Posted on Wednesday, June 25, 2025
|
by Herald Boas
|
0 Comments
|
A cacophony of calls by Democrats, some isolationist Republicans, pro-Palestinian anti-Semites, and the establishment media commentariat to avoid the risks of U.S. intervention in the current military operations in Iran has been exposed as a program of defeat after the brilliant surgical strike by the U.S. armed forces against primary Iranian nuclear facilities.
History is full of failures that resulted from avoiding risks and missing opportunities for triumph or success — and examples of bold, risk-taking action that resulted in victories or notable accomplishments.
The reality of foreign policy and, indeed, life in general is that everything we do involves one or more notable risks. The more risks that are taken, be they military, political, economic, or personal, the greater the potential reward.
This timeless verity of human behavior is somehow repeated over and over.
Of course, there are times when restraint works best, and when boldness fails. Those who can perceive the difference successfully are history’s winners.
The story of post-1979 revolutionary Iran is not complicated. It was and is run by clerics of the militant jihadist branch of Islam. After several years of violent conflict with neighboring Iraq, the regime settled into a long-term conflict with the U.S. and Israel that was conducted through paid proxy terrorist groups in Gaza (Hamas), Lebanon (Hezbollah), Syria (Assad regime), Iraq (insurgent militias), and Yemen (Houthis).
This decades-long shadow terrorist war reached an apotheosis on October 7, 2023, when armed Hamas militants invaded Israel from Gaza and murdered 1,200 Israeli men, women, and children in brutal fashion, along with taking more than 250 hostages. This was a case when bold was very bad, and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) subsequently entered Gaza for the purpose of destroying Hamas. That effort, now nearly complete, has eliminated the leadership of Hamas and more than half of its jihadist soldiers.
The Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon had been attacking Israeli settlements in northern Israel, and the IDF moved to remove them as a threat. The brutal Assad regime in Syria then collapsed, and missile attacks from the Houthis in Yemen were silenced.
Suddenly, and probably for a limited time, the multiple threats from Iran’s proxies were minimized even as the radical Islamic regime itself reached the cusp of its most important goal – building a nuclear weapon.
The Israelis, having recovered from the surprise attack on October 7, knew they had a genuine opportunity to rid the world of the severe threat of Iran possessing nuclear weapons. They subsequently initiated a series of attacks on nuclear sites, missile launchers, missile and other weapon construction factories, and military and terrorist headquarters, and assassinated top Iranian military generals and nuclear scientists.
Israel was, of course, denounced for these military initiatives by friend and foe alike, although in private, many nations were pleased someone was doing something to confront the jihadist Iranian regime, which had troubled virtually everyone in the Middle East and the West.
In spite of the extraordinary success of Israel’s initial barrage, the IDF lacked the military capacity to totally eliminate the nuclear threat from the air. Prime Minister Netanyahu had enlisted President Trump and U.S. military bunker-buster bombs and the planes to deliver them to destroy Iranian nuclear operations buried deeply underground.
To mislead the Iranians and misinform opponents of U.S. military involvement, President Trump created a program of misdirection and uncertainty about his intentions. The final military operation was a remarkable surprise and success, and a classic case of how bold action in the face of many risks and opposition can be exactly the best course of action.
Trump, a famously opportunistic businessman, saw a chance for a quick and decisive victory, and he took it. It paid off.
Some issues remain unresolved as Trump works to broker a ceasefire. Where is the stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium fuel? Can the radical regime led by Ayatollah Khomeini survive? Will there be an uprising led by the crown prince and the many Iranian anti-government groups? Is the Iranian nuclear program truly dead? Will the ceasefire last beyond a few days or weeks?
Despite these questions, there is little doubt that if the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the United States had not ignored the naysayers, doubters, and other opponents of bold action, the conflict and threats from Iran would have continued and truly festered into something even more far-reaching and dangerous.
Herald Boas is a writer for AMAC Newsline.
Read full article here