The 72-Hour Rule

The rule of thumb is that, if the world is up in a hysteria about something Trump did, give it about three days before joining the chorus. The response to the Soleimani assassination has interestingly muddled. We're used to hear the mainstream media operate on a common frequency, often co-ordinating on the verbiage of their headlines and whatnot. Following the strike, responses ranged from a refusal to condemn but vague questioning of Trump's ability to handle the situation, to full-on renunciations of American imperialism. The narrative now seems to be that Trump should have informed Congress before authorizing the strike. Of course, that would not actually be possible, as the Democrats would leak the top secret information in whatever way would derail Trump's decision.

It's not particularly instructive to over-analyze the mainstream media response, since we know they'll simply report in whatever way they believe will be most damaging to the president. Let's look at someone more on our side of things. The Economic Collapse blog (linked on sidebar) is prone to hyperbole and doom scenarios. Let's look at the headlines that unfolded in the course of about a week.

• Iran, It’s Your Move – Trump’s Takedown Of Iranian General Qassim Suleimani Is Likely To Start A Global War
• Iran Vows Revenge Against The United States, And The Phrase “World War 3” Is Now Trending…
• Why Is Iran Flying A Blood Red Flag Over A Famous Mosque That Is Directly Associated With The Mahdi?
• Americans Are Debating About Whether We Will Go To War With Iran, But The Iranians Say The War Has Already Started
• Welcome To World War 3 – Just Pray That You Will Be Able To Survive It
• Everybody In America Should Stand Up And Applaud President Trump, Because He Just Changed The Course Of History

Doom, doom, doom...Trump's a savior! That last one begins,

If someone else had been in the White House, this crisis could have easily turned out much differently.  Sadly, most Americans have no idea that we were literally on the brink of the beginning of World War 3 this week.

While tensions were high and war was certainly possible, there were many indications that the various involved factions were posturing and war was not the likely outcome. The first hint came immediately after the event, when Iran pledged to take the matter before the UN. That is not an indication of a side determined to plunge into a very costly - perhaps regime-ending - war. Then the event was condemned by the Iraqi Parliament - in a non-binding resolution in which the Sunnis and Kurds abstained. Not quite the strong reaction the media was making it out to be. Then, when Iran sent a volley of missiles towards bases hosting US troops, many were certain that it was the beginning of a hot war. But the missiles caused little damage and no casualties (similar to Trump's missile attacks on Syria a couple years ago).

The posturing is as follows:

• Trump was determined not to have his Benghazi moment, and established a red line that US embassies are to be left alone
• The Iraqi Shia were compelled to show an effort to rebuke US attacks on Iran
• The Iranians could not offer a meek non-response. Their leadership can sell their phony military response being a strong enough show of strength to cause the Great Satan to back down in its aggression

The result is a scenario where all sides can achieve their goals without war, which no one actually desires. Trump didn't pull back the US from the brink of war, because we were never at the brink of war.

Also, very interesting to note, is that Israel broke ranks, declaring that the US would be alone if war broke out with Iran. That is a curious development, and I don't currently know what to make of it.