The United States and Israel started a war with Iran over the weekend, dropping bombs in multiple cities across that country. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the bombing. So too, according to reports, were more than 100 children at a school in the Iranian city of Minab. Iran's retaliatory strikes against U.S. military bases in the Middle East have so far resulted in at least four dead American service members. Three American F-15 fighters have also been shot down over Kuwait, reportedly by friendly fire. Israel has also begun attacking Lebanon, and Iran has extended its retaliation to oil production facilities in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
While bringing the Middle East to the brink of total war, Donald Trump found a few minutes on Sunday to speak to reporters from The New York Times. The resulting article is a stunning instance of three reporters attempting to to apply a sheen of reason and dignity to the ramblings of a confused old man. "Mr. Trump offered several seemingly contradictory visions of how power might be transferred to a new government — or even whether the existing Iranian power structure would run that government or be overthrown," was the strained description the Times cooked up for what Trump had to say about his plans for Iran.
He first suggested that Iran's elite military forces turn over its weapons to the country's populace, voluntarily abdicating power. "They would really surrender to the people, if you think about it," Trump said. He then suggested that Venezuela, and the succession of power that occurred after the United States kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro, could serve as a model for how the administration might achieve its goals. "What we did in Venezuela, I think, is the perfect, the perfect scenario," Trump said. "Everybody’s kept their job except for two people." Trump also indicated that he had "three very good choices" for whom he wanted to assume power in Iran.
(The Times' attempt to analyze these obviously contradictory and insane statements: "His answer implied that what worked in Venezuela would work in Iran, a nation with about three times the population and a military and clerical leadership that has ruled with increasing repression since the 1979 revolution." OK guys, thanks.)
Hmm, but maybe we shouldn't be counting on those "three very good choices" after all. ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl also spoke with Trump by phone on Sunday, and was informed that those handpicked candidates to assume power are actually dead. "The attack was so successful it knocked out most of the candidates," Trump said. "It's not going to be anybody that we were thinking of because they are all dead. Second or third place is dead."
Meanwhile, Trump's younger and less-addled surrogates aren't having an easier time justifying the United States' attack on Iran. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth gave a news conference this morning in which he said, "This is not a so-called regime change war, but the regime sure did change." He also made sure to stress that this will not be a "politically correct war." Vice President JD Vance also went on TV to say, "We're not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program." Meanwhile, CNN reported that briefers from the Pentagon admitted to members of Congress that Iran did not pose an imminent threat to American military bases in the region.
It has been darkly enthralling to watch the administration's self-contradictory nonsense test various news outlets' ability and willingness to fall in line. While the consent-manufacturing machine groans to life, Trump is busy undermining himself during sleepy phone calls with reporters. This is the stress test that Trump's administrations have always been uniquely suited to apply to America's narrative-setters: Whether politicians and reporters could maintain their eagerness to talk about Iran's nuclear ambitions, focus on the oppressiveness of Khamenei's regime, and praise the alleged precision of the United States' attack in the face of what's actually unfolding in front of their eyes, which is a war being waged by bloodthirsty sycophants who report to a curdled old man who cannot offer any consistent explanation for his own actions and was doing a little dance in his dumpy ballroom just hours before dropping a bomb on a school. This dissonance has been successfully metabolized many times before while Trump has been in office. It'll perhaps be harder this time, but I believe our august media institutions can do it.
