The Los Angeles Times recently published a "News Analysis" headlined: "Trump, long a critic of 'forever wars,' may be stumbling into one with Iran."

The analysis offers legitimate grounds for criticizing President Donald Trump. He has described the objectives of the war against Iran in different ways. He has made changing predictions about its duration. He has repeatedly suggested that an agreement was near, only for negotiations to collapse. He promised no more endless Middle East wars, yet the conflict has continued for months, American servicemembers have died, and the administration has not clearly defined what victory looks like.

All fair questions. But the article omits the most important question of all: Why did the war begin?

Similarly, recent analyses in Time, The Washington Post and Politico raise many of the same objections. Yet, here, too, none address the threshold question: Was Iran close to obtaining a nuclear weapon—and if so, how close?

Trump, from the beginning of the war, said the primary purpose was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte publicly agreed with Trump and said Iran was close to acquiring a nuclear and ballistic-missile capability........

© Townhall