Iran strikes predicted to spark World War III precede Middle East calm

When US forces launched strikes against Iranian military targets in June, critics warned that it could spark a regional inferno — and even start World War III. After four months, The Middle East He was calmer than he had been in years. Iran’s proxies have reduced their attacks, tensions in the Gulf have calmed, and Washington has turned its attention to the Western Hemisphere.

This unexpected calm raises a new question: Did decisive American action restore deterrence – or was Washington simply lucky?

Those who favored a more forceful American foreign policy viewed Iran’s lack of response as a win for their frame of mind — and a loss for reining in Iran. They now credit these strikes with bringing about a period of relative peace that culminated in a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas this week.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., publicly broke with her longtime support of the president Donald Trump After the hits.

Israeli strike in Qatar draws rare rebuke from US and test of Trump’s Gulf diplomacy

B-2 planes carried “bunker buster” bombs towards Iranian nuclear sites. (U.S. Air Force photo by Bobby Garcia)

“Six months later, we reneged on our campaign promises and bombed Iran on behalf of Israel,” she said on Newsmax at the time.

“We’re entering a nuclear war, World War III, because the whole world is going to erupt. And, you know, the people who are cheering for it now, their tune is going to change radically the minute we start seeing flag-draped coffins on the evening news.”

On Monday, she praised Trump for brokering a peace deal between Israel and Hamas. “Blessed are the peacemakers! May healing begin for all.”

“You have put every American force and embassy in the region at risk and squandered American diplomatic influence — even though you are likely to think you have strengthened it,” Adam Weinstein, deputy director of the Middle East Program at the Quincy Institute, said at the time.

The Iranian president accuses the United States of “grave treason” with its nuclear strikes in a speech before the United Nations General Assembly

The United States bombed three nuclear sites in Iran in June. (Fox News)

Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, claimed that the strike “put the United States on a path to a war in the Middle East that the country does not want, the law does not allow, and our security does not require.”

Rep. Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, was more blunt. “It’s been a good week for the neocons in the military-industrial complex who want war all the time,” he said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Four months later, those who once warned of a spiral toward World War III are facing an uncomfortable reality: the region is largely quiet.

“Those who warned of World War III before the US and Israeli strikes on Iran misunderstood the nature of deterrence and the regime in Tehran,” said Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene publicly broke with her long-standing support of President Donald Trump after the strikes. (Chip Somodevila/Getty Images)

“Strength and resolve do not invite escalation — they prevent it. What we have seen in recent months is a return to deterrence through escalation dominance: Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and America’s other enemies are recalibrating precisely because the United States has finally imposed real costs on the Islamic Republic.”

Dubowitz said that years of Western restraint had emboldened Iran. “For years, Western policymakers have indulged in the illusion that restraint would lead to stability,” he said. “It did the opposite. Tehran viewed our de-escalation as weakness and kept pushing.”

“Anyone who said a strike on Iran would be a disaster was wrong,” said Matthew Kroenig, vice president of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center and a former Pentagon strategist. “These fears about Iranian retaliation and regional war are overblown. Iran does not want a major war with the United States, the greatest superpower on Earth that could end its regime. Instead, Iran engaged in a kind of symbolic retaliation, and the whole thing fizzled out.”

Trump approved the strikes This was not a departure from the principles of “America First,” as Green suggested, but rather a continuation of them.

“When it comes to hitting an opponent hard, Trump has always been open to this kind of short, sharp, decisive use of force to achieve a clear goal,” Kroenig said.

Trump’s Iran ultimatum kicks off 60 days of decisive strikes in June, bomber commander reveals

The United States used massive ordnance-piercing shells, known as bunker buster bombs, To strike Iranian nuclear goals. (Morgan Phillips/Fox News Digital)

Those in the restraint camp say they do not consider Trump’s decision a complete loss of their point of view. They argue that predictions of a broader war were based on a different scenario – one that Trump ultimately avoided.

“The prediction that this might lead to a broader war was related to a scenario in which the United States joins Israel in a larger military campaign against Iran with the goal of regime change,” said Trita Parsi, co-founder of the Quincy Institute. “This is not what Trump chose. He clearly indicated to Tehran before the strikes where he would strike to ensure that the sites were cleared and that there would be no casualties. He also indicated his intention to strike only these sites and be done with them. This greatly reduced the risk of a further escalation.”

Rosemary Kelanic, of Defense Priorities, acknowledged that the strikes were “not a victory for restraint” in principle, and although the US felt little repercussions, it was still a gamble.

“I think it’s really easy to learn the wrong lesson from this, which is that all we have to do is go in and bomb for 45 minutes and then everyone backs off,” she said. “Most of the time, American military power does not actually produce the results we want.”

Click here to download the FOX NEWS app

Adam Weinstein said that the operation came at the expense of diplomacy, noting that the strikes took place in the midst of ongoing negotiations with Tehran regarding its nuclear program.

He added, “The strikes were a setback for diplomacy with Iran.” “It has negatively impacted the world’s ability to ensure that Iran does not develop a nuclear capability. It has fundamentally destroyed trust between Iran and the international community.”