Joshua Scheer
Editor’s Note: The following note was sent by Trita Parsi to me and many others, and it is worth both reading and watching.
Parsi is responding to the latest developments around Trump’s memorandum of understanding with Iran, the danger of Democrats repeating the bad-faith attacks Republicans used against the JCPOA in 2015, and the larger question of how failed wars become endless wars when politicians decide that admitting defeat is more costly than continuing a disaster.
He also shares his recent two-hour conversation with Tucker Carlson, where he discusses the deeper history of the U.S.-Iran conflict and the growing campaign by neoconservatives and war hawks to silence him—including reported efforts to have him investigated and even deported.
ScheerPost has long covered dissent, censorship, and the attempts by the Trump regime—and the broader machinery of U.S. empire—to quash voices it disagrees with. For that reason, we are posting both Parsi’s video interview and his written note, along with his article on Trump’s MOU and the urgent need to prevent this war from being reignited.
Good mornging,
So I tried to get a few things into that subject line. But a lot has happened, and I have once again failed to update you in a timely manner. Let me start with the latest.I have pasted a piece I wrote for Responsible Statecraft on Trump’s MOU and why Democrats should resist mirroring the Republican strategy of 2015, in which they attacked the JCPOA with a plethora of bad-faith accusations.
Trump currently owns this failed war, but if the Democrats help torpedo the MOU and war resumes, then they will co-own the next war. Trump’s disaster will become theirs as well.
I also explain how this is how endless wars are born. They become interminable when leaders convince themselves that ending them without victory is politically more costly than continuing them without hope. Once that trap is sprung, every setback becomes an argument for one more deployment, one more escalation, one more year.
But I also wanted to share with you my 2-hour conversation with Tucker Carlson on his show about the deeper history of this conflict, but also the effort by neocons and warmongers to silence me – and as of late – deport me. Yes, I kid you not.
Trita Parsi
For more than two decades, Trita Parsi has been one of Washington’s most prominent critics of war with Iran. As founder of the National Iranian American Council and later as a co-founder of the Quincy Institute, he has consistently challenged the assumptions, narratives, and policies that have fueled repeated confrontations between Washington and Tehran.
Now, Parsi says those efforts to silence him have escalated beyond smears, accusations, and political attacks. In a remarkable essay published on his Substack, he recounts how a report in The Free Press alleging that the State Department was investigating him appeared to coincide with a broader campaign by pro-Israel activists and hardline Iran hawks calling for his deportation from the United States. While the State Department later publicly stated that it had no plans to revoke his green card and did not confirm that any investigation existed, Parsi argues the episode reveals the lengths to which some advocates of confrontation with Iran are willing to go to marginalize dissenting voices.
The story arrives at a moment when debates over war, diplomacy, free speech, and political dissent are once again taking center stage. As we noted in our editor’s note accompanying Parsi’s recent writings on the Trump administration’s memorandum of understanding with Iran, attempts to silence critics of U.S. foreign policy are hardly new. What makes this episode particularly striking is Parsi’s contention that the campaign against him moved beyond discrediting his arguments and toward questioning whether he should even be allowed to remain in the country.
In the essay below, Parsi reflects on his long-running battles with neoconservative foreign policy circles, the creation of the Quincy Institute, the growing alliance between anti-war voices on the left and right, and why he believes the effort to target him ultimately backfired. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, his account raises fundamental questions about free speech, political intimidation, and the state of debate in an era increasingly defined by polarization and permanent war.
Trita Parsi weighs in on Trump’s agreement with Iran, arguing that the real question is not whether the war produced a better deal—but whether Washington has learned anything from a generation of failed wars. This is that article: Trump Ended His Idiotic Iran War. Good.
Trump Started the War. Now He’s Ending It.
This is the latest from Trita Parsi on the emerging U.S.-Iran agreement and the debate surrounding it.
For years, critics of endless war warned that Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal would eventually lead to military confrontation. It did. After a costly and unnecessary conflict that never should have happened, Trump has now backed a memorandum of understanding with Tehran aimed at ending the war his own policies helped set in motion.
In a new essay for Responsible Statecraft, Parsi argues that many critics are asking the wrong question. Rather than comparing the agreement to Barack Obama’s JCPOA or debating whether the war somehow produced a better deal, Parsi contends that the real issue is whether a failed war should be prolonged simply because leaders fear the political consequences of ending it without victory.
Drawing parallels to Vietnam and Afghanistan, Parsi warns that this is precisely how endless wars are sustained. When politicians become more afraid of admitting failure than continuing a losing conflict, every setback becomes an excuse for further escalation. While holding Trump responsible for starting the war, Parsi argues that ending a failed conflict is preferable to extending it indefinitely—and that efforts to sabotage the agreement risk repeating the same mistakes that trapped the United States in decades of costly and unwinnable wars.
Ultimately, Parsi argues, the debate is bigger than Trump. The real question is whether Washington has learned anything from a generation of endless war.
I will be posting his latest about the Iran Deal here are some of Parsi’s strongest quotes.
- “This is how endless wars are born.”
- “Wars become interminable when leaders convince themselves that ending them without victory is politically more costly than continuing them without hope.”
- “When victory is nowhere in sight, prolonging a conflict in the hope that reality will eventually conform to political rhetoric is not resolve. It is denial.”
- “The refusal to accept an unfavorable reality today merely guarantees a higher bill tomorrow.”
- “Political leaders should be judged not only for the mistakes they make, but also for whether they have the courage to correct them.”
- “In American politics, there is often greater punishment for acknowledging failure than for perpetuating it.”
- “Trump currently owns this failed war, but if the Democrats help torpedo the MOU and war resumes, then they will co-own the next war.”
- “The task now is not to reward Trump politically, nor to excuse the recklessness that produced this war. It is to prevent the war from returning.”
- “Rather than attacking the terms of the MOU, Democrats should pressure the administration to protect it from those who are determined to see it fail.”
- “The choice before them is not between opposing Trump and supporting peace. It is between learning from America’s endless wars and repeating them.”
- “To examine the Memorandum of Understanding and ask ‘Was the war worth it?’ is nonsensical.”
- “Of course it wasn’t. How could it have been?”
- “That is the curse of endless war.”
- George Kennan (1966): “There is more respect to be won in the opinion of the world by a resolute and courageous liquidation of unsound policies than by the most stubborn pursuit of extravagant or unpromising objectives.”
Editor’s Note: At a moment when the once vaunted model of responsible journalism is overwhelmingly the play thing of self-serving billionaires and their corporate scribes, alternatives of integrity are desperately needed, and ScheerPost is one of them. Please support our independent journalism by contributing to our online donation platform, Network for Good, or send a check to our new PO Box. We can’t thank you enough, and promise to keep bringing you this kind of vital news.
You can also make a donation to our PayPal or subscribe to our Patreon.