The limits to being mercurial as a strategic asset

As of this writing, it doesn't appear that Trump's sudden change of mind about a military response to the RQ-4A Global Hawk drone has eased tensions between the US and Iran. The Iranian regime has executed an aerospace contractor it accused of being a CIA spy. Not much room for further discussion on that matter.

The president's explanation of why he called off the response after planes had taken off - that 150 Iranians would have died - has elicited hot takes among his cult followers along the lines of praise for  such a humane calculation at such a late moment. Another perspective deserving consideration, though, is that humanitarian guidelines will motivate Iran to move its assets into densely populated areas.

Another particularly curious uttering by Trump is his speculation that the drone-shooter was acting without clear command from higher up the chain, that he was being "loose and stupid." This has been countered by Iranian statements and photographs since the attack occurred.

Another element that has been added to the mix is the startling turn that Fox News host Tucker Carlson's show has taken in recent days. Carlson, once a solidly principled polemicist, has given indications of going off the rails for some time, but with his choice to focus on the Iran situation in the manner that he has - coming right out and saying Iran is no threat to the US, as he did last night - he's established his bona fides as one of FNC's lineup of out-and-out cranks, along with Sean Hannity and Sebastian Gorka.

If exerting some measure of influence over some swath of the American populace were all that Carlson was accomplishing, it would be a bit concerning, but no more so than the exertion of influence by a whole lot of commentators of even greater degrees of loopiness. However, The Daily Beast reports an item that ought to take our concern to a whole new level:

In the upper echelons of the Trump administration, hawkish voices on Iran predominate—most notably Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton. But as tensions between the U.S. and Iran have escalated over the last few weeks, there’s been another, far different voice in the president’s ear: that of Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

A source familiar with the conversations told The Daily Beast that, in recent weeks, the Fox News host has privately advised Trump against taking military action against Iran. And a senior administration official said that during the president’s recent conversations with the Fox primetime host, Carlson has bashed the more “hawkish members” of his administration.

While some Fox News hosts have argued that a conflict with Iran would be justified, Carlson has consistently criticized U.S. military intervention abroad, particularly in the Middle East. In recent weeks, he has questioned whether war with Iran would be “in anyone’s interest.” Last month, he publicly chided Bolton, saying he was intentionally escalating tensions, and that a potential conflict would “be like Christmas, Thanksgiving, his birthday wrapped into one.”

During a Monday night segment devoted to the recent attack on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman, Carlson invoked the faulty intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The Fox News host compared Pompeo’s “misplaced certainty” that Iran attacked the tankers to former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s now-discredited claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

“We’re still paying a price for that,” Carlson said.

Apparently, getting the Very Stable Genius's ear was fairly easy:

The president has made no secret of his affinity for Carlson.

Since taking office, Trump has live-tweeted episodes of Tucker Carlson Tonighton at least 20 separate occasions, often promoting or directly quoting the eponymous host or his guests. 

“Trump thinks Tucker is one of the sharpest minds on television—[Trump has said], ‘So smart, a thinking man’s show,’” one knowledgeable source told The Daily Beast in August.

So once again, as in the area of economics, where those with a solid understanding of the free market, such as Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore, vie for influence on the rudderless chief executive even as protectionists like Wilbur Ross and Peter Navarro do likewise, we have Pompeo and Bolton having to compete with a television host who has decided his career advancement lies in the perpetuation of a supremely dangerous delusion.

How are things going to go with the economy? How are things going to go with Iran, and rogue states in general? It seems that it would be a fool's errand to offer much in the way of predictions, given that such disparate sets of advisors are telling him what will make him look like a winner, which is all the Very Stable Genius really cares about.