Rep. Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said it was too early to know the success of a series of U.S. attacks against Iran — calling the strikes a “massive gamble” on the part of President Donald Trump and citing past U.S. military action in the region.
“I mean, we’ve seen this movie before. Every conflict in the Middle East has its Senator Tom Cotton who promised us mushroom clouds. In the Iraq war, it was Condoleezza Rice promising us a mushroom cloud. And initially — and this is true of every one of these wars — in Libya, in Iraq — in Iraq and Afghanistan, initially, things look pretty good. Saddam Hussein is gone. Moammar Gadhafi is gone. The Afghan Taliban are gone. And then over time, we start to learn what the cost is. Four thousand four hundred Americans dead in Iraq. The Taliban back in power,” Himes told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl.
Himes noted that it is too soon to call the attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities a success and cautioned against applauding them.
“But bottom line is we don’t know, and if you look at the three conflicts I just mentioned, I would keep the optimism under the hat for a little while yet,” he added.
Himes also said that he was “disturbed” by the fact that the strikes were undertaken without the approval of Congress, which holds the sole authority to declare war.
“There’s not much ambiguity in the Constitution about who gets to approve these things,” Himes said.
Here are more highlights from Himes’ interview:
Himes on Trump critics supporting Saturday’s strikes
Karl: But some of the president’s critics have actually applauded the action last night. Let me read you what Adam Kinzinger — obviously no friend of the president — had to say. He said, “The U.S. attack on the nuclear facilities in my opinion was the right call. We will see what the results are, but now, the key — but now, the key is suppressing surface-to-surface missile fire and negotiate an end to the fight with Iran. Good call by the president.” Is it possible that this ends up being just that, a good call by President Trump?
Himes: Is it possible? Again, setting aside the constitutional issues which we should never set aside because the Constitution matters, is there some chance that, you know, we got all the nuclear material, the regime falls, and you know, next spring, we’re picnicking at Summer Con? Yeah, there is some chance that that is true. But if you look at the history — and again, all we have is history to go on — if you look at the history of our military involvements in the region, they almost never end with the best-case scenario. In fact, they usually end in something approximating the worst-case scenario.
On the worst-case scenario in Iran
Karl: And what do you think is the worst-case scenario?
Himes: Oh, well, the worst-case scenario is that, you know, the Iranians have a lot more missiles than we think they do, and we end up with dead soldiers and sailors in the region, that they managed to move the nuclear material out of Fordo, and it’s sitting in a warehouse right now. And as we speak, they are building a device. I mean, believe me, I will concede that there is some small chance for a best-case scenario here, there always is. But again, history suggests that you better be well — you know, aware of the fact that the best-case scenario almost never happens. So, I mean, you can paint a truly apocalyptic picture of any number of a dozen.
ABC News: Top Stories
Read the full article .
