It all comes down to really one question. Is it acceptable to the United States for the Iranian regime to have nuclear weapons? If the answer is no, then Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have performed a tremendous service to the world. The wicked Iranian regime has directly and indirectly killed perhaps 1000 Americans since it came to being in 1979. It was the source of the vast majority of instability in the Middle East since that time, leading to the collapse of an independent Lebanon and propping up the Syrian regime. And let’s not forget the millions of Iraqis that died during their brutal war. They have assassinated many, and have ordered assassinations of many Americans (e.g., Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump and John Bolton) that they (thus far) have not been able to accomplish. The Iranian Islamic theological framework of Mahdism specifically leads to continual military conflict, as their apocalyptic worldview hopes to usher in the return of the 12th Imam at the end of time. The naive hopes of possible peaceful negotiations have been dashed time and time again. And day by day, year by year, Iran crept closer to nuclear capability. And the choice ultimately was should we allow them to be a nuclear power, or should we eliminate that threat for at least many years, and perhaps forever?

What both the left and the right often confuse about Mr. Trump is that while he is in no way a hawk, he is certainly not a dove. He does favor peace, and his hostility to war is long-standing. Yet he is not naive in the end. I am not generally a fan of Mr. Trump’s pattern of ambiguity on his position; everything is not a deal to be done. Yet in this case, my take is that he walked the line perfectly. There was complete clarity on what the acceptable outcome for the U.S at the end would be–either the easy way or the hard way–the end of the nuclear capability of Iran. But then his beloved ambiguity comes in: I might attack, I might not, we’ll have to see. I believe this was not a diplomatic feint; there was a real possibility of a negotiated peace, “if they take the deal.” But they didn’t. And then our U.S. military responded with devastating force. In the president’s words, the nuclear sites were “completely and totally obliterated.”

Now the world waits to see the Iranian response. Given their theological framework, which precludes what most of us would call rational behavior, it is not all clear that they’ll follow Mr. Trump’s call for peace. Yet in his statement to the world last night, he was equally clear that any intransigence (or military response) on the part of the Iranians will be met with overwhelming U.S. response. Iranian threats of a response are not to be ignored, yet the prior actions by the Israelis have significantly reduced any capability. Iran is not a paper tiger, yet their teeth have been ground very dull. As the economist Thomas Sowell reminds us, there are no solutions, only prudent tradeoffs. The tradeoff here seems highly in our favor. Many prior U.S. presidents have allowed the Iranian threat to grow and did not act. Yet no prior president had the most advantageous military opportunity that the Israelis had enabled.

So let’s think about the political economy implications. Here are some worth thinking about. First, the U.S. public opinion generally supports military action in the immediate aftermath if the objectives are worthwhile and there is no long-term U.S. entanglement. The relatively easy thing has been done (bombing Iran), and now the hard part of defending against any Iranian counterattack is underway. Should Mr. Trump and the U.S. military manage this well, Mr. Trump’s stock will be very high both at home and abroad. If we don’t, obviously the reverse. Any criticisms of Mr. Trump will be generally muted in the short run, e.g., limited to people like AOC, Thomas Massie and MTG. Others will wait to see how this plays out, with Democrats saying things like “there are many questions that need to be answered” and Republicans cautiously supporting the president and focusing on the removal of the threat.

Second, and one I’m particularly enjoying, is that the conservative leftists that are influential in the MAGA movement are being marginalized. Tucker Carlson’s claim that thousands of Americans would die is going to look increasingly bad if we handle the next phase well.

US media commentor Tucker Carlson has warned against a potential US-Iran war, with some suggesting his post hinted that Israel is an “enemy” of the US. Carlson took to social media site X on Monday to warn that following Trump’s tariff policy, “it’s clear that now is the worst possible time for the United State to participate in a military strike on Iran”. “Thousands of Americans would die. We’d lose the war that follows. Nothing would be more destructive to our country,” Carlson said, blaming Iran hawks from the neoconservative movement for the tensions. “Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy,” he added.

Third (and related) is we’re getting ready to see the end of “forever wars” cries and it will have been done by Donald Trump himself! The nonsense that we’re limited to neocon nation building wars or isolationism as the only possible military choices was always ridiculous. We can break Iran and leave them broken. If they rebuild with worse leadership and threaten the U.S., then break them again. Unless you intend to foolishly attempt to recreate nations in our own image with nation building, there is almost no need for the U.S. to have any boots “on the ground” with the possible exception of special forces (e.g., navy seals) for part of the operation. Air power was sufficient in Bosnia and it will likely be so here. That does not mean this is a risk-free operation, but the risk is completely different from most of the stated fears of getting us into a quagmire. Could that happen? Not likely with Donald Trump in charge.

Finally we need to zoom outward. Many of the isolationists within the MAGA movement (including those that are in very senior positions) repeatedly claim that China is our strategic threat, and that Ukraine and Iran are not our concerns. They are half-right–China is our most strategic threat (although a nuclear-armed Iran would not be that far below in my mind). But they are completely wrong about the linkage in other areas. Just as Mr. Biden’s spectacularly bad retreat from Afghanistan suggested to Mr. Putin that now is the time to invade Ukraine, so likewise China is completely focused on how the U.S. responds to both the Russian aggression in Ukraine and how we dealt with Iran. Conservative leftists can claim that you wouldn’t have the evil axis of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea combined against the U.S. if we hadn’t “pushed Russia into China’s arms.” Perhaps. But this is also irrelevant–that is, in economic terms, a sunk cost. We are where we are. China has seen it’s forever partner Russia humiliated again and again in their conflict with the much smaller Ukraine. The recent spiderweb operation was only the latest. Russia’s vaunted Black Sea fleet is basically limited to safe harbors, fighting against a nation without a Navy! China, which historically has conflicts with Russia, has used this relationship transactionally (for cheap oil) but has seen that Russia is not a particularly valuable ally in any future conflict when they can’t even beat Ukraine. Similarly Iran has been shown to be not able to defend itself, and depending on what happens in the next few days, may not even be in a position to supply them oil in a conflict. China is seeing that aggressive action against the west by its allies has been a serious miscalculation. It is all the more important that we continue to arm Ukraine to not allow Xi Jinping’s partner to succeed. The only question in Xi Jinping’s mind is what level of commitment and staying power the U.S. will have if a conflict over Taiwan takes place. What has happened already in Ukraine and now in Iran has to shake his confidence. He cannot count on any support from his allies. We should continue to ensure that this conclusion stays that way.

This morning is a good morning. It is good to be an American. Whatever happens next, we know what will not happen–we will not have a nuclear weapon for years if ever from Iran. I hope you too have been praying for Mr. Trump’s leadership during the runup to this operation; we need to keep he and our military in our minds, and pray that the Iranians will now take a different course.