By John Q. Hosedrinker Why am I reading about our military’s plans on the internet before they happen? It’s frustrating to see news like “US approves plan to strike Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq, officials say” without any prior knowledge or official announcement. As a citizen, I feel left out of the decision-making process when it comes to our country’s military actions.
While I understand the need for secrecy and operational security, it raises questions about the transparency of our government and the trust we can place in their decision-making. Shouldn’t the American people have a say in matters of national security? Shouldn’t we be informed about potential military actions that could have far-reaching consequences?
The fact that we’re discussing these plans openly on the internet before they even happen is concerning. It seems like a breach of security and a failure on the part of our government to control sensitive information. It also makes me wonder about the effectiveness of these strikes if our enemies are given the opportunity to evacuate or move valuable assets before we even attack.
Moreover, I question the strategic value of these strikes. If the targets are specified as Iranian, does that mean we’re not only striking weapons caches but also Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) officers? While it’s important to take action against those who pose a threat, I can’t help but wonder if these strikes will truly deter Iran from funding and supporting militias in the region.
Take, for example, Israel’s regular airstrikes on IRGC targets in Syria. Despite these attacks, Iran continues to fund and support its proxies without batting an eye. So, how will the US strikes be any different? The limited nature of these strikes and the warning given to Iran make it seem like a weak response, done more for show than to achieve tangible results.
It’s frustrating to witness this pattern of announcing our military plans before executing them. We spend billions on advanced weaponry and stealth aircraft, only to have our politicians divulge sensitive information to the public and our adversaries. This weakens our position and undermines the element of surprise that is crucial in military operations.
I understand the desire to avoid starting a war with Iran, but why do we always feel the need to announce our intentions? It’s as if we are seeking validation or approval from the international community. If we truly want to protect our interests and stand up against Iran’s destabilizing activities, we should focus on hitting their weapons production facilities. These are responsible for thousands of civilian deaths and significant damage to the world.
We cannot allow Iran to keep getting away with plausible deniability while they enable terror campaigns and disrupt global shipping. The freedom of navigation in the world’s sea lanes is crucial for billions of people, and we must prioritize protecting civilian lives and maritime security.
Instead of these telegraphed strikes, which seem more like political theater than a decisive response, we should consider a more robust approach. It’s time to scare Iran into realizing the consequences of their actions. We need to send a strong message that there is a real possibility of triggering a full-scale war with the United States if they continue on their current path.
By targeting Iranian production facilities and cutting off the head of the snake, we can make it clear that their behavior will not be tolerated. The international community, except for Russia, sees Iran and its proxies as enemies. So if Iran throws a tantrum over strikes on their weapons production facilities, that’s on them.
However, the planned strikes on Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq, as reported, seem half-hearted and ineffective. Giving Iran time to evacuate valuable assets and warning them before the strikes only diminishes their impact. It’s reminiscent of appeasement policies that history has shown to be ineffective in dealing with belligerent enemies.
I hope to see a more significant response from the United States, one that has a lasting impact and deters Iran from continuing its destructive activities. The lives of American soldiers are at stake, and we owe it to them to take decisive action that truly addresses the threat we face.
In conclusion, the news of the approval of strikes on Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq leaves me with mixed feelings. On one hand, I appreciate the desire to protect American interests and hold Iran accountable for its actions. However, the limited nature of these strikes, the warning given, and the public announcement raise concerns about their effectiveness and the transparency of our government’s decision-making. We must strive for a stronger and more impactful response that truly addresses the threat posed by Iran and its proxies. Only then can we ensure the safety and security of our nation and its allies.