Quote:

---

US Accuses Iran Of Attack On Saudi Tankers

Update: Just as everyone with half a frontal lobe had expected, the WSJ reported late on Monday that according to an initial U.S. assessment, "Iran was likely behind the attack" on the two Saudi Arabian oil tankers and two other vessels damaged over the weekend near the Strait of Hormuz, a U.S. official said, a finding that, whether confirmed or not, will certainly inflame military tensions in the Gulf and likely result in a global proxy war that drags in the US, China and Russia. Oh, and that would be the Persian Gulf for those wondering, not the Gulf of Tonkin, which is where another famous False Flag naval incident occurred.



Furthermore, as we predicted would happen on Sunday, this "official assessment", was the first suggestion by any nation that Iran was responsible for the attack and follows a series of U.S. warnings against "aggression" by Iran or its allies and proxies against military or commercial vessels in the region. Some more details from the WSJ:

The U.S. official, who declined to be identified, didn’t offer details about what led to the assessment or its implications for a possible U.S. response. The U.S. has said in the past week that it was sending an aircraft carrier, an amphibious assault ship, a bomber task force and an antimissile system to the region after it alleged intelligence showed Iran posed a threat to its troops.

“If they do anything, they will suffer greatly. We’ll see what happens with Iran,” President Trump said while meeting with Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban at the White House earlier on Monday.

The assessment, predictable from a mile away, squares perfectly with CIA veteran Mike Pompeo's warning from just two days before the alleged attack, in which he said that "The regime in Tehran should understand that any attacks by them or their proxies of any identity against US interests or citizens will be answered with a swift and decisive US response,” the US Secretary of State wrote in a statement warning that Iran should not mistake US “restraint” for a “lack of resolve,” and criticizing Iran for “an escalating series of threatening actions and statements in recent weeks."

---

Quote:

---

Iran Slams Trump's "Genocidal Taunts" As "Team B" Concocted Threats
Soon after reportedly meeting with national security advisor John Bolton at the White House Sunday afternoon in the wake of a lone rocket being launched toward the US embassy in central Baghdad's protected 'Green Zone', President Trump provocatively warned via Twitter: "If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran," and added, "Never threaten the United States again!"

Iran has fired back Monday morning, with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif saying also via Twitter that mere "genocidal taunts" won't "end Iran".

Goaded by #B_Team, @realdonaldTrump hopes to achieve what Alexander, Genghis & other aggressors failed to do. Iranians have stood tall for millennia while aggressors all gone. #EconomicTerrorism & genocidal taunts won't "end Iran". #NeverThreatenAnIranian. Try respect—it works!
— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) May 20, 2019

Tehran's top diplomat said: Goaded by B_Team, Trump hopes to achieve what Alexander, Genghis & other aggressors failed to do. Iranians have stood tall for millennia while aggressors all gone. Economic terrorism & genocidal taunts won't "end Iran".

If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran. Never threaten the United States again!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 19, 2019

The sarcastic "Team B" insult has been a familiar theme of Zarif's of late. He previously stated on May 17 when the Trump administration appeared to contradict itself — given both Bolton and Pompeo have appeared way out front of Trump when it comes to threat of war, and with Trump saying he "doesn't want war" — that With the B_Team doing one thing & Trump saying another thing, it is apparently the U.S. that doesn’t know what to think.

FM Zarif's "B-Team" seems a reference to John Bolton, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Bin Salman, based on some prior references Iran has made indicating those actually dictating the direction of White House foreign policy. Or more broadly, it's referencing the powerful Saudi and Israeli lobbies in Washington, which have long argued for a US military confrontation with Iran.

And generally the B-Team reference has been seen as pointing to the 'deep state' and its longtime outsized influence on policy direction. Thus perhaps for the first time in history a foreign enemy of Washington is acknowledging a president is being "goaded" by deep state interests over which he had little control. It's not the first time Iran has urged Trump to resist these voices.

Trump has denied being at odds with his own top aides and cabinet members, days ago framing what appeared to be policy confusion as merely a strategic attempt at sowing unpredictability: "at least Iran doesn't know what to think," the president tweeted last Friday at the end of a week of military build-up in the Persian Gulf and soaring tensions.

Going into this past weekend, it appeared de-escalation and a general calming of tensions was on the horizon as Trump seemed to distance himself from Bolton's usually charged rhetoric.

However, the Sunday tweet put things right back where they started two weeks ago when Bolton first announced a heightened state of alert and deployment of a carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf, citing intelligence that US troops face attack by Iran and its regional allies.

Is Trump merely playing to 2020? Trump's retweeting of the below makes it appear so.

God Bless President Trump--- Iran's so called leaders must think they're dealing with Bush or Obama. #MAGA #AmericaFirst #Dobbs https://t.co/r9ROi9QiMy
— Lou Dobbs (@LouDobbs) May 19, 2019

But then again, it could be that Trump's every intent is to de-escalate, even while ratcheting the tough bellicose talk ultimately geared toward the 2020 reelection campaign.

Even the Iranians likely remember that with Trump, there is indeed a prior tweet for every occasion...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
For all the time some people spend pissing and moaning about Russia's supposed influence on Trump, it seems they could spend a few moments pissing and moaning about Israel's and Saudi Arabia's outsized effect

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran. Never threaten the United States again!" https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1130207891049332737?s=21]

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.

Therefore, neither does Siggy.

---

Quote:

---

Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.
Therefore, neither does Siggy. - REAVERBOT


Hitler loved dogs.
Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.- SIX

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.
Therefore, neither does Siggy. - REAVERBOT


Hitler loved dogs.
Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.- SIX

---

HAHA! indeed.

I swear to god, REAVERBOT has only a few words in its vocabulary: "Nazi" "troll" and "Russia". Occasionally it veers off into new territory, like "Pppppppputin".

Hey REAVERBOT! How does it feel to be so stupid?

Here's the deal: I don't want the USA to attack ANYBODY. "Attacking" is an offensive (not defesnive) position, and violence IMHO should only be used in defense. You OTOH ... seem to want to attack everybody, not only at the national level but at the personal level.

So you're not only an abysmally stupid bot, you're an aggressive little bot too. Somebody should reprogram you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Oh, lookie. More mindless insults by Captain Wonderful.

It must be Tuesday.

---

Quote:

---

Oh, lookie. More mindless insults by Captain Wonderful. It must be Tuesday.- SIX

Hardly mindless - basic observation.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Oh, lookie. More mindless insults by Captain Wonderful. It must be Tuesday.- SIX

Hardly mindless - basic observation.- GSTRING

---

So, what do you think of war with Iran GSTRING? For? Against?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Oh, lookie. More mindless insults by Captain Wonderful. It must be Tuesday.- SIX

Hardly mindless - basic observation.- GSTRING

---

So, what do you think of war with Iran GSTRING? For? Against?

---

He's clearly waiting for Rachel Maddow to give him his opinion.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I don't think there is a thread on Iran. Pompous, Bolt-on, and Trump are cranking up their "war on Iran"*, possibly leading up to war itself.

The PNAC neocons have long targeted Iran for destruction, along with Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Lebanon. ("We’re going to start with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, then Libya, Somalia, Sudan, we’re going to come back and get Iran in five years". - General Clark)
https://journal-neo.org/2014/10/09/the-neoconservative-hit-list-iraq-l
ibya-and-now-syria-a-plan-for-global-u-s-military-supremacy/

Israel's long-term plan for the Middle East was to destroy Iraq, Syria, and Iran: "A Clean Break"
http://original.antiwar.com/dan_sanchez/2015/06/29/clean-break-to-dirt
y-wars/

Trump has spoken against Iran, even when he was campaigning. I don't know the source of his animus against Iran (probably "Javanka") but it runs counter to his desire to make nice with Russia, and also to not start new wars.

Recent events:

Withdrawing from the JPCOA
Fully sanctioning Iran, and threatening to sanction any other nation that deals with Iran
Letting the "Iran oil" exemptions expire (India, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, China, Turkey most affected)
Meeting with Iraq two weeks ago RE:Iranian influence (Pompous)
Meeting with the EU (instead of Putin) RE; Iran
Sending a carrier group to the Persian Gulf

In the meantime, several Saudi and UAE oil tankers have been sabotaged in the Persian Gulf. The blame will probably go to Iran altho this might have been a false flag to precipitate war.

So I wonder .. of all of the "regime change" operations that Trump has threatened and/or is engaged in (Venezuela, Syria - continuing, N Korea, Turkey, Iran, Russia)

Iran is the one nation that has a long history of being targeted by Armageddonists like Pompeo, neocons like Bolton, PNAC pro-Zionists like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, and actual Zionists like Netenyahu, partners like Saudi Arabia, Trump appointees like Gen Flynn, Trump advisors like "Javanka", and even Trump himself.

Given the vast array of advisors, other nations, and appointees who have Iran in their sights, will Iran be the one exception to Trump's reluctance to involve the military in regime-change operations?

Or will he limit himself to CIA assets, mercs, spec-ops, proxies, cyber-, financial, ad economic warfare, and "show of force" repositioning of US ships?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Quote:

---

May 31, 2019

The Daily Beast reported Friday that former members of President Barack Obama’s administration are advising the Iranian regime.

As the Trump administration sent warplanes and an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf, a small group of former Obama administration officials reached out to their contacts in the Iranian government, including Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Their message to Iran: Don’t take Trump’s bait. Stay calm.

Conversations between former Obama officials and Iranian government officials have been ongoing since November 2016.

Th Obama alumni are also reportedly passing messages from the Iranian regime to congressional Democrats:

Three Obama officials who worked closely on the Iran nuclear deal, one of whom is still in touch with Iranian government officials, traveled to Capitol Hill to brief congressional Democrats about the situation. Those former officials said would not say if they passed information from Iranian government officials to members of Congress. Rather, they said they focused on educating members about their experience working with Iranian leaders and how Tehran reacts to economic pressure.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is already known to have met with Zarif, and was seen with his contact page open on her cell phone.

Former Secretary of State John Kerry, who led the negotiations that produced the Iran nuclear deal, is known to be meeting with Zarif as well — which President Donald Trump said earlier this month should have earned him prosecution under the Logan Act.

Some Obama alumni are also thought to be encouraging Iran to stick with the nuclear deal and to wait out the Trump presidency.

---

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/05/31/report-obama-adm
inistration-alumni-advising-iranian-regime-on-dealing-with-trump/

Old habits die hard, especially for treasonous Democraps. Looks like a lot more work ahead for Barr. These traitors need to be locked up. Personally, I prefer a good old fashioned firing squad for the scum. And for the sake of the children watching, please make sure Feinstein is "double-bagged".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
For all the time some people spend pissing and moaning about Russia's supposed influence on Trump, it seems they could spend a few moments pissing and moaning about Israel's and Saudi Arabia's outsized effect

---

Quote:

---

U.S. Sees State Actor Behind Oil Tanker Attacks in Gulf Region

An attack on two oil tankers near the entrance to the Persian Gulf was likely done by a state actor, according to a U.S. official, heightening tensions over a potential military confrontation between the U.S. and Iran. Oil prices surged.

The incidents on Thursday, including an assault on a Japanese-operated vessel, were the second in a month to hit ships near the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint, through which about 40% of the world’s seaborne oil travels. They come as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a rare ally of both Donald Trump and Iranian leaders, visits Tehran in an effort to ease tensions.

A U.S. official said the government is confident it knows which country is responsible but declined to give more details. U.S. and Saudi officials have suggested they think Iran was behind a previous attack last month on ships in the region.

---

Quote:

---

Update 6: And there it is...

The US has officially blamed Iran for Thursday's attacks, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters during a Thursday press briefing.

---

Quote:

---

The secretary of state and longtime Iran hawk said Iran's unprovoked attacks are part of a campaign to escalate tension in the region and disrupt the flow of the international oil trade (if we can't be sell our oil, nobody can, would appear to be the logic). He also said that Tehran rejected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's outreach for diplomacy.

The US is planning to raise concerns about Iran at the UN Security Council, Pompeo said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Update 6: And there it is...

The US has officially blamed Iran for Thursday's attacks, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters during a Thursday press briefing.

---

Of course

Quote:

---

The secretary of state and longtime Iran hawk said Iran's unprovoked attacks are part of a campaign to escalate tension in the region and disrupt the flow of the international oil trade (if we can't be sell our oil, nobody can, would appear to be the logic). He also said that Tehran rejected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's outreach for diplomacy.

The US is planning to raise concerns about Iran at the UN Security Council, Pompeo said.

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-13/2-tankers-damaged-after-susp
ected-torpedo-attack-near-strait-hormuz-oil-soars

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.

Therefore, neither does Siggy.

---

Hitler loved dogs.

Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.
Therefore, neither does Siggy. - REAVERBOT


Hitler loved dogs.
Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.- SIX

---

HAHA! indeed.

I swear to god, REAVERBOT has only a few words in its vocabulary: "Nazi" "troll" and "Russia". Occasionally it veers off into new territory, like "Pppppppputin".

Hey REAVERBOT! How does it feel to be so stupid?

Here's the deal: I don't want the USA to attack ANYBODY. "Attacking" is an offensive (not defesnive) position, and violence IMHO should only be used in defense. You OTOH ... seem to want to attack everybody, not only at the national level but at the personal level.

So you're not only an abysmally stupid bot, you're an aggressive little bot too. Somebody should reprogram you.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

---

Quote:

---

The Japanese owner of the Kokuka Courageous, one of two oil tankers targeted near the Strait of Hormuz, said Friday that sailors on board saw "flying objects" just before it was hit, suggesting the vessel wasn't damaged by mines.

That account contradicts what the U.S. military said as it released a video Friday it said shows Iranian forces removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the two ships that were hit.

The Japanese tanker was attacked twice Thursday, damaging the vessel and forcing all 21 crew members to evacuate.

Company president Yutaka Katada said Friday he believes the flying objects seen by the sailors could have been bullets. He denied any possibility of mines or torpedoes because the damage was above the ship's waterline.

---

Quote:

---

He called reports of a mine attack "false."

Katada said the crew members also spotted an Iranian naval ship nearby, but didn't specify whether that was before or after the attacks.

The tanker survived the first attack, which hit near the engine room and was followed by another, damaging the starboard side toward the back.

---

Quote:

---

The U.S. military's Central Command said the video it released shows Iran's Revolutionary Guard removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the tankers, suggesting Tehran sought to remove evidence of its involvement from the scene. Iran denies being involved and accuses the U.S. of waging an "Iranophobic campaign" against it.

The U.S. Navy rushed to assist the stricken vessels in the Gulf of Oman, off the coast of Iran, including one that was set ablaze Thursday by an explosion.

The operators of the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair offered no immediate explanation of what happened to their vessel.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by REAVERFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.
Therefore, neither does Siggy. - REAVERBOT


Hitler loved dogs.
Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.- SIX

---

HAHA! indeed.

I swear to god, REAVERBOT has only a few words in its vocabulary: "Nazi" "troll" and "Russia". Occasionally it veers off into new territory, like "Pppppppputin".

Hey REAVERBOT! How does it feel to be so stupid?

Here's the deal: I don't want the USA to attack ANYBODY. "Attacking" is an offensive (not defesnive) position, and violence IMHO should only be used in defense. You OTOH ... seem to want to attack everybody, not only at the national level but at the personal level.

So you're not only an abysmally stupid bot, you're an aggressive little bot too. Somebody should reprogram you.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

---

And this is why we know you'e a Russian troll.

Not a very bright one. That's why they assigned you to this teeny tiny site.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
HA! Xi just recently attended the St Petersburg Economic Forum, which was both unexpected and unheard-of.

---

Quote:

---

Putin doesn't want the US to attack Iran.
Therefore, neither does Siggy. - REAVERBOT

Hitler loved dogs.
Therefore, anyone who loves dogs is a Nazi.- SIX

HAHA! indeed.
I swear to god, REAVERBOT has only a few words in its vocabulary: "Nazi" "troll" and "Russia". Occasionally it veers off into new territory, like "Pppppppputin".
Hey REAVERBOT! How does it feel to be so stupid?
Here's the deal: I don't want the USA to attack ANYBODY. "Attacking" is an offensive (not defesnive) position, and violence IMHO should only be used in defense. You OTOH ... seem to want to attack everybody, not only at the national level but at the personal level.
So you're not only an abysmally stupid bot, you're an aggressive little bot too. Somebody should reprogram you.- SIGNY

And this is why we know you'e a Russian troll. -REAVERBOT

---

Quote:

---

Not a very bright one. That's why they assigned you to this teeny tiny site.- REAVERBOT

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
HA! Xi just recently attended the St Petersburg Economic Forum, which was both unexpected and unheard-of.

---

I've always thought that China was a fair-weather friend to Russia. So I was pretty cynical when I read reports that Xi and Putin had become allies, to all intents and purposes. I thought - just wait till China has to take some kind of hit to support or defend Russia. Then we'll see how far this really goes.

But then I read (in translation of course) the warm words Xi spoke - of mutual trust, friendship, and defense. They seemed to go FAR beyond the normally polite and non-committal Chinese officialdom-speak. They actually seemed to veer into an affirmative commitment.

Either XI has got the western talent of speaking totally meaningless words, or something significant happened.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

The problem is that the US isn't playing with a mental full deck. It seems like nobody here has rationally thought out the range of possibilities. (Either it's that, or they have and they have their little hidey-holes where they think they can all survive; and we're just so much expendable biomass.) Given that, I personally find it hard to predict what might happen. But I see it as a potentially fatal problem, to address in the next election.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Trump prepares to bypass Congress to take on Iran

The Trump administration and its domestic political allies are laying the groundwork for a possible confrontation with Iran without the explicit consent of Congress — a public relations campaign that was already well under way before top officials accused the Islamic Republic of attacking a pair of oil tankers last week in the Gulf of Oman.

Over the past few months, senior Trump aides have made the case in public and private that the administration already has the legal authority to take military action against Iran, citing a law nearly two decades old that was originally intended to authorize the war in Afghanistan.

www.politico.com/story/2019/06/18/trump-congress-iran-1366756

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

An election that changes the leadership from Republican to Democrat won't fix what is wrong with American voters.

---

Quote:

---

People be Getting Dumber

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

An election that changes the leadership from Republican to Democrat won't fix what is wrong with American voters.

---

You see, SECONDRATE, what your problem is? You think that words are disconnected from reality, which is why you're so careless with them.

Sometimes (when it suits you) you claim that people (voters) have no effect on policy. Then at other times (when it suits you) you lay blame for bad policies on the American voter.
So, which is it?
Neither you nor your favorite political party can fix this Iran problem (or indeed ANY problem) until they figure out this conundrum.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE - So, the American voter CAN change policy.
Please don't bring up that whinge again about how they "can't". If you do, I'll remind you of your stated position.

Now, how do you explain why American voters so consistently vote against their own interests?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Now, how do you explain why American voters so consistently vote against their own interests?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
They don't vote against their interests, at least they don't think they are. The bigger the gap between what they think will happen and what will predictably happen explains hundreds of millions of painful failures in America.

---

Quote:

---

The ... system of propaganda and censorship existed not so much for the purpose of spreading a particular message as for the purpose of making learning impossible, replacing facts with mush, and handing the faceless state a monopoly on defining an ever-shifting reality.

---

Quote:

---

I could go on-and-on about guys I know making decisions that predictably turn out disastrously wrong in business, even ending with bankruptcy. I tell them what will happen. When it happens, several years later, they never understand how I did it. It seems like magic! I had worked the figures on paper for them, showed them the estimated profit or loss, and they still don't believe I can predict their future. Somehow, they believe that God, or willpower, or luck, or working harder, with more passion, will make them a success. I cannot save them from their poor decisions which they feel are right and I predict are wrong.

---

Quote:

---

He might not get reelected if the majority of voters think an Iran War is in Trump's future and, more importantly, the voters remember the Iraq War.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:

---

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE - So, the American voter CAN change policy.
Please don't bring up that whinge again about how they "can't". If you do, I'll remind you of your stated position.
Now, how do you explain why American voters so consistently vote against their own interests?- SIGNY

They don't vote against their interests, at least they don't think they are. - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

The bigger the gap between what they think will happen and what will predictably happen ... SECOND

---

Quote:

---

explains hundreds of millions of painful failures in America.- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

I could go on-and-on about guys I know making decisions that predictably turn out disastrously wrong in business, even ending with bankruptcy. I tell them what will happen. When it happens, several years later, they never understand how I did it. It seems like magic! I had worked the figures on paper for them, showed them the estimated profit or loss, and they still don't believe I can predict their future. Somehow ...

---

Quote:

---

they believe

---

Quote:

---

that God, or willpower, or luck, or working harder, with more passion, will make them a success. I cannot save them from their poor decisions which they feel are right and I predict are wrong.

---

Quote:

---

I'll make a prediction about Trump's Iran War. It will be a more expensive fiasco than Bush's Iraq War. Will Trump go to war in his next term? That I can't predict. Trump is too scattered brained to know what he will do two weeks from today, let alone two years from now. He might not get reelected if the majority of voters think an Iran War is in Trump's future and, more importantly, the voters remember the Iraq War.

---