Trump's political risk in Iran

He didn't get support first.

I wrote for the McClatchy about Trump’s decision to attack Iran. An excerpt:

Both Presidents Bush went to war with the authorization of Congress, and with the widespread support of the American people. Trump has neither.

There was no Congressional authorization for this attack, even though the U.S. Constitution gives the legislative branch — not the president — the legal power to declare war. Trump might argue the post-9/11 authorization for military force gives him the legal right to order the attack, but it is impossible to imagine that Congress in 2001 intended to approve a blank check for new wars a quarter-century later.

As for popular support, well: An Economist/YouGov poll released on the eve of Saturday’s attack found that 60% of Americans — including, incidentally, 53% of Republicans — said the U.S. military should not get involved in Israel’s war on Iran.

That may change: Americans often rally ‘round the flag when war breaks out. But it suggests Trump didn’t bother to build a democratic foundation for his attack decision. That’s not really his style, and in any case he has spent the last six months seemingly determined to alienate the half of the country that did not vote for him.

But he may regret not getting more buy-in if there is blowback from Saturday night’s bombing raid.

Iran, after all, has a long history as a state supporter of terror. (The mullahs are not the good guys here, but neither was Saddam Hussein.) American forces and American civilians are more in danger of being attacked now than they were before the president’s decision.

If that happens — God forbid — Trump will have to own the result.

Side note: A lot of angry social media commenters have responded to the column by saying, essentially, Trump didn’t lead us into war, he stopped one.

And I dunno: We dropped a few 30,000-pound bombs on Iran. We weren’t dropping bombs before. I don’t know what to tell you. Looks like war to me.