hey never learn. Once again, a bellicose US president has unleashed overwhelming military firepower to force a sovereign nation to its knees. Once again, blatant lies and exaggerated claims are being propagated to justify the attack. Duplicitous American diplomacy became a fig leaf for premeditated aggression. The cautionary advice of allies was spurned. The UN, international law and public opinion were ignored. Democratic consent is lacking. And once again, there are few defined goals by which to gauge success, and no long-term plan.

Now, as in the past, the predictable result of today's renewed, expanded and apparently open-ended US-Israeli aggression against Iran will be instant, spreading chaos. Civilians will be killed, children orphaned, families torn apart. Regional turmoil and international oil-price panic will follow the Iranian retaliation that has already begun, and which may be backed by Tehran's Hezbollah and Houthi allies. New hatreds will be seeded, terrorist vendettas sown. The west's foes will rejoice. And almost nothing of enduring value will be achieved. That was the bitter outcome of the failed US-led interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Today, it's Tehran's turn to reap the whirlwind.

How dismaying - how unforgivable! - that those past lessons have not been learned. How incredible that an elected 21st-century American president still believes it's effective and permissible, let alone moral, to dictate to the world from the barrel of a gun. By what conceivable right does the US behave in this way?

While there are certain differences, the similarities between Donald Trump's siege of Iran and George W Bush's disastrous 2003 invasion of Iraq are striking. Both crises fit a wider pattern of ultimately unsuccessful, costly US interventionism dating back to Vietnam - and the 1953 CIA-led Iran coup. Trump promised to avoid foreign adventures. Surprise! He lied. Anyone who believes he has radically changed the way the US engages with the world should review this sordid saga of post-1945 imperial hubris. In this, he's no different from his predecessors.

. . .