Brooks and Capehart on the cost of the Iran war and Trump's strategy

## Summary
David Brooks of The Atlantic and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW join Amna Nawaz to discuss the week in politics, including the political debate over the war in Iran, reaction to President Trump's address on the conflict, Trump's economic policies and the latest No Kings protests. Amna Nawaz: For more on the political debate over the war in Iran, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart. David Brooks: Yes, that's one of the disadvantages of having a huckster for president, that he does just -- he can't tell the American people that, when you're going to war, it's horrible, and that Iran is a serious country that's been preparing for this for nearly half-a-century. Amna Nawaz: Yes, David, to Jonathan's point here that those 19 minutes that the president addressed the nation, right, said this is why we're here, this is what we're there to do, there were some contradictory statements.

## Article Content
David Brooks of The Atlantic and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW join Amna Nawaz to discuss the week in politics, including the political debate over the war in Iran, reaction to President Trump's address on the conflict, Trump's economic policies and the latest No Kings protests.

Notice: Transcripts are machine and human generated and lightly edited for accuracy. They may contain errors.

Amna Nawaz:

For more on the political debate over the war in Iran, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart. That's "The Atlantic"'s David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW.

Great to see you both.

Jonathan Capehart:

Hey, Amna.

Amna Nawaz:

So, as we sit here and speak now, as we reported at the top of the show, there's still a U.S. crew member from that downed fighter jet missing, a search-and-rescue operation under way. We know Iranians were also able to shoot down another aircraft over the Gulf, shot at a Black Hawk helicopter that returned to base safely.

Iranian leaders are looking for that missing crew member on the ground.

David, all of this is just two days after the president said in a dress to the nation that the U.S. had crippled the Iranian military and the war was nearly over. What's your reaction to all of this?

David Brooks:

Yes, that's one of the disadvantages of having a huckster for president, that he does just -- he can't tell the American people that, when you're going to war, it's horrible, and that Iran is a serious country that's been preparing for this for nearly half-a-century.

And they're going to fight back and they're going to make countermoves like this or like the Straits of Hormuz. To me, what happened -- I have been somewhat, moderately hoping there'd be some positive outcome. And I think there has been some. We have had go to the Middle East for almost every decade for the last 50 years because of radical Islam, which the Iranian regime typifies.

But this is clearly the week when the costs of the war are so exponentially larger than the benefits of what we're getting in these marginal weeks. The cost to Russia is now getting all this revenue. Iran is getting all this revenue. The European economy and the world economies are in crisis. NATO is in shreds.

And so the costs are just exorbitant now, not to mention the human suffering. And so, if Trump doesn't see that we're losing every day he continues this thing, he's going to just face more and more political problems, military problems, and all sorts of problems. And so he just needs to admit that -- what's going on. And I doubt he has the mental ability to do that.

Amna Nawaz:

Jonathan?

Jonathan Capehart:

I mean, this is a war of choice. We didn't need to do -- take this action now.

What's funny, but not funny, playing on cable right now on a loop is "Top Gun: Maverick." And if anyone has seen that movie, the whole plot is about a U.S. military operation deep inside Iran, and two fighter pilots have to eject out of their planes.

I bring that up was more of a plan in the fictional plot of "Top Gun: Maverick" then there appears to be in this very real, very live situation in the United States' war with Iran.

Look, I applaud the president for finally addressing the American people, that he is a month too late, and told us nothing we had not already heard from him, from his administration through -- in various ways. What he should have done was told the American people really why we went, how we're getting out, and then spend more than half-a-phrase on the 13 service members who lost their lives in this war of choice, his choice.

Amna Nawaz:

Yes, David, to Jonathan's point here that those 19 minutes that the president addressed the nation, right, said this is why we're here, this is what we're there to do, there were some contradictory statements.

There are negotiations ongoing, but we're going to bomb them back to the Stone Ages. We're winning, but there's still a lot of work to do. Did you get clarity on what the goal of this war is from that speech?

David Brooks:

I got reverse clarity.

If you go back to Trump's first book, "The Art of the Deal." I don't think it was his first book, that early book "The Art of the Deal," he would talk about how he tries to confuse everybody by multiple different options, and I say this, I try this, I do that, it's all like a weave or a chaotic weave, as he would say.

But when you're running a war, when you're asking people to risk their lives and in some cases lose their lives, you owe some clarity to the country. And you owe some clarity on the idea that this is what we're going to try to do.

And if he had said we're trying to make it impossible for Iran to be a regional power, that's a defined aim. I think it's a plausible aim. But when it shifts every day, you're not just confusing the Iranians. Can you imagine fighting in this war and where you don't know what the president wants you to do or what the goal here is?

It's a horrible position to put anybody in.

Amna N

---

## Expert Analysis

### Merits
- Put aside whether Democrats are taking advantage of all this.

### Areas for Consideration
- But when you're running a war, when you're asking people to risk their lives and in some cases lose their lives, you owe some clarity to the country.
- So, for example, in reference to the Iran war, he said it's not our problem because we don't use oil that goes through the Straits of Hormuz.

### Implications
- They may contain errors.
- What he should have done was told the American people really why we went, how we're getting out, and then spend more than half-a-phrase on the 13 service members who lost their lives in this war of choice, his choice.
- And, as a result, you get these policy failures.
- That's -- a very plausible argument could be made.

### Expert Commentary
This article covers amna, nawaz, president topics. Notable strengths include discussion of amna. Areas of concern are also raised. Readability: Flesch-Kincaid grade 0.0. Word count: 2300.