An intense new round of reporting from The New York Times' Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan revealed that Vice President J.D. Vance was the most intense naysayer over invading Iran in President Donald Trump's inner circle, often going against the positions of everyone else to warn the idea could be a disaster.
"Nobody in Mr. Trump’s inner circle was more worried about the prospect of war with Iran, or did more to try to stop it, than the vice president," the report said. "Mr. Vance had built his political career opposing precisely the kind of military adventurism that was now under serious consideration. He had described a war with Iran as 'a huge distraction of resources' and 'massively expensive.'"
According to the report, Vance did favor some forms of intervention in Iran, but there was a huge qualifier on it.
"In January, when Mr. Trump publicly warned Iran to stop killing protesters and promised that help was on its way, Mr. Vance had privately encouraged the president to enforce his red line," said the report. "But what the vice president pushed for was a limited, punitive strike, something closer to the model of Mr. Trump’s missile attack against Syria in 2017 over the use of chemical weapons against civilians."
Vance ultimately recognized Trump could not be dissuaded from some form of military intervention, so instead tried to steer him toward a more limited operation, according to the report. But later, "when it seemed certain that the president was set on a large-scale campaign, Mr. Vance argued that he should do so with overwhelming force, in the hope of achieving his objectives quickly."
All of this comes after reporting that Vance wasn't even alerted to a major escalation of hostilities against Iran until he was onstage with the far-right Hungarian prime minister — and it comes as Vance now tries to catch up with Trump's rhetoric, endorsing Trump's plan to obliterate Iranian civilization if no deal is reached.