Are We At War with Iran Already?

This molten heap of metal is the SUV in which Iran's top general was traveling,
after it was hit by U.S. missiles.

For a moment let's imagine a scenario: U.S. General Mark A. Milley, Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is killed when his motorcade is attacked with missiles launched from an aircraft flying the flag of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Now, in what universe would the U.S. not take this as a blatant act of war?

Therefore, we must be clear that the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, who, by all accounts, was the ranking member of the Iranian military, was an act of war.

However, we have not openly declared war on Iran and we try to deny that our actions amount to an act of war. Why is that? Does it not make more sense to be clear about what it is we are doing, in order to rally support at home and abroad and in order to expedite a resolution to the conflict?

Make no mistake: actions on both sides of this conflict are part of a clear march toward war and the same questions could be asked of Iran; is Iran in open conflict with the U.S.? Were the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, the multiple missile attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria and the downing of a U.S. drone in the Persian Gulf not overt acts of war? When non-state actors like ISIS take similar actions we do not hesitate to declare ourselves at war with them -- why not with Iran?

This conflict should be called what it is and decisive action should be taken, or we should step back and let our allies carry water for us. I am not a fan of leaders who incite to war but claim to not seek war.

If Iran wants war with the U.S. then let them have it and stop all this pussy-footing around.