The White House has been getting a lot of flak for broadcasting its plans to retaliate for the deaths of three U.S. soldiers in Jordan in an Iranian-backed drone strike. Heck, even CNN scoffed at the recent airstrikes in Syria and Iraq. Now the White House is trying to prove that it is actually taking a tough stance against the terror-sponsoring nation.
On Sunday, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan hit the Sunday shows to give the appearance that the response has only just begun.
On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Sullivan claimed that the United States will take “further action” against Iran.
“From our perspective, each action that we take is targeted at reducing the capabilities of the militias to be able to continue to conduct attacks against us and to send a clear message that the United States will respond when our forces are attacked, and we will respond with strength in a sustained way when American casualties are incurred,” he told host Dana Bash.
Recommended: Hamas-Linked UNRWA Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize
He wouldn’t say what that was because he didn’t want to “telegraph our punches,” which is hilarious given the fact the White House has already done that.
“We are not looking to take the United States to war,” Sullivan insisted. “So we are going to continue to pursue a policy that goes down both of those lines simultaneously, that responds with force and clarity, as we did on Friday night, but also that continues to hew to an approach that does not get the United States pulled into a war that we have seen too frequently in the Middle East.”
He added, “Past presidents have had to deal with a significant number of American casualties and American deaths in the Middle East because of war. This president is looking to defend our interests and to defend our troops.”
Sullivan also appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” where he told host Kristen Welker, “We intend to take additional strikes and additional action to continue to send a clear message that the United States will respond when our forces are attacked, or people are killed.”
While I don’t doubt the White House figures it will have to do more to convince the public it’s actually serious about retaliation, I’m not convinced they actually want to do this. Nor did I believe Sullivan when, in a separate appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” he didn’t rule out potential strikes in Iran.
“I would just say, from the perspective of Tehran, if they chose to respond directly to the United States, they would be met with a swift and forceful response from us,” Sullivan told host George Stephanopoulos.
Does anyone believe that Biden would dare strike Iran directly? He was part of an administration that went to extreme lengths to give Iran a path to nuclear weapons. Upon his occupation of the White House, he continued the Obama-era policy of appeasement by unfreezing billions of dollars for the regime and tolerating attacks on our troops. Biden would sooner play shuffle board with the Iranian mullahs at a retirement community than drop bombs on Tehran.
Let’s face it, the administration wants to save face, but they’re not going to undermine their longstanding policy of appeasement.