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
3 `/ P2 G$ B ]9 rTrump is doing the right thing for the U.S., and we Democrats should judge the war on
7 ]5 V# L$ S( N; Fthe merits. # Q% @7 F/ Z4 z" K3 N* ]
By David Boies 3 \" G* f m9 G+ }1 @
March 12, 2026 1:34 pm ET
' }5 u6 e/ e2 k& G$ w- f( X
% }) ^2 R3 ^! Z7 m4 T$ }" _3 H' PEvery past president since Bill Clinton, Republican and Democrat alike, has declared that & I- e0 V8 i0 T3 ?9 G6 V7 \. B' d
Iran couldn’t be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Not one acted to prevent it. 1 a3 g9 V' | k& e) M
Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran’s role in terrorism against
$ `8 ]1 z2 N2 V7 a8 ^American citizens, interests and allies. Not one acted to stop it. Instead each president $ R( s9 @8 q: S8 H- H; ^
left his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more complicated threat to # B3 { f6 M6 r& q
address. : v T' a4 x" R, H1 f8 a5 W
7 m: l7 D0 b4 _+ w$ eLast June President Trump undertook a limited military operation designed to interrupt ( X; K$ @' ?, |: c# r" _3 |
Iran’s development of nuclear weapons and discourage the country from continuing its % m$ F2 q6 u! }3 x/ E2 b7 U0 M y
nuclear program. In the face of Iran’s refusal to forswear nuclear weapons and evidence
0 Z/ a& h# e3 |8 E4 ~that it was rapidly increasing the number, sophistication and range of its missiles, Mr.
$ P9 d3 w2 Z0 L- e- ?2 Z* {Trump began the current military campaign. 2 Z: C2 X: A9 \4 ~" I O" R$ z, l# Y
4 s% r* ?( \7 t0 K* }! j5 b
If he hadn’t acted, his successor would have been left with an even more dangerous ' N: t3 C6 K7 v0 L2 v
choice than his predecessors left him. Three or four years from now, the Iranian missiles ) P$ X) o3 }( F5 Y
now hitting Iran’s neighbors could be hitting Berlin or London, perhaps even New York
; F- |! A* @, b! h1 W( f# b1 ]8 H; oor Washington—perhaps with a nuclear device or at least a dirty bomb. 0 ]7 t0 D, H5 x+ G
# w ~! @1 ]: w& n$ Q- j
No sensible person wants a war, a president least of all. Wars destroy lives, waste 3 E4 z$ Y5 S, ^( P6 z
treasure and usually are unpopular. But the widespread hostility to this military action ' j) \) h9 X! e& n* ^- R' S
seems untethered to any serious discussion of the merits. What is the alternative? # a, Q" y7 X3 [! l
$ a9 u! U/ d. c% aObviously, few are prepared to say it is simply to permit religious madmen who swear * Q4 Q$ o" |* l# a$ |
“death to America” and back up their threats with terrorism to secure nuclear weapons
! _* J$ H k" { L+ \' i/ F3 _and the capability to deliver them. The scope and scale of Iran’s response show how # K$ ~) K* A4 ^) E
much its military capabilities have progressed, and how dangerous it would have been
% |' j& b: p4 ?% h! kto permit them to increase further.
/ y) Z0 z! Y f! y% e: f; O* M, A! L( ^1 G5 U2 i' x
For three decades we have tried everything that each president could think of. We’ve
9 ]7 s, r# K; M7 o y, Jtried being nice, talking tough, moral suasion, negotiated agreement, economic
. E; A% q, V% j W# w7 N5 C) ksanctions. None worked. The problem is that there is only one language Iran’s leaders * R* g% H7 ^* a4 c4 }
understand. 9 m+ J8 [8 i9 M. d1 U
# g& q u: p: OI understand some of the hostility to Mr. Trump’s action. The isolationist wing of the + S/ ?* {1 J/ I) d
Republican Party and the pacifist wing of the Democratic Party each are wrapped in the ( j/ [) k7 \' i5 k
fantasy that we can afford to ignore the capabilities and intentions of enemies because
9 T \" P6 L, p3 ?/ s; sthey are thousands of miles away. Two hundred years ago that view was credible. One
, U7 h/ k5 E! l; g2 ]+ i& [hundred years ago it was plausible. Today it takes only one missile carrying a nuclear or
+ S; [9 [3 B% idirty bomb to get through our defenses, or one such device smuggled into this country,
: m+ k% w+ e ?8 oto devastate a city. 8 h+ Y4 L4 E; l Y+ f/ N
- O8 d3 {" B5 |2 C
I also understand—and deplore—the fringes of both parties that apparently hate Israel ; L( W" V8 c# K. f' O, w* M2 U
and Jews so much that they oppose any action to neutralize Israel’s enemies.
/ A2 O( P2 L M1 [% j
4 F" P! b# D( A& u! n* HWhat is harder to understand, and particularly troubling for our country, is opposition
+ D. H8 V0 M }rooted simply in antipathy toward Mr. Trump himself. We used to say that politics stops
7 v) b9 W; j% Mat the water’s edge. That was never completely true; the willingness to bludgeon a
" b+ |( M; T0 Mpresident over foreign policy for domestic political gain is as old as Vice
* {7 E- u9 J1 B1 ]0 }President Thomas Jefferson’s attacks on President John Adams. Yet for most of our 4 X* ]2 W& |5 C' w
history we have given the president the benefit of the doubt. 8 j9 N+ H' S, a) H p
% v2 a- ^' w+ A: W& bMore important, criticisms have historically been based on policy differences over the ! W5 j3 W$ Z# M- [+ }) J/ g( c
military action at hand, not knee-jerk opposition to the president himself. Many ; ^4 ~7 z! c/ v2 r7 w |" B
Republicans supported Mr. Clinton’s military actions and President Obama’s surge in
" M0 n3 x* A: c* }; @# L8 YAfghanistan; many Democrats supported President George W. Bush’s actions in & O6 x b2 O1 m' _. V- F/ |8 u% A
Afghanistan and (at least initially) Iraq. More Republicans than Democrats probably
2 a8 G3 J/ }) y6 b+ |4 x0 p: S. Dsupported President Lyndon B. Johnson’s actions in Vietnam. / v2 R3 A* n0 D- M: | M/ y
6 E/ o+ j" k& G9 LMore important still, even when we believed a president’s actions were misguided, we
6 b( e' f4 _9 y% ealmost always wanted him to succeed if possible. Some efforts to curtail what the + d; k# j1 z0 L$ m% N
president is doing in Iran seem motivated simply by a desire not to give him a win—5 i0 N/ x0 F0 K/ z
even if it means a loss for America. 2 t4 ~# ^% t% S
& ~/ k9 j5 v. L7 yWhen North Korea invaded South Korea President Harry S. Truman acted to stop it. It
1 y6 }, q1 p0 @was so unpopular that Truman didn’t seek re-election in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower was
P0 k" T2 h, J; z' s8 }! O3 Yelected on the promise that he would go to Korea and end the war. But while Truman - Q- q9 v. x M+ X
was president, lawmakers on both sides supported Truman, even when he removed the 8 Y0 }% r6 {1 g# D& i, m% S9 Y
popular Gen. Douglas MacArthur from his command.
0 T6 t% W. \7 {& h& k; n; o6 N0 x Z; a" U C# ]
Truman’s successful defense of South Korea began a four-decade bipartisan effort to E) K0 O6 B; C% y: L
contain, and ultimately end, communism as a global threat. One wonders what the
4 i. I1 ^! x. x8 }+ N, _! dresult would have been if he faced a country as divided and partisan as today’s.
# C1 w9 }6 [* B" TRepublicans, including Mr. Trump, bear a share of the blame for the divisiveness and
; P8 w" F. t' R6 k9 t; M" ~extreme partisanship that has stunted our ability to cooperate and work together. Those 1 E( y# [! G6 R) ?* ^4 s9 D9 o
of us who generally oppose Mr. Trump but who recognize the threat Iran poses need to ( e, V+ @+ E {5 ]7 e ?9 a
support the military action not because we owe anything to Mr. Trump but because we / z3 L/ q" T: {$ h9 j; Z; J
owe it to ourselves, our country and our children.
! A2 l% h/ D. V& p8 [- f, Y3 O/ z9 v6 U- s1 Y% L" a
If we opposed the war and succeeded in pressuring Mr. Trump to curtail it before the 1 e# w% c1 M) A6 u
mission is accomplished, we would have the satisfaction of defeating someone we
) U( a% F: f! m$ g& \* c6 h! d2 Cgenerally oppose, which might help ourselves politically. But America would be worse % B0 a% i) x, D- b- W8 ?
for it. / U c( n3 j+ ^; M9 S8 n
! {( Z8 ^ G& @; \8 b- c
America’s national security is too important to hold hostage to partisanship. We
- O! p8 A& f$ |5 \1 F$ ^( cDemocrats need to begin by asking what our position would be, and why, if the action
/ C1 k4 j7 o4 z) z* }! u, v/ [" lhad been taken by Mr. Clinton, Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden. I’m not counting on it, but 0 X J) d+ X& T# h& U
maybe in 2029, when a Democrat is in the White House, our Republican neighbors will 0 t/ c. Z0 I8 a
return the favor, and judge that president’s efforts to keep our nation safe on the merits
" }# R. @8 n3 e0 oand not merely obstruct.
, f0 {3 r! D" R* x+ ]9 l6 n3 N( I$ ?3 f! ] T6 d
If we believe that Iran presents a serious threat, we need to support the president on
5 U" O o+ B1 u3 Z, x4 u; R+ R2 Q$ lthis issue. There’s plenty to disagree with him about, and we don’t need to like or & W3 ?, {7 U: ^6 L" a
admire him. But on Iran we should be on common ground. Not primarily because we
3 G# j$ c0 N6 A: V' P$ \* B K3 \) D/ t, qwant to reduce partisanship in foreign affairs—although that is conceivable. Not
+ t9 d+ C$ d9 Vbecause the voters will reward us for a more measured response—although I hope they
! I- V7 ~2 g; d2 o- Nwill. But because it is the right thing to do for our country, our children and the
$ U$ [+ r1 Z% K! [Democrat who will succeed Mr. Trump as president.
8 w1 T4 _: S/ u; R
' {, j. {" H# |: _4 L$ P2 ^" W5 KMr. Boies is a founding partner of the law firm Boies, Schiller & Flexner |
|