# Opinion: Tom Rogan Says Blaming Iran War Costs on Those Who Wanted It Stopped Is 'Farcical,' Taking Aim at Ari Fleischer and Mark Levin

The Washington Examiner columnist, who opposed the war, argues the ceasefires were a response to a regime that would not fall and to depleted munitions. He rejects claims that arming Iranian rebels would have worked. The views are his.

- Section: [Opinion](https://rightnewsrightnow.com/opinion/)
- Published: 2026-11-05
- By: RightNewsRightNow Staff
- Canonical page: https://rightnewsrightnow.com/articles/opinion-tom-rogan-farcical-blame-iran-war-costs-on-stopping-war-fleischer-levin-ceasefire-hormuz-blockade-washington-examiner/

This is a Washington Examiner opinion column by Tom Rogan. The views are his, not ours.

The argument. Rogan writes that the Iran war is at the center of conservatives' post-mortem on the midterm losses, and that it is "farcical" for supporters of the war to blame its costs on people who opposed it or backed the ceasefires. He says the war was controversial from its start in February, that its backers promised the regime would fall quickly and painlessly, and that critics who warned of complications "were correct."

What he concedes. Rogan says Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism, has killed many Americans, and wants Israel gone, and that the Obama nuclear deal was weak. He says even war opponents should admit there was a legitimate case for military action. He also agrees the war raised inflation, especially gas prices, and says Vice President JD Vance is right about those costs, though he calls Vance disingenuous for playing down the impact of tariffs.

The targets. He names Ari Fleischer, who argued that the problem "was not the Iran War. It was the cease fire," and that gas could be under $3. He also names Fox News host Mark Levin, who he says said Vance "screwed up" the war. Rogan says Levin is right that Israel does not deserve blame for Trump's decision to go to war, but calls the idea that continued fighting would have won it "ridiculous."

His case for the ceasefires. Rogan says the administration pursued them because the regime held on under heavy pressure and was not expected to fall in the short or medium term, and because continuing would have drained munitions he says cannot be restored to acceptable levels before 2029. He says the ceasefire and a Navy blockade eased energy prices and restored pre-war flows through the Strait of Hormuz. He dismisses Fleischer's call to back "pro-western forces" in Iran as fiction that would need years of training and U.S. troops on the ground.

His conclusion. "Trump tried to make the best of a bad decision," Rogan writes, and those who argued for the war with the claim it "had no downside" should be more honest.

Why it matters here. We have carried writers who blame the war for the losses, including Vance's own statement, and others who blame different things. Rogan's column attacks the pro-war side's rebuttal.

What we could not check. We read the column and did not check the munitions timeline, the Hormuz flow claim, the price effects or the quotes he attributes to Fleischer and Levin. Rogan is a stated opponent of the war, so he is not a neutral voice on it.

## Source

Original reporting: [Washington Examiner (opinion by Tom Rogan)](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/beltway-confidential/4793585/farcical-to-blame-iran-conflict-costs-on-stopping-war/)