In recent weeks, the Trump administration has done some major saber-rattling when it comes to Iran, and as proof it used two events that allegedly took place in May, according to Salon:
Last week a senior Pentagon official accused Iran of having sabotaged four oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman on May 12 and of firing a rocket into Baghdad’s Green Zone on May 19. Iran executed these events, he said, either directly or through regional “proxies.”
Problem was, that so-called “evidence” presented at a briefing by Vice Admiral Michael Gilday was supported by no facts whatsoever:
Gilday was apparently chosen to give a non-political patina and the authority of the U.S. military to an accusation that clearly originated with Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. In a prepared statement, Gilday declared, “In the recent past, Iranian leaders have publicly threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. They have backed up those threats with actions, posturing their forces in an effort to intimidate the movement of international trade and global energy sources.”
In other words: If you repeat something enough times, it becomes truth, or at least qualifies when it comes to what passes for truth from an administration known for half-truths, conspiracy theories, and outright lies. Then again, what do you expect when the president himself is a pathological liar who doesn’t seem to have the ability to say anything truthful?
What did Admiral Gilday have to back up his claims? He told a reporter who asked that question:
“(The Iranians) have said publicly they were going to do things. We learned more through intelligence reporting they have acted upon those threats and they’ve actually — they’ve actually attacked.”
What Gilday did, according to investigative journalist Gareth Porter, is what’s known as “a crude syllogistic argument.” Here’s how that works:
(A is true, and B is logically related to A, so B must be true), as the entire basis for the accusation against Iran regarding these two incidents.
But what happens when the very premise of the argument is false on its face?
What a senior Iranian official actually said on April 22 was not that Iran intended to close the Strait of Hormuz unilaterally, but that it would do so in response to any effort to prevent Iran from using it. Alireza Tangsiri, head of the Revolutionary Guard Corps naval force, declared on April 22, “According to international law, the Strait of Hormuz is a marine passageway, and if we are barred from using it, we will shut it down.”
Who could blame the Iranians if they decided to shut down the Strait of Hormuz because the U.S. decided to ban all ships from Iran passing through it? The Iranians would be well within their rights under international law.
All of this suggests that war hawks within the administration — most notably National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — are preparing to do anything necessary in order to foment military action against Iran, even if it means lying the United States into war, the same way the Bush administration lied us into the Iraq quagmire.
President Trump desperately needs something (anything!) to change the discussion from impeachment. Does anyone doubt he’d start a war to save his own hide?
Featured Image Via the BBC
