OPERATION EPIC FURY Has Been Planned Carefully

COMMON SENSE: The talking points for the Democrats to criticize Operation Epic Fury have become clear. They are accusing President Trump of being “reckless,” of having “no plan.” They are portraying him as a warmonger, an irresponsible leader with a cowboy mentality. This is how they have positioned him, but is this true? Is it fair?

I don’t think so. Although I don’t know what the future for Iran will look like after the war, I can demonstrate how careful and precise the leadup to Operation Epic Fury has been. Because I can, I believe it is accurate to assume that careful consideration has been given to what Iran’s future will look like. That we are not yet privy to this information is necessary for the success of the mission. That seems obvious. That the Democrats are exploiting this is also predictable. It’s what they do.

So, let me help you understand, by putting some things together that will allow you see how strategic the decision to attack has been.

After Operation Midnight Hammer last June, when B-2 bombers and Cruise Missiles decimated the Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, it was hoped that Ayatollah Khomeini would abandon his nuclear ambitions and end his call for “Death to America.”

That didn’t happen. Instead, Iran doubled down by using the uranium that had not been destroyed to create an arsenal of nine nuclear weapons. Although the Iranians tried to hide what they were doing, lying about it repeatedly, intelligence from the CIA and Mossad discovered their perfidy.

In my opinion, that was when Operation Epic Fury was given the green light to proceed—last summer. Even though it was, there were strategic things that needed to happen first.

It all began with President Maduro’s tenure in Venezuela coming to an end. This was necessary to ensure that, when Operation Epic Fury was launched, the world’s supply of oil would not be hindered dramatically. So, before striking Iran, taking out Maduro and restarting the production of crude in Venezuela was essential. That has happened.

Next, the naval buildup to attack Iran, which required two Strike Forces—one in the Arabian Sea, the other in the Mediterranean—was required. These ships were not sent to the Middle East to be a bluff. They were sent to attack, but the Ayatollah was given numerous opportunities to avoid destruction. However, being a Twelver Shiite, he preferred to be an Islamic martyr than to back down, so he refused to capitulate. That he would take this position, hardliner that he was, was predicted.

This meant that the attack was inevitable. To protect the free-flow of oil, which required having control over the Strait of Hormuz, meant that destroying Iran’s meager navy was a strategic aspect of the operation. That was accomplished by the end of the fourth day. Iran no longer has a navy, not one above water anyway.

Going one step further, President Trump authorized low-cost insurance for oil tankers that use the Strait. It has been offered to Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Aran Emirates and others. Our Navy is also escorting oil tankers through the Strait, protecting them from attack.

Therefore, from a geopolitical perspective, Trump has taken careful consideration to not disrupt life, not for Americans and not for other nations either. Because of this, I believe it is safe to say that careful consideration has been given to what Iran will look like after the cessation of hostilities. As usual, this means the talking points of the Democrats are deceptive, misleading and wrong—their specialty.