'It's possible that Trump believes the attacks give him more bargaining leverage with Iran. But a more likely explanation is that the attacks fit perfectly with Trump's desire to divert attention from his multiple failures at home: The on-again-off-again tariffs that have spooked financial markets while eliciting no meaningful concessions from other nations (especially China). An immigration crackdown that's been stymied by federal judges. The so-called "big beautiful bill" that's in deep trouble in the Senate. Trump's embarrassing tiff with Musk. His failures to achieve peace in either Ukraine or Gaza. And last weekend's record-breaking "No Kings" demonstrations as compared to his scrawny military parade. Besides, there's nothing like a war to help a wannabe dictator like Trump justify more "emergency" powers.' Do you believe this to be true?

'In March, Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, testified before Congress that the intelligence community "continues to assume that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader [Ali] Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003." Iran's growing stockpile of enriched uranium could allow it to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Experts differ in how long Iran would need to make a usable nuclear weapon out of the fissile material. In the face of such uncertainty, it's useful to recall George W. Bush's claims of Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction" that proved bogus — at a cost of 4,431 American lives, 31,994 Americans wounded in action, and an estimated 295,000 Iraqi lives.' Do you think Iran was building a nuclear weapon?

'Trump told reporters on Friday that Gabbard was "wrong" to say that Iran is not currently building a nuclear weapon but he didn't say where he was getting his intelligence from. In May, Trump fired his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, and dismissed half the professionals at the National Security Council (the Middle East section went from 10 staffers to five). Trump is being advised on Iran by a close-knit group of political advisers and ideologues, none of whom has deep knowledge of Iran or the Middle East. All are totally loyal to Trump. (They include JD Vance; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Chief of Staff Susie Wiles; Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller; Steve Witkoff, Trump's envoy to the Middle East who was formerly a luxury real estate developer; lieutenant general Dan (Razin') Caine, now serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; Erik ("The Gorilla") Kurilla, the head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM); John Ratcliffe, CIA director who served in the first Trump administration and was previously a Texas congressman and a mayor of a small town; and Steve Bannon.) As a result, he's probably getting decent advice about what's good for Trump but not about what's good for America or the world. It's an inevitable consequence of purging from the government anyone more loyal to the United States than to him. Besides, Trump only listens to information he wants to hear.' Do you think Trump is getting good information?

As retaliation, Iran 'could wholly or partially close the straights of Hormuz, a vital waterway through which about a fifth of global oil must pass. While not completely closed during past conflicts, Iran possesses the capabilities to significantly disrupt or halt traffic with mines, anti-ship missiles, and air defense systems. This would cause oil prices to soar in the United States and Europe (helping Big Oil but not American consumers). Iran could also engage in a range of terrorist actions directed toward the United States. No one knows the extent of any "sleeper cells" in the U.S. or in Europe. The mere possibility could give Trump more license to restrict civil liberties.' Do you think Iran will retaliate?

'Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, in which Mark Antony (in Act 3, Scene 1) says: "Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war" — signifying that war unleashes chaos and violence. Now that the bombing has begun, there's no telling where this will end.' Did you know where the phrase 'Dogs of War' came from?