On Tuesday morning, Americans woke up to the news that the U.S. embassy in Baghdad was physically assaulted and besieged — not by anodyne “mourners,” as the fine folks at The New York Times would have us believe, but by Iranian regime-supporting radical jihadists. The terrorists’ physical storming of the embassy was allegedly in direct retaliation for U.S. airstrikes conducted against Kataib Hezbollah, which is the Iraqi proxy for the broader Hezbollah terrorist group — itself a wholly owned and operated Shiite Islamist outfit of the jihadist Iranian regime. In many respects, Iraq is increasingly a mere Iranian satrapy.
Debate about how best to deal with the Iranian regime, which has been in a ceaseless state of war with the West since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, continues to percolate throughout American conservative discourse. Paleoconservative-leaning Buchananites, led by Fox News host Tucker Carlson, came out swinging hard against retaliatory American military action after the mullahs downed an American unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in June. In September, the debate rekindled after Iran and its proxies launched an unprecedented attack against Saudi Arabian oil facilities. That Iranian attack against Saudi Arabia took place roughly a week after Trump’s dismissal of then-National Security John Bolton, who is famously hawkish on Iran.
.png)
.png)
