Policy on Iran

The Powell Doctrine regarding war includes the statement, using overwhelming force to ensure a quick victory. In laymen’s terms one interpretation is, if you are going to war, go to win, or otherwise stay home. When to go to war is not always easy to determine and sometimes requires a change in plans. When President Wilson ran for his second term his campaign slogan was, “He kept us out of war”. He took office on March 4, 1917 and declared war on Germany on April 2, 1917 just 29 days later. When Trump campaigned for his second term, he was quite clear on Iran. Trump doesn’t even pretend to have human rights or democracy concerns with Iran, just as he doesn’t with the rest of the world. He squarely restricts his demands on Iran to a change in its nuclear and foreign behavior. His position was modified after he was elected to: Based on 2026 reports, Donald Trump has expressed vocal support for Iranian protesters, warning Iranian authorities against killing demonstrators and urging the population to take over their government.

Why Iran and why now

During the Revolutionary War which lasted 8 years, 25,000 soldiers died and that would be the equivalent of 350,000 dying today based on population. This was a fight for freedom and was against a far superior force. The war today is seen by many Iranians as their fight for freedom but they have no weapons. Trump says that the people want the US to help but there is no confirmation from inside Iran to support this. What we do know is that the people were protesting in the streets. This is from Google AI as reported by Al Jazeera: Protests erupted in Iran in late 2025 and early 2026, driven by a severe economic crisis—including skyrocketing inflation, high food prices, and a crashing currency (the rial)—and long-standing frustration with systemic corruption and authoritarian rule. These nationwide demonstrations escalated into broader political demands for the removal of the clerical leadership and greater freedoms, particularly regarding women’s rights. In 2011 the US intervened in Libya to stop Gaddafi from attacking civilians, protect human rights and support rebels, ultimately leading to a regime change. Hillary Clinton Susan Rice and Samantha Powers convinced Obama to attack Libya based on the “Responsibility to Protect” rule. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P or RtoP) is a global political commitment endorsed by the UN in 2005 to prevent genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. It mandates that states protect their populations; if they fail, the international community must intervene via diplomatic or, as a last resort, military action.

War crimes

Iran specifically targeted power generation in Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE with little notice in the press but Trump announce such a strategy and some in the US said this would be a war crime. Going back to the Gulf War in 1991 and a half dozen times since the US has attacked the electric grid infrastructure in foreign countries. This was also used extensively in WW 2. During WW 2 this was only part of attacking civilian areas. Cities with no military bases or weapons facilities were bombed and millions of civilians were killed and injured. This was a deliberate attempt to demoralize the enemy which was considered the best way to win the war. Far more people in Japan were killed by firebombing cities than were killed by the two nuclear bombs. The threat to bomb power plants posed a new problem, when Sen Jeff Merkley condemned Trump’s threat to bomb power plants and urged US service members to refuse any orders to do so. This was reminiscent of when Gen Milley back in 2021 called China and said: In the calls, Milley sought to assure Li the United States was stable and not going to attack and, if there were to be an attack, he would alert his counterpart ahead of time, the report said.

Leaks

Trump announced today that someone leaked the fact that one of the pilots downed over Iran was not rescued. Then Iran ordered all people to be on the lookout for this pilot. This of course, put this airman in danger. Something similar happened when the US was looking for Osama bin Laden It is widely believed that media reporting on U.S. intelligence capabilities in the late 1990s—specifically a 1998 Washington Times article—disclosed that the U.S. was monitoring his satellite phone usage, leading Osama bin Laden to stop using it and go "off the grid". This made it more difficult for the US to capture him. Is it acceptable for the press to publish info that may be harmful to US troops? This is a question of free speech and is not easily resolved. Back in WW 2 the saying was loose lips sinks ships.

Vote for

Senator Van Hollan has proposed the Working Americans' Tax Cut Act" (WATCA). It will eliminate federal income taxes for individuals’ earnings under $46,000 and for married couples under $92,000. The tax relief is phased out for marrieds up to $153,000. It will be paid for by a tiered surtax on income over $1 million for singles and $1.5 million for marrieds. In addition, it increases the child tax credit up to $3,600 for children 6 and older up to age 17 and $4,320 for children under 6 with a baby bonus of $6,360. Senator Cory Booker has a somewhat similar plan. This is interesting from two standpoints. First it will help reduce the income gap and second it is a proposal by democrats instead of just opposing Trump. It gives people something to vote for.

Obama removals

Obama’s border policy while he was in office. He emphasized that border security must be strengthened and stated that those who cross illegally should be held accountable. He deployed more agents and technology to the southern border. His administration focused on deporting individuals apprehended at the border, as well as those with criminal records. During his two terms he deported 3 million and turned back another two million at the border. About 75% of deportees were removed via, non-judicial removals, meaning without a judge to determine asylum status.

China or Mexico

Mexico is becoming the new China. Starting after the end of the cold war in 1990, China began its rise as the newest manufacturing model. Their big draw was low wages and companies from the West were willing to invest large sums to make products in China and sell them in the West were the consumers with money lived. The government of China, while maintaining its communist political side, recognized that the true economic growth was based on selling products to the West and in particular the US. They set up a pseudo free market and set government policies to encourage exports. It was a resounding success and the GDP of China went from $400 billion in 1990 to $11 trillion in 2015 a staggering 24% annual increase. The first signs of trouble came when US relations began to crumble. The West realized that shipping all of their production to China was a national defense problem. During this period labor cost in China tripled and by 2019 the average wage in China was $4.50 compared to Mexico at $3.95. Thus started the great process of near shoring and reshoring. During this time period the cost of the standard 40-foot shipping container from China to the US increased from $3000 to $18000 or a six-fold increase. People became concerned that important products like pharmaceuticals were no longer made in America. Trade deals with China and Mexico gave a big edge to Mexico. The US has now undertaken steps to reduce the drug traffic from Mexico and offer safety to trade routes. The trade deficit with China declined from $295 billion in 2024 to $202 billion in 2025 while the deficit with Mexico increased from $175 billion in 2024 to $197 billion in 2025. This trend is expected to continue as the US builds up its industrial base as it brings back manufacturing jobs back home. This process of America First is taking place in many industries where the US can no longer rely on foreign countries for necessary goods.