Lessons from Iraq, as Trump teases attacks on Iran
09:55 Share

Before Donald Trump became President Trump, he was a candidate in a very crowded Republican primary.

And one way he stood out during his 2016 campaign was by bluntly attacking President George W. Bush for launching the Iraq war, like in this CBS News debate. George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East. Trump criticized the war, but also Bush's justification for it.

for the war. They said there were weapons of mass destruction, there were none, and they knew there were none. Bush did argue to Americans and to the world that Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi dictator, was building weapons of mass destruction and that the U.S. needed to stop him. Here's Bush talking about Iraq in 2002. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.

That assessment was, of course, inaccurate. No such stockpiles were found after the U.S. invasion of Iraq. And the Iraq war would become a quagmire. It cost the U.S. more than $2 trillion by one estimate. It killed more than 4,000 U.S. service members and well over 100,000 Iraqis. And it outlasted Bush's presidency, only officially concluding near the end of President Obama's first term. Today,

Today, I can report that as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America's war in Iraq will be over. And Obama would end up sending more troops into Iraq in 2014 after the rise of ISIS. There are still U.S. forces there today.

This history is important because, as we record this episode Wednesday afternoon on the East Coast, President Trump is threatening to bring the U.S. military into another Middle East conflict. As with Iraq, the justification for a potential attack on Iran is the alleged threat of a nuclear weapon. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It's very simple.

We don't have to go too deep into it. They just can't have a nuclear weapon. Consider this. Trump hated the war in Iraq. Has he learned its lessons? From NPR, I'm Ari Shapiro.

This message comes from Thuma. Create your oasis with Thuma, a modern design company that specializes in furniture and home goods. By stripping away everything but the essential, Thuma makes elevated beds with premium materials and intentional details. With clean lines, subtle curves, and minimalist style, the Thuma bed collection is available in four signature finishes to match any design aesthetic.

To get $100 towards your first bed purchase, go to thuma.co.npr.

This message comes from BetterHelp. June is Men's Mental Health Month, and every year, 6 million men in the U.S. suffer from depression. If you're feeling overwhelmed, the strongest thing you can do is ask for help. And BetterHelp can make it easy. Take a short online quiz and connect from home with a qualified therapist. Visit BetterHelp.com slash NPR today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P dot com slash NPR.

This message is from Synchrony Bank, who wants to remind you to stay flexible. Not the yoga-bending, circus-performing kind of flexible. Financially flexible, like with their high-yield savings account. Stay flexible at synchrony.com slash NPR. Member FDIC.

It's Consider This from NPR. As of Wednesday morning, President Trump would not rule out U.S. military action in the conflict between Israel and Iran. I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do. I can tell you this, that...

Iran's got a lot of trouble. And one of the central questions here is how close Iran is to having a nuclear weapon. Trump has dismissed his own spy chief's assessment about the threat. In March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified to Congress that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. But on Air Force One yesterday, Trump said, quote, I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having it.

All of this has echoes of the run-up to the war in Iraq. To discuss that, I spoke with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Steve Kahl. His latest book is The Achilles Trap, Saddam Hussein, the CIA, and the Origins of America's Invasion of Iraq. U.S. intelligence has been catastrophically wrong before on the status of a Middle Eastern country's nuclear ambitions and programs. So as someone who covered the drumbeat to the war in Iraq in 2003, how are you thinking about this moment with Iran?

Well, there are echoes and there are differences. Let's maybe start with the differences. There's a much deeper public and agreed body of evidence about Iran's nuclear capabilities. They have the ability to enrich and are, in fact, enriching uranium to levels that could be used with a little bit of tweaking for a bomb. Everybody agrees about that.

The question is their intention. And here, intelligence gets a little bit murkier, but that is a difference from Iraq. In the case of Iraq, there was no evidence publicly available, despite intrusive inspections, that the Iraqis were carrying out active nuclear bomb work. It was only the assertion of intelligence analysts that they were. And so if the available intelligence is one key difference, what do you see as the key similarities?

Well, some of it is the political use of intelligence to justify a war, to justify

articulate to publics in democratic societies, whether in Israel or in the United States, that, oh, we've got evidence that justifies this preemptive attack. You're going to have to trust us. That sounds similar, even though we can see, in the case of Iran, a much clearer and longer explicit nuclear program. Nonetheless, the threshold decision to attack is based on intelligence. So that's similar. And there's a second point

similarity that struck me over the last few days in particular, which is the disconnection between war aims and credible means to achieve those aims. What do you mean by that? What is the aim here? And I take it you think the credible means are not available. Yeah, well, let's start with the question. What are those aims? It's not clear. Israel has acted...

preemptively to stop Iran from breaking out and building a weapon at an unacceptable pace. And that was the first and remains an important part of Israel's explanation for why it had to attack. At the same time, Prime Minister Netanyahu has talked about regime change, has called upon the Iranian people to take matters into their own hands, a

a call that echoes one that George H.W. Bush made in early 1991 when he called on the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam Hussein. And that didn't end well because the aim of fomenting an internal rebellion was not matched by any ability of the United States to support the rebels. Here, too, no one is expecting the United States or Israel to launch a ground invasion of Iran and topple its governments, and yet there's talk of

loose talk about regime change as the goal of the entire operation. What do you make of the disconnect between Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard saying Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and President Trump apparently deciding he knows differently? Well, it sounds like Director Gabbard is articulating a judgment that has been publicized in the recent past, a judgment of American intelligence that

Iran has not made an explicit decision to go all the way towards building a weapon. It sounds as if Israel is reporting that their intelligence is of a different character. And this seems to explain the gap between the president and his director of national intelligence.

Ms. Gabbard is reporting what we understand to have been a longstanding U.S. judgment. And the president may be listening to his allies in Tel Aviv who are telling him, well, you've got to get up to date with what we've learned. In the run-up to the Iraq war, Secretary of State Colin Powell famously told President Bush that what he called the Pottery Barn Rule applied in the war. If you break it, you own it. Do you think that principle is relevant here?

Well, the Iraq War, after all, was a ground invasion. So once American forces reached Baghdad and chased Saddam Hussein out of his palace, they were the occupying power and they owned the country. And we all remember the unhappy result that unfolded, I think.

Analogy here is probably closer to the intervention in Libya because that was just a bombing campaign. It was undertaken for limited purposes, but it set off a chain reaction that neither President Obama, who ordered American participation, nor the U.S.

nor many of the other allies in Europe and the Arab world who participated in the intervention could foresee. It resulted in a very complex civil war that's in some ways still going on today more than a decade later. So these kinds of interventions may start out with limited aims, but our recent experience in the Middle East and elsewhere is that they don't always end there.

Do you think an off-ramp is likely, or does the momentum seem to be moving in the wrong direction? I think the key question for me now is what is President Trump going to decide to do? Israel is managing its own foreign policy. They have, since the October 7th attacks, been quite forceful in taking their own security into their own hands. They've done that here.

That's one path that the United States can't control. I think that's been demonstrated. What it can control is its own intervention and how far it goes. And I think, as the president said today, nobody knows what I'm going to do. And that sounds like that includes himself. That's journalist Steve Call, who is now at The Economist. Thank you. Thanks, Ari. Thanks for having me.

This episode was produced by Michael Levitt and Connor Donovan. It was edited by Tinbeat Ermias and William Troop. Our executive producer is Sammy Yenigan. It's Consider This from NPR. I'm Ari Shapiro.

This message comes from Jackson. Seek clarity in retirement planning at Jackson.com. Jackson is short for Jackson Financial, Inc., Jackson National Life Insurance Company, Lansing, Michigan, and Jackson National Life Insurance Company of New York. Purchase New York.

This message comes from NPR sponsor NetSuite by Oracle, your AI-powered business management suite. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, download the free e-book, Navigating Global Trade, Three Insights for Leaders at netsuite.com slash story.

This message comes from Capital One. Banking with Capital One helps you keep more money in your wallet with no fees or minimums on checking accounts. What's in your wallet? Terms apply. See CapitalOne.com slash bank for details. Capital One N.A., member FDIC.