Americans Wanted Something Done Short Of Ground Troops, And They Got It.. I & I Editorial Board

[mystery-ak]

Trump’s Iran Deal: Americans Wanted Something Done Short Of Ground Troops, And They Got It
I & I Editorial Board
June 17, 2026
1 comment

President Donald Trump’s deal with Iran has received a lot of flak from both sides of the spectrum for its supposed shortcomings. Is it a failure before it’s even finalized? No, but that won’t stop the angry backbiting over an agreement that looks like it could significantly weaken Iran’s ability to cause trouble in the Middle East.

Let’s be clear: If Trump’s deal leads to a non-nuclear Iran, a freer flow of oil to the global economy, and a more stable Mideast, that will be a net gain for everyone concerned.

For the record, no, we’re not entirely satisfied, either. We didn’t want Trump to give an inch to the mullahs.

“The only choice they should be offered is to give up everything or lose it all to the almighty forces of the U.S. and Israeli militaries,” we wrote in late May.

But that was before people on both the left and the right began complaining about committing ground troops. Our own I&I/TIPP Poll showed a 57% majority of Americans opposed sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.

Those of us who have been around since Vietnam remember quite well that even the most gung-ho supporters of military action often recant when troops get wounded or killed. It happened in Vietnam, in Iraq, and in Afghanistan. It would have been no different in Iran.

more
https://issuesinsights.com/2026/06/17/trumps-iran-deal-americans-wanted-something-done-short-of-ground-troops-and-they-got-it/

[Smokin Joe]

What would the troops who wintered at Valley Forge have thought of the resolve of Americans today?

[BobfromWB]

Trump’s Iran Deal: Americans Wanted Something Done Short Of Ground Troops, And They Got It
I & I Editorial Board
June 17, 2026
1 comment

President Donald Trump’s deal with Iran has received a lot of flak from both sides of the spectrum for its supposed shortcomings. Is it a failure before it’s even finalized? No, but that won’t stop the angry backbiting over an agreement that looks like it could significantly weaken Iran’s ability to cause trouble in the Middle East.

Let’s be clear: If Trump’s deal leads to a non-nuclear Iran, a freer flow of oil to the global economy, and a more stable Mideast, that will be a net gain for everyone concerned.

For the record, no, we’re not entirely satisfied, either. We didn’t want Trump to give an inch to the mullahs.

“The only choice they should be offered is to give up everything or lose it all to the almighty forces of the U.S. and Israeli militaries,” we wrote in late May.

But that was before people on both the left and the right began complaining about committing ground troops. Our own I&I/TIPP Poll showed a 57% majority of Americans opposed sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.

Those of us who have been around since Vietnam remember quite well that even the most gung-ho supporters of military action often recant when troops get wounded or killed. It happened in Vietnam, in Iraq, and in Afghanistan. It would have been no different in Iran.

more
https://issuesinsights.com/2026/06/17/trumps-iran-deal-americans-wanted-something-done-short-of-ground-troops-and-they-got-it/

The guy who wrote that is as unbelievably delusional as 47.