9 U- M0 ]7 n5 ?% SAmerica’s national security is too important to hold hostage to partisanship. We
" J- l1 c% E- \9 |Democrats need to begin by asking what our position would be, and why, if the action
& L" |$ p8 y, E8 ]had been taken by Mr. Clinton, Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden. I’m not counting on it, but
# E% @* K F2 ?: i8 Vmaybe in 2029, when a Democrat is in the White House, our Republican neighbors will 9 W; [" T9 T) o* Q
return the favor, and judge that president’s efforts to keep our nation safe on the merits
. E7 `$ ^# M1 o2 q y8 b1 l" {and not merely obstruct.
7 D2 R2 P) l4 g" u) x& i0 R1 y% ~ w
If we believe that Iran presents a serious threat, we need to support the president on
& ^, P$ K, ^7 x4 t5 hthis issue. There’s plenty to disagree with him about, and we don’t need to like or
1 Q Z8 c2 l. D" R4 m+ |% `admire him. But on Iran we should be on common ground. Not primarily because we 8 N$ Q& \% P7 J
want to reduce partisanship in foreign affairs—although that is conceivable. Not / a5 `6 y1 ]6 s) f U1 X0 H
because the voters will reward us for a more measured response—although I hope they
) [7 C% u, ~) F/ {3 P: H: L" swill. But because it is the right thing to do for our country, our children and the
& E6 l9 m0 t" w2 aDemocrat who will succeed Mr. Trump as president. $ e+ D8 S* M. c4 [# m* |% A
( A5 }( B6 `9 O7 y6 D7 B
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