'Moving the goalposts': Rubio’s Iran war defense sparks fierce backlash

President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio continue to appear at odds with each other’s messaging on Iran, as Secretary Rubio declared four “clear objectives” for the war — objectives Trump has said have already been met, with Rubio describing Iran’s new current leadership as possibly impermanent, while the president praises them.

On ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” Secretary Rubio on Monday said it is unclear if the current Iran regime will “end up being in charge,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s Alex Ward.

“We have to see [if] these people end up being the ones in charge, seeing if they’re the ones who have the power to deliver,” he said.

Also on Monday, President Trump announced that the U.S. “is in serious discussions with A NEW, AND MORE REASONABLE, REGIME to end our Military Operations in Iran. Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched.'”

“Here are the clear objectives of the operation,” Rubio said, as the State Department posted. “You should write them down: 1. The destruction of Iran’s air force 2. The destruction of their navy 3. The severe diminishing of their missile launching capability 4. The destruction of their factories.”

Opening the Strait of Hormuz — which Trump demanded and critics note was open before Trump began his war thirty-one days ago, is not listed among the four objectives Rubio declared on Monday. Trump has stated previously that the first three have already been met — and he is reportedly preparing to send thousands more troops to the Middle East, possibly for a ground invasion.

Rubio’s stated objectives drew strong backlash.

“Perhaps the reason Secretary Rubio is having trouble convincing people that these are the only objectives is that none of these goals require thousands of ground troops, which makes it curious why they are flowing into the region right now as I type this tweet,” noted associate professor of political science Christopher Clary.

“No mention of nuclear capabilities, vague language that leaves room for interpretation. Preparing the media space to declare victory and leave?” asked Institute for Military Operations Professor Olivier Schmitt.

“Always good to have clear objectives laid out one month after you start a war,” noted Eli Clifton of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

“Moving the goal posts isn’t the solution Mr. Secretary. What happened to nuclear weapons? Uranium enrichment? Support to proxies? Civilian rising up to challenge the regime? Reopening the Strait of Hormuz?” posited retired U.S. Army military intelligence officer Jon Sweet.

• george conway
• noam chomsky
• civil war
• Kayleigh mcenany
• Melania trump
• drudge report
• paul krugman
• Lindsey graham
• Lincoln project
• al franken bill maher
• People of praise
• Ivanka trump
• eric trump