A War the U.S. Didn’t Need
An Iranian Red Crescent volunteer stands by the Shahran oil depot after U.S.–Israeli strikes in Tehran, Iran, on March 8, 2026. (Sobhan Farajvan via Pacific Press/Sipa USA)
The costs of this war, both to date and looking ahead, far outnumber the benefits. It is precisely for this reason that this war of choice was ill-advised.
--:--
--:--
Upgrade to Listen
5 mins
Produced by ElevenLabs using AI narration
7
It has been just over 40 years since historian Barbara Tuchman published The March of Folly. The book is about wars that ought not to have been fought, as they went against the interests of the empire or country that undertook them, when better alternatives were available. I agree with Tuchman’s thinking and have since termed these kinds of conflicts “wars of choice” as opposed to those of necessity.
Today’s war in Iran is a war of choice.
As has been widely pointed out, evidence of the kind of immediate threat from Iran that the Trump administration cited to justify its massive military attack has yet to emerge. The U.S. had many other options, including enhanced sanctions and diplomacy.
Start Your Free Trial to Unlock This Story
Support our journalism and unlock all of our investigative stories and provocative commentary about the world as it actually is. Get your first 7 days free.
$8.33/month
Billed as $100 yearly
$10/month
Billed as $10 monthly
Already have an account?
Sign In
