Skip to content

Dude, where’s my exit strategy? Lieberman’s drive-by on Iran.


By: Emilian Papadopoulos

First, Vietnam. Then, Iraq. Next, Iran?

If you have an exit strategy for getting out of this pattern, now’s your time to shine.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman’s (I-CT) statement on Sunday’s Face the Nation that the U.S. should consider a military strike against Iran has sparked a truly impressive variety of comments.

There are plenty of people that call him “the Senator from Israel” and rail against his hawkish leanings.

Others laud him for his foresight and for sticking to his guns, taking a relatively unprecedented position because it’s what he believes is right.

Bill Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, had this to say:

[When visiting Iraq, Lieberman] was struck by the depth and breadth of Iranian involvement in helping the terrorists attack U.S. soldiers … and also that Iran is now helping not just their fellow Shia but all kinds of groups, including Sunni al-Qaeda-related groups who are attacking US soldiers … Does that mean there is planning on the table or does that make it at least easier for the administration to consider it? … It sure does.

One of the only people who seems to have kept quiet since Lieberman’s comments on Sunday is Lieberman himself. Given that his suggestion was such a significant one - a military strike into Iran that could affect the war in Iraq, turn into a full-blown regional conflict, or have even greater consequences - he owes it to the public debate and the policy community to flesh out his idea.

A few issues he should talk about:

  • Perhaps most importantly, the exit strategy: hoping that Iran will absorb a military strike inside its territory and not take a swing back seems like a pretty weak plan. So, where would Lieberman draw the line? Here’s another question we’ve become more familiar with since March 2003: what exactly does success look like?
  • The case for military intervention: the American public, and indeed many publics outside the U.S., are skeptical of aggressive military interventions by the U.S. following the Iraq WMD fiasco. Has an adequate case been made about the threat of Iran in general and the training camp Lieberman mentioned in particular?
  • Priorities: if bombing Iran risks a greater regional war, then the question of resources and priorities has to be asked. Given the current state of the military, putting resources in one place means taking them away from somewhere else, and the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan still need all the attention and effort they can get. Even if Lieberman’s suggested strike is a good idea, is now the right time?

    These issues are just the tip of the iceberg. Lieberman has only scraped the surface so far, and a policy recommendation of such titanic magnitude deserves more than just a drive-by mention. The Senator from Connecticut has the floor.


    • Tags: , , ,
    Related Posts:
  • None

    • Comments 2

    1. Max wrote:

      Nice job, Emilian. Here’s what Wesley Clarke recommends to Lieberman: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gen-wesley-clark/joe-lieberman-is-at-it-ag_b_51828.html

      “Only someone who never wore the uniform or thought seriously about national security would make threats at this point. What our soldiers need is responsible strategy, not a further escalation of tensions in the region. Senator Lieberman must act more responsibly and tone down his threat machine.”

      Posted 12 Jun 2025 at 11:56 pm
    2. Emilian Papadopoulos wrote:

      thanks Max. I think Clark is right about needing to think seriously. but i’m not sure that escalation is always a bad thing. we need to engage iran diplomatically, but i wonder if there’s a place for some “stick” in the strategy. “escalation” in one context could be “avoiding appeasement” in another, and there’s i think a good point to be made that the longer the u.s. takes on really addressing iran, the worse off the situation is. the counterpoint, of course, is that iran is where it is now because the u.s. has applied bad pressure and didn’t engage diplomatically, help out domestic moderates, etc. .. by that logic, taking a little time is on our side.

      Posted 14 Jun 2025 at 4:17 pm

    Trackbacks & Pingbacks 1

    1. From Casual Friday III « Smart Tart on 15 Jun 2025 at 11:04 am

      […] security blog. They write about serious issues like nuclear terrorism, global warming, and the Iran question (nice articles, guys). A gaggle of Nicholas Kristofs to my Maureen […]

    Post a Comment

    Your email is never published nor shared.