Without apparent consultation with Congress or his own cabinet and Joint Chiefs of Staff consensus, Donald Trump unilaterally ordered the attack which took out the Iranian general. He did so, it is reported, based on intelligence that the general was preparing an imminent attack in the region on American “interests.”
Given the president’s past decision making, can his reason for ordering the attack be considered grounded in truth? The consequences of his order are yet to be determined. But if the reality for the reason for his order was not unquestionably to thwart an imminent, direct attack by Iran, to what purpose was the order given? Or are we now faced with another “weapons of mass destruction” Iraq scenario?
G. FRED GOODSIR