Uploaded April 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Jim Hanson argues on Fox News that recent U.S. actions against Iran achieved their intended effect: demonstrating overwhelming force, degrading capabilities, and shifting the conflict toward negotiation.
Hanson explains that the same deal had been available—but only became viable once Iran faced credible pressure and the risk of escalation. The result, he argues, is a transition from military action to leverage at the negotiating table.
He also responds to critics of the strategy, questioning whether the outcome has changed the debate—and what comes next as talks move forward.
Jim Hanson argues on Fox News that recent U.S. actions against Iran achieved their intended effect: demonstrating overwhelming force, degrading capabilities, and shifting the conflict toward negotiation.
Hanson explains that the same deal had been available—but only became viable once Iran faced credible pressure and the risk of escalation. The result, he argues, is a transition from military action to leverage at the negotiating table.
He also responds to critics of the strategy, questioning whether the outcome has changed the debate—and what comes next as talks move forward.
