82 Comments
User's avatar
Richard Alexander's avatar

As I wrote in a different Substack, there are many possible motivations:

1) Distraction from the worsening Epstein situation, of course.

2) A favor for Netanyahu, with something eventually expected in return.

3) A favor for the Saudis. Ditto.

4) He's tanking in every opinion poll. Nothing like a war to boost one's numbers, eh?

5) Hurt feelings (SCOTUS tariff, etc.). So of course, what does a bully do then? Find someone else to bully.

6) His ongoing warped ideas about how to create a legacy.

7) And let us not forget Hegseth. Gotta put that warrior ethos into practice, eh?

Charles Osborne's avatar

re: 7) Hegseth has to have his strokes because Anthropic told him to go pound sand.

Hvvfagn's avatar

Don't discount (8) general incompetence of all involved

Henry Cohen's avatar

It's not a favor for the Saudis. It's a quid pro quo. Trump doesn't do favors. He takes bribes. (Maybe that's what you mean by "Ditto.") Rachel Maddow discusses it.

Henry Cohen's avatar

Timothy Snyder writes at his Substack: "Gulf Arab states who oppose Iranian power have generated extremely generous packages of compensation for companies associated with Trump personally and with members of his family. The United Arab Emirates invested in a family firm. The Saudis have provided numerous de facto gifts. And sometimes the gifts have been simply gifts. The Qataris gave Trump a jet. The list is very long."

If you read the above at Snyder's Substack, some of the words are hyperlinked, but the hyperlinks didn't come through in my copy and paste.

https://snyder.substack.com/p/why-attack-iran

Henry Cohen's avatar

Giving this more thought, I realized that Trump doesn't do quid pro quos. He stiffs the people with whom he deals (except Putin, as noted below). So maybe his reason for starting a war is primarily to distract us from the Epstein files, especially now that the charge by the woman (or is it two of them?) that he raped her when she was thirteen is getting more attention.

Yehawes (VA)'s avatar

I love Rachel Maddow. I'll have to look for that discussion.

Anne DePalma's avatar

Trump doesn’t do favors . . . except for Putin, amirite?

Richard Alexander's avatar

Yes, that was the "ditto."

Robot Bender's avatar

8) Boosting the piece of oil, therefore helping out Putin.

9) Seems early, but trying to affect the 2026 election?

Gary E Masters's avatar

And the MUGA crowd was saying Biden was the monger and Trump made peace! Anything for some currency.

David Smith's avatar

8) Eager to make war everywhere he can in spite, for not getting the Nobel Peace Prize.

MFL's avatar

"If I cannot inspire love, I will cause fear." -Mary Shelley, Frankenstein.

Andy's avatar

All of the above.

Dale of Green Gables's avatar

Bored of Peace indeed. Again, in his inimitable fashion, Demento has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. There supposedly was an even better deal than "Obama's" JCPOA according to the Omani foreign minister who was honchoing the so-called negotiations which was what shit-for brains was presumably looking for. And we do so well at regime change...

Iowa David's avatar

Thank goodness we had our top diplomatic team (Messes Witkoff and Kushner, a Dynamic Duo for the ages) negotiating with the Iranians. I'm sure they did their utmost to avert this latest obliteration. Can't wait to read their memoirs.

Dale of Green Gables's avatar

Based on the Constitution and historical precedent, a president does not have the authority to stop, cancel, or postpone federal elections, even during a time of war or national emergency. Since Congress enacted the law in 1845 establishing “a uniform time for holding elections” for the office of president and vice president, no presidential election, or any federal election for that matter, has been postponed. In the midst of the Civil War in 1864, Lincoln was reelected. During World War II, FDR was elected to a third and fourth term and House and Senate elections were held in '42 and '44. Even if a new law changing election dates were passed and withstood judicial challenge, that law would run afoul of the 20th Amendment. It provides that the presidential term shall end at noon on Jan. 20 (and Jan. 3 for the House and Senate). So to change the date of a presidential or legislative elections would involve several moving parts, assuming it had public support. Moving the federal general election would also not affect state and local elections.

Robot Bender's avatar

If we had elections during WW II, we can have them this year.

Frederica Nanni's avatar

And a President doesn't have the authority to start a war without the approval of Congress, or to do any of the myriad of things he has already done. So who will stop him? The Republicans in Congress? His hand-picked bootlickers in the (previously). Supreme Court? Are his Cabinet lackeys going to invoke the 25th Amendment? We can't expect the law to save us--unless someone can come up with a way to enforce it against him. We have to hit the streets, not just on No Kings days, but every day. We have to save ourselves.

AustinAngel's avatar

I think it's a diversionary tactic for the Epstein situation and the stories coming out about federalizing the upcoming November elections. Also, spouse mentioned trump wanting the Iranian people to take to the streets but when US citizens do that here it's slammer time.

Rosemary George's avatar

Except for the January 6th insurrectionists, who were pardoned by trump.

Auntie Phat's avatar

Winning slogan for the day: "Operation Epstein Fury".

Sasquatch's avatar

This should be grounds for impeachment and removal. But we know how likely that will be....

Gary E Masters's avatar

Midterm elections will settle this, but not finish it.

Kate King's avatar

If we have actual elections.

eekeek's avatar

Call it the Trump/Epstein war, like the Trump/Epstein papers. Or just the Epstein war.

Sean Clinchy's avatar

I honestly don’t think that Trump thinks critically enough to provide distractions. He’s all id. He shoots from the hip, consequences be damned, or not even contemplated.

What are the chances that this attack results in democracy in Iran? I’d say pretty close to zero.

Sam Mertens (he/him)'s avatar

I’m sure they’ll be thinking fully warm and fuzzy thoughts about the US after we’ve killed a bunch of school children.

Sasquatch's avatar

Agree but cannot like.

Sam Mertens (he/him)'s avatar

Understood all too completely.

Marc Davis's avatar

I live in NYC,

I'm very concerned

Skip us and go to Mar A Lago

Sorry Marjorie Post (collateral damage)

Mark Asquino's avatar

As I wrote in another post, it's "Israel wagging the Donald."

Not Simple, Ever's avatar

What are the Gulf States’ objectives and how do we accomplish them? It seems we’ve become a service state for general tyranny.

Sasquatch's avatar

Besides diverting attention from the Epstein files, what's in it for Agolf Shitler? How much money are Israel and the Gulf States paying the Trump family enterprises?

Gary E Masters's avatar

Good question. I keep wondering if some one in the Middle East has cracked crypto files and loaded up Trump with fake money.

William Pifer-Foote's avatar

I guess by killing the Ayatollah, we are officially in jihad?

Linda Rose's avatar

The US strike on Iran killed the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , their leader for 36 years .

We are so screwed. They are going to retaliate. It may take years, but they will strike us. Holy hell