Trump calls for regime change in Iran; media need to learn from their mistakes

Well, so much for all the weekend punditry that would follow Donald Trump’s State of the Union.

And expert analysis of the tax confusion caused by the president’s Supreme Court loss? That is still on hold.

When Trump unleashed bombardment against Iran, allied with Israeli forces, he did more than take a major, dangerous step against the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.

The attack targeted Iran’s supreme leader, and succeeded in killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a remarkable military achievement.

After such a push, Trump spoke an important phrase: regime change.

Those words have a hidden meaning because they echo George W. Bush’s speech from twenty years ago. Bush’s declared goal was to overthrow Saddam Hussein – instead of standing still, as his father did – even though he talked about lethal weapons. And that drive is aided by rally-round-the-flag, almost media coverage.

I feel strongly about this because when I was at the Washington Post, I did a long report in which the paper’s leaders admitted that they too had joined the march in eagerness to fight and downplayed evidence to the contrary. “I think I was part of the thinking group,” Bob Woodward told me.

EXILED IRANIAN KING SAYS MARCO’S ‘BEGINNING OF THE LAST’ RETURN

So Trump is no longer just trying to stop Iran’s nuclear program, which he said he did nine months ago with that surprise attack on Tehran’s underground facilities.

Now the president says he wants the Iranian people to overthrow the latest in a long line of theocracies ruling the country with an iron fist – as if they could do so automatically.

Not that I have any sympathy for these horrible ayatollahs. Trump called Khamenei “one of the worst people in history.”

The latest round of strikes in Iran ended in the ouster of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. (Sobhan Farajvan/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Many of Trump’s supporters are drawn to his America First language, which they see as an end to distant wars. Instead, they got the hostage of Nicolás Maduro, whose Venezuela is roughly the size of Iran. And the threats, finally come down, to take Greenland. In addition, now the second shelling of Iran.

Not surprisingly, some of his conservative allies oppose these military strikes. They want government money to be spent here, not in a volatile region fueled by centuries of racial hatred.

Iranian retaliation – against Israeli and US bases in several nearby Arab countries – was both swift and predictable. So now we find ourselves in a regional battle.

While the assassination of Khamenei sealed his fate, the targeted assassination of another head of state is sure to inflame critics who see the US acting as the Great Satan. At the same time, many neighboring countries, including Saudi Arabia, want nothing to do with Iran or its proxies like Hamas.

OPERATION EPIC FURY: HOW AMERICAN AIR POWER BREAKED IRAN’S DIFFERENCE

On the question of why the military escalation was started now, some of Trump’s explanations seem to be based on disputed or exaggerated evidence, as Tehran is no closer to ending the bomb. He may decide that the kingdom is too weak to survive for now.

But Iranian hardliners who absolutely refuse to abandon their nuclear ambitions have left Trump with little choice.

This is the gang of dictators who killed thousands of protesters in the streets. Trump has been saying that the practice has stopped, but that was not true, except for public hangings. All this reminds us of the violence in Beijing in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

Let’s go back even further. What civilized country would detain 52 diplomats for over a year, to pressure America to replace the ailing Shah Reza Pahlavi? I think the keyword is civilized.

This 444-day massacre ended the term of President Jimmy Carter, but also served notice that even American diplomats were not safe.

The Iranian Hostage Crisis spelled disaster for the Carter administration. (Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Chuck Schumer wants to move forward by invoking the War Powers Act, as the Constitution gives that authority to Congress. That’s too late.

Politically speaking, who would vote to undermine the administration as our pilots risk their lives in an attack on Iran?

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE HOTTEST NEWS OF THE DAY

Come on, in this day and age, presidents are fighting and Congress is holding hearings. Whether it was JFK and Cuba, Ronald Reagan and Grenada, George HW Bush and Panama, Bill Clinton and Kosovo or many others, the commander in chief gives orders.

But war also brings casualties, as Trump rightly says.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS PROGRAM

Before the invasion of Iraq, Bush’s CIA chief said there was a “slam-dunk” case that Saddam had illegal weapons. As the media sinks into coverage of Trump’s war on Iran, they may show the kind of skepticism that was largely absent from that last Middle East showdown.

Related Article