Iran attack is nothing but a ploy to divert attention

National security, my Irish-Hungarian butt. President Donald Trump’s attack on Iran was a brazen political stunt, meant to deflect and distract from, well, everything.

Even Pearl Harbor — the greatest premeditated attack on American soil before 9/11 — was not answered before Franklin Roosevelt went before Congress and requested a formal declaration of war on Japan.

Make no mistake; assassinating the leader of a foreign power, no matter how evil, without direct provocation, is an act of war.

With a spineless, nearly fully compliant Congress, the corrupt football toward the end zone of full authoritarianism advances another 10 yards.

Every one of us — except Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., whose shameless display of sycophancy on Sunday's "Meet the Press” would make his own dog run away from home — should be shaking in their boots. Impeachment No. 3, followed by removal from office, should come hard and fast. But, of course, it won’t.

Rob Hirsh, West Ridge

Stop ‘madman’

Saturday's Sun-Times included an Associated Press story that quoted Donald Trump saying of the Iranians, "I’m not happy with the fact that they're not willing to give us what we have to have. … We’ll see what happens. We’re talking later."

Hours (or maybe it was only minutes) later, reports abounded that the United States and Israel attacked Iran.

This so-called president has never had to wait for whatever he wants and doesn’t care that many Americans, whom he purports to represent, don’t want any more regime-change wars. He also obviously doesn’t care about Middle East diplomacy and negotiations. He doesn’t deserve to be a dog catcher, let alone president.

It may be Israel’s and Trump’s latest trumped-up charges, or yet another of these bitter, petty men's fever dreams, but why are we again slavishly doing Benjamin Netanyahu's bidding, and why doesn't any Republican speak up for "We the People," and stop this madman?

Maja Ramírez, Avondale

U.S. needs regime change, too

Donald Trump is urging Iranians to take over their country for regime change. Who does he think he is? He can’t even run his own country. I urge my fellow Americans to take over and topple the regime running the United States. Let’s have a regime change here before it’s too late. Get rid of the tyrant.

Jackie Tinker, Des Plaines

Barron can enlist

Donald Trump speaks boldly about going to war with Iran. If he is truly confident in that decision, then perhaps the first boots on the ground should belong to his own son, Barron Trump. It is far easier to advocate for sacrifice and the inevitable loss of life when it is borne by someone else’s family.

Tom Scorby, St. Charles

War and peace

Attention: Oslo.

There is a new MAGA logic — the road to the Nobel Peace Prize is to attack other countries.

Hugh Spencer, Countryside 

Man of peace?

Isn't it interesting that Donald Trump, the man who loves to brag that he ended eight wars, has started a shooting war with Iran?

Steven Herr, West Ridge

Iran attack violates U.S. Constitution

The current attack on Iran is not only an attack on Iran. It is an attack on the U.S. Constitution. The power to declare war is granted to Congress, not the president. Even after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Roosevelt addressed Congress and requested a formal declaration of war.

This is the second time Donald Trump has taken military action against Iran without authorization from Congress. In the June bombing, Trump claimed to have obliterated the Iranian nuclear weapons program. The continued existence of that program is now part of the justification for the current war.

Trump, of course, has attacked the Constitution before when he unilaterally and without congressional authorization sought to impose tariffs. After the Supreme Court ruled against him recently, he attacked the court.

He also attacked the Constitution in trying to mangle the 14th Amendment in his attempts to end birthright citizenship.

And then there's another proposed attack on the Constitution as Trump seeks to have the federal government take the power of conducting elections away from the state governments.

Voters are rightfully concerned about the economy, but even if the economy is strong, the essential action to make sure that a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people," shall not perish is to uphold the Constitution.

Alan Rhine, Glenview

Trump followed the law

For those who want to criticize President Donald Trump for bombing Iran, go for it, but please do not claim he is somehow violating the War Powers Resolution or acting "unconstitutionally." He's not.

The resolution was passed by Congress in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto. As a threshold matter, it is unclear whether the resolution itself is constitutional. Presidents — both Democrat and Republican — have argued it is not. The Supreme Court has never weighed in. Just as Congress can't pass a law outlawing the First Amendment — as that would require a separate process of amending the Constitution — the argument is Congress can't infringe on a president's commander-in-chief powers by statute either.

But even if the War Powers Resolution is constitutional, Trump has not violated it.

All it requires is that he give Congress notice of his actions within 48 hours, which he did. He then has up to 90 days to withdraw troops without congressional consent. If he wants to keep troops on the ground for more than 90 days, then he needs Congress to authorize it.

There don't appear to be any troops on the ground in Iran, but even if there are, they will likely be withdrawn well within 90 days. If not, then and only then, would Congress need to approve, assuming the War Powers Resolution is indeed constitutional.

So again, compliment or criticize the president to your heart's content, just don't claim he's violating the Constitution or law.

William Choslovsky, Sheffield Neighbors