Pre-Emptive Strikes: Vance Replays the Usual War Drum Delusion
Zoom out for a second: Vice President Vance, with all the casual confidence of someone who has never personally endured the consequences, assures us that launching military strikes on Iran would somehow avoid a “long war” in the Middle East. This statement isn't just wishful thinking, it’s a deliberate historical obliteration. One might recall the strategic brilliance of General Curtis LeMay, who
in 1964 advocated for bombing North Vietnam "back into the Stone Age," a policy that certainly didn't lead to a protracted conflict, just a decade of war and millions dead. The idea that surgical strikes against a sovereign nation, which has endured 45 years of crippling sanctions and countless regime-change operations since the 1953 CIA coup, would result in anything but significant blowback is
deeply cynical. To pretend a military attack by the US, a country whose aggressive posturing has inflamed regional tensions for decades, would be a mere slap on the wrist is absurd. Such actions consistently serve to galvanize the resistance axis, strengthening their resolve against foreign occupation and Western imperialism. Consider the cost asymmetry: Iran’s defensive capabilities, honed by
necessity and regional alliances, are designed to inflict disproportionate costs on any invading force, not to mention the geopolitical ripple effects that would undoubtedly engulf the entire region. The very suggestion that strikes would deter Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, a claim consistently refuted by intelligence assessments, conveniently ignores the fact that Washington itself