Patriotism Takes Many Forms

March 15, 2026 (Vol. 20 No. 11) - Noted and widely respected attorney David Boies published a widely read commentary in the Wall Street Journal this week entitled "Partisanship on Iran is Dangerous for America." I encourage you to read it, although it is behind a paywall. For those not wishing to subscribe to the WSJ, the subhead of the article gives you its gist. "Trump is doing the right thing for America, and we Democrats should judge the war on its merits." To put it another way, Boies is arguing we should support the war even if Trump is doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

While I generally agree with Boise's thesis, I think his commentary is based on a false premise, that patriotism is a form of blind allegiance that says we support the actions of our nation whether they are right or wrong. Patriotism, like most things in life, has many layers. It is possible to judge this war on its merits and be opposed to it while, at the same time, supporting the goal of disarming Iran's nuclear program. My opposition to carpet bombing that kills civilians is not an indictment against our troops. In this case, my opposition to this war is based on my love for and desire to protect the Constitution. No president should be allowed to go to war on a whim.

Under our system of laws, only Congress can declare war. Boies correctly points to earlier examples of presidents unilaterally taking military actions. "Many Republicans supported Mr. Clinton's military actions and President Obama's surge into Afghanistan and (at least initially) Iraq," Boies wrote. "More Republicans than Democrats probably supported President Lyndon B. Johnson's action in Vietnam."

That may be true. But in each of these cases, the president either sought prior authorization or the actions were brief reactions to a provocation. Neither of these conditions existed when President Trump attacked Iran. This is especially true since the Administration claimed to have "obliterated" Iran's nuclear capacity during a brief bombing raid last summer. If that was true, where's the urgency to attack now? Trump and his cronies have fumbled all over themselves trying to come up with a justification for this war. However, I believe that Secretary of State Marco Rubio accidentally told the truth when he stated that we attacked because Israel forced us to. There's also another widely believed reason, Trump's need to distract from the ever-widening Epstein files scandal.

There's another part of Boise's commentary to which I take exception. He said that every president since Clinton had declared Iran should not have nuclear weapons, but none of them had done anything. That is false. President Obama had reached a negotiated agreement with Iran to dismantle its nuclear program. And by most independent accounts, Iran was doing so. Donald Trump, the proverbial bull in a China shop, unilaterally tore up that agreement. That left Iran little choice but to resume its nuclear ambitions. In light of this history, if you were in Iran's shoes, would you be willing to negotiate with the United States? The current war with Iran is virtually the same as Mr. Trump sending in the fire department after he stated the fire.

I support our troops. I favor the goal of achieving a nuclear-free Iran. But I do not like Donald Trump's trashing of the Constitution at the beck-and call of the corrupt Benjamin Netanyahu. (By the way, opposing Israel's actions does not automatically make one an antisemite, either.) Nor do I like the lack of planning and the failure to recognize the unintended consequences of Trump's Operation Epstein Distraction. (Have you bought gasoline lately?) I believe it is my patriotic duty to oppose the conduct of this war. That means I will engage in public protests against our wannabe king and will encourage my fellow citizens to vote these rascals out this November. That's my right and responsibility as a patriotic American. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.