Lessons from Iraq, as Trump teases attacks on Iran

Summary

Consider This from NPR: Detailed Summary of "Lessons from Iraq, as Trump Teases Attacks on Iran"

Episode Information

• Title: Lessons from Iraq, as Trump teases attacks on Iran
• Host: NPR (Ari Shapiro)
• Release Date: June 18, 2025

---

1. Introduction: Trump's Critique of the Iraq War

The episode opens with Ari Shapiro contextualizing former President Donald Trump's historical stance on the Iraq War. During the 2016 Republican primary, Trump distinguished himself by vehemently criticizing the decision to invade Iraq.

• Donald Trump stated in a 2016 CBS News debate:

  "Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes, but that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East." [00:17]

Trump not only condemned the war but also questioned the justifications provided by President George W. Bush, specifically the claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

• Donald Trump further criticized the Bush administration:

  "They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none, and they knew there were none." [00:30]

Ari Shapiro elaborates on Bush's 2002 assertion regarding Iraq's WMD programs:

"It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons." [00:47]

Shapiro underscores the inaccuracies of these claims, highlighting the absence of found WMDs post-invasion and the extensive human and financial costs incurred by the U.S.

2. Transition to Current Geopolitical Tensions

Shapiro draws parallels between the Iraq War and the current geopolitical climate, where President Trump is again hinting at potential military action, this time targeting Iran.

• Ari Shapiro: "As we record this episode Wednesday afternoon on the East Coast, President Trump is threatening to bring the US Military into another Middle East conflict." [01:35]

The justification mirrors the past narrative—alleged nuclear threats—as Trump asserts:

• Donald Trump: "Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It's very simple. We don't have to go too deep into it. They just can't have a nuclear weapon." [02:03]

3. Analysis with Steve Coll: Lessons and Parallels

To delve deeper into the implications of Trump's rhetoric and potential actions, Ari Shapiro engages in an interview with Steve Coll, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author of The Achilles Trap. Coll provides a nuanced comparison between the Iraq War and the current situation with Iran.

3.1 Similarities and Differences Between Iraq and Iran

Coll highlights both parallels and distinctions between the two scenarios.

• Steve Coll: "There are echoes and there are differences. Let's maybe start with the differences. There's a much deeper public and agreed body of evidence about Iran's nuclear capabilities." [05:42]

He explains that unlike Iraq, where WMDs were never found, Iran has an established nuclear enrichment program. However, the key difference lies in the intentions behind Iran's actions.

• Steve Coll: "The question is their intention. And here intelligence gets a little bit murkier. But that is a difference from Iraq." [05:48]

3.2 Political Utilization of Intelligence

Coll draws attention to the political motivations behind using intelligence to justify military actions.

• Steve Coll: "Some of it is the political use of intelligence to justify a war, to articulate to publics in democratic societies... that, oh, we've got evidence that justifies this preemptive attack." [06:34]

This manipulation mirrors the pretext used in Iraq, where intelligence was leveraged to garner public and international support for the invasion.

3.3 Disconnection Between War Aims and Means

A critical point made by Coll is the disconnect between the stated objectives of military interventions and the practical means to achieve them.

• Steve Coll: "The aim of fomenting an internal rebellion was not matched by any ability of the United States to support the rebels." [06:34]

He warns that similar disjunctions may arise if military action against Iran is pursued without clear, achievable goals.

3.4 Divergence in Intelligence Assessments

A significant tension exists between the assessments of national intelligence officials and the President's stance.

• Ari Shapiro: "Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. But President Trump... I think they were very close to having it." [07:55]

Coll suggests that the President might be influenced by allies, such as those in Tel Aviv, leading to a divergence from established intelligence reports.

• Steve Coll: "Ms. Gabbard is reporting what we understand to have been a longstanding U.S. judgment. And the President may be listening to his allies in Tel Aviv." [08:42]

3.5 Potential Consequences and Historical Echoes

Coll reflects on historical precedents, drawing parallels with interventions like Libya's.

• Steve Coll: "The result... was a very complex civil war that's in some ways still going on today, more than a decade later." [09:55]

He cautions that limited military aims can escalate into prolonged conflicts, emphasizing the unpredictable nature of such interventions.

3.6 Uncertainty of U.S. Response

Coll concludes by highlighting the unpredictability surrounding the U.S.'s potential actions.

• Ari Shapiro: "As the president said today, nobody knows what I'm going to do." [10:02]

This uncertainty underscores the precariousness of the current situation and the potential for unforeseen developments.

4. Conclusion: Reflecting on Historical Lessons

The episode wraps up by reiterating the importance of learning from past military engagements to navigate present and future geopolitical challenges. The discussions emphasize the need for clear objectives, accurate intelligence assessments, and a thorough understanding of the potential ramifications of military interventions.

Notable Production Credits:

• Produced by: Michael Levitt and Conor Donovan
• Edited by: Tinbit Ermias and William Troup
• Executive Producer: Sami Yenigun

---

Final Note: This summary encapsulates the critical analysis and discussions presented in the episode, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the potential lessons from Iraq applicable to the current tensions with Iran.

Transcript

[Ari Shapiro]

Before Donald Trump became President Trump, he was a candidate in a very crowded Republican primary. And one way he stood out during his 2016 campaign was by bluntly attacking President George W. Bush for launching the Iraq war. Like in this CBS News debate, George.

[Donald Trump]

Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes, but that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East.

[Ari Shapiro]

Trump criticized the war, but also Bush's justification for the war.

[Donald Trump]

They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none, and they knew there were none.

[Ari Shapiro]

Bush did argue to Americans and to the world that Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi dictator, was building weapons of mass destruction and that the US Needed to stop him. Here's Bush talking about Iraq in 2002.

[Donald Trump]

It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.

[Ari Shapiro]

That assessment was, of course, inaccurate. No such stockpiles were found after the US Invasion of Iraq, and the Iraq war would become a quagmire. It cost the U.S. more than $2 trillion. By one estimate. It killed more than 4,000 U.S. service members and well over 100,000 Iraqis. And it outlasted Bush's presidency, only officially concluding near the end of President Obama's first term.

[Steve Coll]

Today I can report that, as promised.

[Ari Shapiro]

The rest of our troops in Iraq.

[Steve Coll]

Will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America's war in Iraq will be over.

[Ari Shapiro]

And Obama would end up sending more troops into Iraq in 2014. After the rise of ISIS, there are still US forces there today. This history is important because as we record this episode Wednesday afternoon on the East Coast, President President Trump is threatening to bring the US Military into another Middle east conflict. As with Iraq, the justification for a potential attack on Iran is the alleged threat of a nuclear weapon.

[Donald Trump]

Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It's very simple. We don't have to go too deep into it. They just can't have a nuclear weapon.

[Ari Shapiro]

Trump hated the war in Iraq. Has he learned its lessons? From npr, I'm Ari Shapiro.

[Unknown]

This message comes from Instacart this summer. Instacart is aiming to bring back your favorites from 1999, like juice pouches, box Mac and cheese and ham, cheese and cracker lunches with prices from $19.99. Enjoy all those throwbacks and more at throwback prices only through Instacart. $4.72 maximum per $10 of eligible items. Limit one offer per order expires 95 while supplies last discount based on CPI comparison. The house of Representatives has approved a White House request to claw back two years of previously approved funding for public media. The rescissions package now moves on to the Senate. This move poses a serious threat to local stations and public media as we know it. Please take a stand for public media [e-mail] thank you. You know those things you shout at the radio or maybe even at this very NPR podcast on NPR's Wait, Wait, don't tell me. We actually say those things on the radio and on the podcast. We're rude across all media. We think the news can take it. Listen to NPR's Wait, Wait, don't tell me. Wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ari Shapiro]

It'S Consider this from npr. As of Wednesday morning, President Trump would not rule out US Military action in the conflict between Israel and Iran.

[Donald Trump]

I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do. I can tell you this, that Iran's got a lot of trouble.

[Ari Shapiro]

And one of the central questions here is how close Iran is to having a nuclear weapon. Trump has dismissed his own spy chief's assessment about the threat. In March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified to Congress that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. But on Air Force One yesterday, Trump said, quote, I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having it. All of this has echoes of the run up to the war in Iraq. To discuss that, I spoke with Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Steve Call. His latest book is the Achilles Trap. Saddam Hussein, the CIA, and the Origins of America' Invasion of Iraq. US Intelligence has been catastrophically wrong before on the status of a Middle Eastern country's nuclear ambitions and programs. So as someone who covered the drumbeat to the war in Iraq in 2003, how are you thinking about this moment with Iran?

[Steve Coll]

Well, there are echoes and there are differences. Let's maybe start with the differences. There's a much deeper public and agreed body of evidence about Iran's nuclear capabilities. They have the ability to enrich and are in fact enriching uranium to levels that could be used with a little bit of tweaking for a bomb. Everybody agrees about that. The question is their intention. And here intelligence gets a little bit murkier. But that is a difference from Iraq. In the case of Iraq, there was no evidence publicly available, despite intrusive inspections, that the Iraqis were carrying out active nuclear bomb work. It was only the assertion of intelligence analysts that they were.

[Ari Shapiro]

And so if the available intelligence is one key difference, what do you see as the key similarities?

[Steve Coll]

Well, some of it is the political use of intelligence to justify a war, to articulate to publics in democratic societies, whether in Israel or in the United States, that, oh, we've got evidence that justifies this preemptive attack. You're going to have to trust us. That sounds similar. Even though we can see in the case of Iran, a much clearer and longer explicit nuclear program, nonetheless, the threshold decision to attack is based on intelligence. So that's similar. And there's a second similarity that struck me over the last few days in particular, which is the disconnection between war aims and credible means to achieve those aims.

[Ari Shapiro]

What do you mean by that? What is the aim here? And I take it you think the credible means are not available?

[Steve Coll]

Yeah. Well, let's start with the question, what are those aims? It's not clear. Israel has acted preemptively to stop Iran from breaking out and building a weapon at an unacceptable pace. And that was the first and remains an important part of Israel's explanation for why it had to attack. At the same time, Prime Minister Netanyahu has talked, talked about regime change, has called upon the Iranian people to take matters into their own hands, a call that echoes one that George H.W. bush made in early 1991 when he called on the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam Hussein. And that didn't end well because the aim of fomenting an internal rebellion was not matched by any ability of the United States to support the rebels. Here, too, no one is expecting the United States or Israel to launch a ground invasion of Iran and topple its governments. And yet there's talk, loose talk about regime change as the goal of the entire operation?

[Ari Shapiro]

What do you make of the disconnect between Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard saying Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and President Trump apparently deciding he knows differently?

[Steve Coll]

Well, it sounds like Director Gabbard is articulating a judgment that has been publicized in the recent past, a judgment of American intelligence that Iran has not made an explicit decision to go all the way towards building a weapon. It sounds as if Israel is reporting that their intelligence is of a different character. And this seems to explain the gap between the President and his Director of national intelligence. Ms. Gabbard is reporting what we understand to have been a longstanding U.S. judgment. And the President may be listening to his allies in Tel Aviv who are telling him, well, you got to get up to date with what we've learned.

[Ari Shapiro]

In the run up to the Iraq war, Secretary of State Colin Powell famously told President Bush that what he called the Pottery Barn rule applied in the war. If you break it, you own it. Do you think that principle is relevant here?

[Steve Coll]

Well, the Iraq war, after all, was a ground invasion. So once American forces reached Baghdad and chased Saddam Hussein out of his palace, they were the occupying power and they owned the country. And we all remember the unhappy result that unfolded. I think the analogy here is probably closer to the intervention in Libya, because that was just a bombing campaign. It was undertaken for limited purposes, but it set off a chain reaction that neither President Obama, who ordered American participation, nor many of the other allies in Europe and the Arab world who participated in the intervention, could foresee. It resulted in a very complex civil war that's in some ways still going on today, more than a decade later. So these kinds of interventions may start out with limited aims, but our recent experience in the Middle east and elsewhere is that they don't always end there.

[Ari Shapiro]

Do you think an off ramp is likely, or does the momentum seem to be moving in the wrong direction?

[Steve Coll]

I think the key question for me now is what is President Trump going to decide to do? Israel is managing its own foreign policy. They have, since the October 7 attacks, been quite forceful in taking their own security into their own hands. They've done that here. That's one path that the United States can't control. I think that's been demonstrated. What it can control is its own intervention and how far it goes. And I think, as the president said today, nobody knows what I'm going to do. And that sounds like that includes himself.

[Ari Shapiro]

That's journalist Steve Kahl, who is now with the Economist. Thank you.

[Steve Coll]

Thanks, Ari. Thanks for having me.

[Ari Shapiro]

This episode was produced by Michael Levitt and Conor Donovan. It was edited by Tinbit Ermias and William Troup. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun. It's consider this from npr, I'm Ari Shapiro. Decades ago, Brazilian women made a discovery they could have an abortion without a doctor thanks to a tiny pill. That pill spawned a global movement helping millions of women have safe abortions regardless of the law. Hear that story on the network from NPR's Embedded and Futuro Media, wherever you get your podcasts. As conflicts spread across the Middle east, it can be hard to keep up with important developments. Stay on Top of the World with the State of the World podcast from npr. With journalists across the Middle east and around the globe, we get you caught up on what matters in just a few minutes. Listen to State of the World from NPR every weekday.

[Unknown]

Want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon prime members can listen to Consider this sponsor free through Amazon Music, or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get consider this [e-mail] that's plus.NPR.org.