The best way to support your foes might involve delivering strong destructive blows.
I reject the idea that America should abstain from using military power because I support strategic deployment of force. The success of military bombing operations requires that you achieve total completion of your targets especially when dealing with nuclear weapons development. Trump’s attack on Iran became a strategic failure that matched the level of provoking a hornet’s nest while showing false surprise at getting attacked.
The Pentagon along with Trump’s Twitter statements failed to reveal the real events which followed the bombing of Iranian nuclear sites. Our military conducted fourteen attacks which used 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs to target Iranian nuclear facilities. The United States uses these weapons as its most powerful conventional military tools. The total cost of these weapons exceeds the lifetime earnings of most people. What did we accomplish? According to our own intelligence folks, we set Iran’s nuclear program back by maybe a few months. Maybe.
That’s not a victory. The costly action ended up infuriating Iran beyond what they already felt toward the United States.
The numbers tell the whole story. The three significant nuclear facilities located in Iran were Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan which we attacked. The underground stuff that actually matters? Most of it survived. The centrifuges spinning uranium into bomb material? Still spinning. The stockpiles of enriched uranium? Still there. Our military expenditure of billions of dollars resulted in the destruction of buildings along with parking lot cratering.
Through our military actions Iran gained undeniable proof that they require nuclear weapons as soon as possible. Before our bombing run, Iranian leaders could explain to their population that nuclear weapons were unnecessary while diplomatic solutions had potential success, and global powers would not allow US aggression. Now? Trump provided Iran with an ideal recruitment advertisement. “See?” they can say. “America will bomb us no matter what we do. Time to build some real deterrence.”
The principles of Military Strategy 101 are clearly evident in this situation. The approach must be either to eliminate the threat completely through forceful action or maintain complete non-interference. The middle course between hurting your enemy and defeating them results in the creation of disastrous situations.
Throughout history various leaders displayed their perceived strength through actions which ultimately resulted in worsening their situations. Take Iraq in 1981. Israel destroyed Saddam’s nuclear reactor at Osirak which earned widespread approval for its perceived brilliant pre-emptive assault. Except it wasn’t brilliant – it was stupid. Saddam realized nuclear weapons became essential for him after the attack because it left him without any protection. Following Israel’s “surgical strike” Iran moved its nuclear operations into multiple secret locations instead of maintaining one visible reactor. The complete destruction of what Israel’s “surgical strike” expedited required a complete war that lasted ten years.
The attack on Pearl Harbor can be evaluated from Japan’s perspective. Japan’s attack was tactically brilliant – they caught us completely off guard and sank most of our Pacific fleet. But strategically? It was suicide. Japan managed to miss vital targets including aircraft carriers and fuel reserves and repair facilities. The attack failed to defeat America in the war since it produced intense rage alongside providing America with necessary resources to counterattack. Japan became a radioactive ash heap after four years of conflict.
The Romans needed to learn this lesson through direct experience. Marcus Crassus decided to create his reputation by launching a quick military expedition against Parthia. The entire Parthian army killed him and turned his head into a theatrical display after he misjudged his foes without creating a winning strategy by marching east for victory.
The pattern is always the same. Leaders who employ sudden violent solutions to complicated problems generate problems that surpass their original scope. Geopolitical success depends on complete measures instead of partial ones. The weak position of a nation gets displayed while its adversaries become more determined and dangerous.
The Iran conflict initiated by Trump aligns with this specific scenario. His main objective was to appear powerful, but he avoided investing in the extensive long-term campaign that would be required to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The situation deteriorated because we received inadequate diplomatic solutions and insufficient military strength that only intensified the conflict.
The execution of this operation produces negative consequences that worsen the situation. Our military forces were aware before the operation started that bunker-busters might not possess sufficient power to destroy Iran’s deepest underground facilities. The Isfahan military operation skipped bunker-buster bombs in favor of cruise missiles since they understood that the powerful bombs would not succeed. We initiated the attack with full awareness that we lacked the capability to fulfill our announced targets. Strategy demands better decision-making than the explosive tactics Trump implemented.
The Iranian government exploits its victim status to construct new atomic bombs. The bombed facilities serve Iran to demonstrate American military aggression toward countries without nuclear capabilities. This is why we need them.” All moderate Iranian politicians who supported Western cooperation lost their political careers. The American military attack has validated the statements of every Iranian hardliner who questioned American trustworthiness.
The international community has reacted to the situation in an expected manner. Multiple nations now question why we failed to involve them prior to involving them in another Middle Eastern conflict. The bombing incident enables our adversaries to learn how to create installations which our military force cannot destroy. The North Korean government probably celebrated because we demonstrated that deep underground construction combined with extensive infrastructure distribution makes us immune to American bunker-buster attacks.
Trump promotes “total obliteration” through social media posts yet his intelligence officials are quietly informing Congress that our strikes left Iran’s key facilities unscathed. The large discrepancy between Trump’s stated objectives and actual outcomes creates dangerous conditions. Your enemies view you as weak because you declared victory yet failed to achieve it while your friends see through your dishonest claims.
The result of placing someone with reality TV mentality in charge of foreign policy leads to dangerous consequences because he focuses only on dramatic moments and displaying toughness on television. Real strategic thinking involves planning three steps into the future along with impact assessment and building enduring answers that last. Trump’s approach to international policy operates on checkers level while others play chess.
The worst part? This was completely avoidable. The President had several alternative methods to address Iran’s nuclear program if he chose to handle it. The President could enhance international economic restrictions against Iran and build international support to maintain continuous diplomatic pressure on the country. The military force would have been more effective if Trump had launched a complete campaign designed to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities instead of conducting limited strikes.
Instead, we got amateur hour. The combination of destructive power and bold statements resulted in a complete breakdown of strategy. The nuclear program of Iran continues its operations because they now have sufficient reasons to speed up their development. Trump has converted a manageable situation into an urgent situation because he needed dramatic footage for his social media highlights.
This situation stands as a tragic prediction for anyone who paid attention. Military historians could have warned that unfinished attacks against enemy capabilities tend to create negative results. The bombing would only serve to boost hardline power over moderate voices inside Iran according to anyone who studied Iranian political trends. Any expert with strategic comprehension would recognize that weekend bombing attacks cannot solve the Iran nuclear issue.
Trump lacks knowledge of historical events and disregards expert opinions because he focuses solely on short-term media trends. Through his actions he turned the Iran crisis into an unprecedented disaster. American strength was supposed to be demonstrated through his actions but instead he showed American constraints. His actions most likely pushed nuclear proliferation forward instead of preventing it.
This is what strategic incompetence looks like in practice. It’s not just about making bad decisions – it’s about making bad decisions that create bigger problems while convincing yourself you’re winning. Trump dropped fourteen massive bombs and accomplished less than nothing. That takes a special kind of talent.
The major issue now is how much destruction this catastrophe will create before we obtain leaders who recognize the distinction between appearing strong and being effective. Iran continues developing nuclear weapons while gaining enhanced motivations and enhanced political backing for rapid advancement.
Congratulations, Mr. President. Mission accomplished.
-Winston Mundy