Imagine a society in the grips of civil war. On one side stand the partisans of theocracy; on the other, the partisans of secularism. As they fight over their country, a larger imperial power decides to invade, citing as justification the apparent approval of (a faction of) the secular side, along with the inherent evils of theocracy. Taking advantage of the smaller country’s internal division and weakness, the imperial power then tears the country to pieces that neither side will ever be able to govern. Besieging, starving, and massacring the people it claims to be liberating, the imperialists eventually conquer the place, lording it over the defeated population. They then spend the next several centuries singing their own praises–until they, too, are defeated by a rival power and swept away.

Imagine that the society in the grips of civil war is Jewish Jerusalem ca. 70 AD, and the imperial power is Rome, led by Nero and Titus. Are Nero and Titus wrong to invade Palestine, to besiege Jerusalem, to lay waste to it, to destroy the Second Temple, and to destroy the theocracy associated with it? Most people familiar with this history would (I’d like to think) say “yes.” Few, I suspect, would even hesitate.

Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum (photo credit: Jebulon, Wikipedia)

Now imagine that the society in the grips of civil war is modern-day Iran, and the imperial power is the United States/Israel, led by Trump and Netanyahu. Are Trump and Netanyahu wrong to attack Iran and (try to) unseat the Iranian theocracy? Everyone is, or should be, familiar with the facts in this case. Why the reluctance to say “yes”? Why the reluctance to say “yes” on the part of the very people who would, in the prior case, say “yes” without hesitation?

No analogy is perfect, so it’s worth noting a salient difference between the two cases. We know ahead of time that Rome went on to win its war with the Jews. We don’t know that the United States/Israel will win its war with Iran. Does that change the answers? It shouldn’t, but maybe for some it does. Stipulate that the imperialists lose this one. Then what?

I hate to break the news, but I don’t think the last epicycle of my thought-experiment is merely hypothetical. Though the mainstream American media is trying desperately to conceal this fact from its audience, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that the United States and Israel are losing the war to Iran. No, not “failing to satisfy strategic expectations,” or “getting embroiled in a quagmire,” or “ascending a risky escalation ladder.” They’re losing. They’re being defeated. Their aggressions are meeting strategically successful Iranian counter-force. That’s where the Roman analogies end.

Is it worse to be successful in the effectuation of evil, or worse to blunder one’s way insouciantly into it, failing ignominiously in the attempt? I don’t know. But we’re about to find out.