Thursday's Final Word

Ali don't like it - rock the tabs-ah, rock the tabs-ah ... Courtesy of Marissa Forte Ed: Probably true, but the problem is that the mullahs of Iran took over an actual nation-state member of the UN in a popular uprising. ISIS is a stateless terror network that has held varying amounts of turf in Syria and western Iraq. We treat that differently for good reasons. We can address ISIS militarily without committing acts of war against an actual member-state. However, Alinejad is correct to argue that the UN should be treating the mullah regime as a pariah state. === Times of Israel : US President Donald Trump reportedly informed Iran that he won’t be ordering a strike on the country over its deadly crackdown on protesters after the leaders of four Arab countries convinced him to hold off. Trump had threatened to hit Iran in recent days if the regime killed protesters who have been pouring into the streets across the country in demonstrations against the Islamic Republic. Several thousand are reportedly dead as part of the crackdown, but Trump declared Wednesday that he had been told, apparently by Tehran, that the killing in Iran had stopped and that the regime would not be executing any protesters. Iran’s Ambassador to Pakistan Reza Amiri Moghadam said in remarks during a Thursday visit to a Pakistani ministry that Trump had informed Tehran that he does not want a war and urged the regime to exercise restraint and not target US assets in the region. Ed: Reportedly, t he Israelis also opposed a military strike . The concern seems to be that a strike would further empower or entrench the parts of the regime that might fall more easily without American intervention, or just create a failed-state collapse that no one in the region wants. That may be why we're hearing of alternatives to military strikes that focus consequences on elements in a way that more effectively weakens them. This is, however, also why presidents shouldn't announce red lines in public. === However, I’m not pretending to know the intelligence situation, the assets available, or the potential target package. Maybe it’s a bad idea now. I don’t know. I do know that JD Vance distinguishes between endless forever wars without any strategic objective and discrete strikes designed for immediate effect without a perpetual commitment. I think I’ve seen enough from this administration to trust their judgment, especially in light of the fact that neither you nor I know all the facts they know. Ed: This is a fair point. However, again, these considerations should have been taken into account before declaring that "help is on the way" if the intel doesn't support an intervention. I also think that we should be a bit more patient before concluding that Trump won't do anything in this moment. === Time Magazine : A sudden collapse of central authority could unleash not only sectarian and ethnic violence but also a scramble for nuclear material among rival...

Preview: ~500 words