Video: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...

Article: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...

Article: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...

Entry: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...

Video: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...

Trump’s war with Iran is not popular – and that’s no surprise. Critics of the war are correct about one very important thing: It is messy.

The Strait of Hormuz remains dangerous. Oil markets are volatile. The risk of escalation has not disappeared. Even after weeks of air strikes – and now a U.S.-led blockade aimed at restoring control of the Strait – Iran retains the ability to disrupt shipping and rattle the global economy.

All of that is true. But what critics have yet to show is that there was a better alternative.

For years, American policy toward Iran rested on a simple hope – that confrontation could be avoided long enough for the problem to solve itself. That hope took different forms depending on the administration. Sometimes it meant sanctions. Sometimes it meant negotiation. Sometimes it meant outright financial concessions in exchange for temporary cooperation.

But underneath those differences was a common assumption: that delay was safer than decisive action.

It was that assumption President Trump questioned, and appropriately so. The evidence was plain that with each passing year Iran was becoming more menacing. Its leadership spent decades building a network of militant proxies, expanding its missile capabilities, and positioning itself to threaten one of the most critical economic chokepoints in the world. It did not need to close the Strait of Hormuz to exert influence. It only needed to make clear that it could.

And there was........

© RealClearPolitics