Trump is using our best weapon against Iran's aggression:
President Donald Trump said Wednesday he is hitting Iran with new economic sanctions over an attack on Saudi Arabia oil facilities.
"I have just instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to substantially increase Sanctions on the country of Iran!" Trump tweeted.
Good. I'm not in the camp that says responding to enemy attacks with our own military action is exactly what an enemy wants. I've always said that ineffective military responses are what our enemies want. That rallies allies. Al Qaeda did not expect the ass-kicking we inflicted on them after 9/11. That response kills allies and can discourage them if done energetically enough for long enough.
Sadly, as my initial post links shows, our Congress won't allow us to use effective military power against Iran.
On the other hand, that Congressional opposition may be moot. After some pondering after Iran shot down an American drone, I believe our economic measures are the most effective weapon we have against Iran's mullahs at this point. So let's continue with this weapon.
Iran's kinetics likely mean that our economic warfare is as effective as kinetics for their harm inflicted on Iran, so Iran might as well use force in response. We need to watch out for Iran really upping their military options as our economic warfare escalates.
If the Saudis want to hit Iran directly over this very serious attack, they can do something. And America should back them. The Saudis are justified in retaliating. I'd suggest bombing Kharg Island oil export facilities as an option.
UPDATE: Although the Saudis might want to close gaps in their missile defenses before replying in kind.
UPDATE: From Geopolitical Futures, America's military options are problematic because none can really be decisive and basically rely on Iran agreeing to end hostilities when we finish with our military operations. Or they count on Iran not striking a blow that gets through our defenses, such as in a long blockade.
Remember, the Tanker War in the late 1980s was ended when Iran essentially broke in the Iran-Iraq War and agreed to a ceasefire with Iraq. Our operation leading Western navies was not done in isolation.
So George Friedman has good points. Which is one reason why Saudi Arabia should be the one retaliating. The act of war was against them--not America.
We should definitely help the Saudis. But the Saudis should do the deed. A sizable strike on Kharg Island would probably be the best bet. The question is whether strikes on Iranian anti-aircraft and surface-to-surface missiles need to be added to the primary targets.
UPDATE: Huh:
Air raid sirens were tested across the Saudi Arabian capital on Thursday as the country prepared for a possible escalation with Iran after a weekend attack on its oil fields raised the stakes in the conflict.
You almost have to admire the chutzpah of the Iranians:
Iran’s foreign minister warned that any U.S. or Saudi strike on his country in response to the attacks on the kingdom’s critical oil facilities would lead to “all-out war.”
So Iran would like the freedom to strike Saudi Arabia without any kinetic response. Well there you go. That certainly would be nice from Iran's point of view.
