Ok yeah I think I'm done paying for this neocon stenography. In all the handwringing about potential Israeli losses, nowhere is it mentioned that at least 224 Iranians have already been killed so far, overwhelmingly civilians including children. Netanyahu's actions in Gaza are described as "crippling Hamas" rather than carrying on a sustained campaign of deliberate starvation of the civilian population (again, many children) and allowing snipers to target desperate people looking for food, bombing indiscriminately, etc. It's a genocide, not a "calculated" military action.
Also who is this President Trump you're describing? This sober leader struggling to avoid conflict, keep campaign promises, and follow a thoughtful strategy in the Middle East? That's not the colossally stupid and trigger-happy fool we've all watched for the last 10 years. He's not the man for this moment and every honest person knows it.
Anyway, Iranians are people too, and this perspective on a potential war and its impact to oil prices in the US is some 90s-2000s-era BS. Do better.
The human toll is absolutely appalling in any war. However I think there are also absolutely people across America only watching snippets of news who only see a war in the Middle East and think, how will this impact me? To think there aren't and to think that those impacts won't change how they view American politicians doesn't make that not true. And I agree that Trump probably isn't thinking through the Middle East conflicts like previous presidents. But a war in the Middle East, that we are a part of, would absolutely change his presidency. I didn't read that section and think wow Trump is so good at this. I thought this will either end well in spite of him, or go badly because of him.
I've read other content from Elise and she has been very critical of the Trump admin. As well as Netanyahu's decisions. Hamas though alongside other terrorist organizations (alongside unfortunately again the every day people) are not what they were a year ago. It is devastating to sit and think about the average every day people across the world impacted by war. It's hard for me not to wonder how we can fix it. I wish Trump wasn't the one in charge. I wish he had better people surrounding him. And it is a concern. I also know there are people living next door to me (both literally and figuratively) who think the fix to this is to just nuke them all and be done with it. Human cost be damned. Who do care more about their gas prices than someone else's life.
I was out with my dad when I read the news if the bombs being dropped. He of course wanted to see what was being said. He turned on CNN (mostly to make it look like he wanted to hear both sides) before turning on Fox. They talked about the bomb for maybe 15 minutes before jumping into another story. To me it seemed like Fox wanted to distract from this new potential war.
Thanks for saying this. I canceled yesterday when the post was all about bravery and not being silenced and yet total silence on Netanyahu’s genocide and the U.S. being complicit. A year decimating Hamas indeed.
I’ve noticed this too, and not just here, but news media like NBC, ABC, CBS, and even NPR are so desperate to seem unbiased that they actually completely miss the truth of the situation. Both-sidsing also isn’t helpful and just muddles the truth. Calling a spade a spade isn’t bias, it’s truth. Yet so many are so scared or unwilling to just plainly describe the facts. I much prefer Heather Cox Richardson’s Substack these days.
Thank you for another helpful post. Some commenters clearly missed the title of this article stating “How Israel’s Iran strikes could change everything for AMERICA”. This post was designated as a discussion about how these events would likely impact Americans right from the start. The likely scenarios include high gas prices. So its place in this article makes more sense than delving in to the effects for civilians in Iran, as horrific as those are. This is one article in a sea of past writings coming from the Preamble as well as the many still expected to come. Don’t whine over ONE post not including every single issue you feel needs to be included when the article tells you what it will be about. Sharon has always given us considered, balanced, nuanced posts. If you believe she or her team don’t cover the heart-breaking realities for the innocent people in Gaza or elsewhere, you clearly don’t engage with her posts consistently. In a time where finding unbiased, non-sensationalist and ACCURATE updates is difficult, don’t crack it at the few people working overtime to provide us this because one post wasn’t exactly how you would have written it.
I critique the Preamble team BECAUSE I respect them and I think they can do better than both-sidesing us into oblivion. And this isn't one post, this is a pattern.
Why doesn’t the worst case scenario part about potential conflict on American soil, and the killing of US troops make it to the top of the worst part. As well as the idea that Americans have to live with the loss of their nation’s moral compass and lack of humanity. Gas prices are already $5.50/gal in California every day we fill up. We know it will be higher.
It’s hard to imagine people rallying to Trump’s support the way most Americans did around Bush after 9/11, or how citizens have historically united behind presidents during collective national emergencies. The trust and social cohesion that makes effective crisis response possible has been systematically eroded.
Just yesterday I saw a friend post definitively, without any real proof, that the 2024 election was stolen by Musk for Trump, and Harris actually won. His friends piled on with “💯” and “I knew it all along, why didn’t the Democrats do anything??” Meanwhile, we’re witnessing Trump use the military as his pawns in an effort to crush domestic dissent for his authoritarian policies. If this Middle East situation does erupt into the kind of conflict that would necessitate bipartisan enthusiasm for national defense, I know the love of country is still there, but it seems like half the country doesn’t feel like they can trust our current government to competently utilize that energy. When a president has spent years attacking the legitimacy of democratic institutions and deploying divisive rhetoric as a political strategy, it becomes nearly impossible to activate the kind of national solidarity that complex international crises demand.
I’m part of the problem here, and not a problem I think should be fixed, to be clear. What I mean is I have been using my time to research the many ways we can counter the “promises made, promises kept” lie that Trump’s supporters constantly parrot. They basically say “you may disagree with his values, but he is doing exactly what he said he would do during his campaign, and people voted for it.” I think there’s some intentional collective amnesia here, so it’s important to remember the actual claims he made and how that message got interpreted by voters. My hope is that by cataloging this stuff we can counter the propaganda that’s being used to gaslight Americans.
One of the biggest lies Trump told people was how quickly he’d be able to solve international conflicts. During his 2024 campaign, Trump repeatedly claimed he could end Russia’s war in Ukraine “within 24 hours” if returned to office. In March 2023, he told Sean Hannity there was “a very easy negotiation to take place” and that he could “solve” the war in a single day. At a CNN Town Hall in New Hampshire, he insisted “They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done — I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” At a July 2023 rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, Trump boasted that the resolution would come “before I even arrive at the Oval Office” and would be “done within 24 hours, you watch.” During a speech to the National Guard, he promised service members they wouldn’t be deployed because “I’ll get it settled very fast.” What did get settled very fast was breaking any illusion that Putin felt Trump had any leverage on him.
Trump made similarly grandiose claims about the Israel-Gaza conflict. On the day of the Hamas attack in October 2023, he immediately posted on Truth Social that this “would NEVER have happened if I were President!” At campaign rallies, he blamed American “weakness” and claimed “it would not have happened if we were in office.” After his election, he doubled down alongside Netanyahu, claiming “the horrors of Oct. 7 would never have happened if I were president.” Throughout the campaign, Trump positioned himself as uniquely capable of bringing “quick” peace. However, just like with the friendship he thought he had in Putin, he’s come to realize that he didn’t have as much leverage as he assumed he did with Netanyahu, and this latest attack was clearly started against Trump’s wishes.
These promises about the simplicity of foreign policy were enthusiastically amplified by conservative media figures who presented his claims as credible policy positions. Fox News pundits regularly echoed Trump’s confidence, with conservative commentator Nick Solheim labeling Trump “the No New Wars President,” a moniker that circulated widely in MAGA circles. Charlie Kirk reinforced the messaging that conflicts like Ukraine weren’t in America’s interest and that Gen-Z could trust Trump to end them quickly, while op-eds in The New York Post hailed Trump’s “24-hour Ukraine plan” as “bold” and columnists in The Federalist argued that only Trump had the “deal-maker savvy” to bring world leaders to the table.
Many voters genuinely believed these promises. Arab-American voters in Michigan, upset with Biden’s handling of Gaza, shifted toward Trump explicitly because they believed he could bring peace to the region: many first-time Republican voters said they backed Trump hoping for swift peace in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe, saying things like “If he could do that, [he] could be the chosen person from God.” Trump rally attendees regularly cheered his vows to “stop World War III,” with supporters echoing his talking points: “There were no new wars on Trump’s watch, and I trust that he’d end the Ukraine war immediately.”
Now, Trump finds himself managing contradictions between his campaign rhetoric and geopolitical reality. His base expects him to avoid entangling wars, but the scenarios outlined in this analysis suggest he may face choices between abandoning key allies or entering precisely the kind of prolonged military engagement he campaigned against. The president who promised 24-hour solutions is discovering that complex international conflicts resist simple fixes, and the voters who believed those promises are about to learn the same hard lesson.
That being said, we know his base excuses everything he does, but his election victory depended on a lot of people outside of his base. This is the kind of thing that will break that support.
This! The article above does have some good analysis, but portraying Trump as savvy is nonsensical. His skill at the negotiating table is smoke and mirrors. His book was ghost written - not uncommon for famous people to use, but they usually actually contribute content, if not style. His ghost writer has long claimed that there's nothing real in that book. I'm pretty certain that certain global events were planned to improve Trump's chances of getting back into office BECAUSE he's an ineffective leader and easily flattered and bribed, to boot. That doesn't mean that I believe that the "election was stolen." But the American people were certainly manipulated by people who do NOT have the best for America and Americans in mind. And this kind of "serious" writing is part of the problem. Stop imagining elected officials as having skills or motives they do not clearly have evidence for. None of this is likely to end well for anybody. At this point, I just want the facts, ma'am, not some hot air blown up the president's skirt. It's not likely he's paying attention to this group, so flattery toward him is unnecessary.
People demanding perfection from a free, stand alone article that is clearly titled is mind blowing.
Helping Americans understand how a war in another country might affect them is SO important because most of us are saturated with caring about what’s happening here. Do we have the capacity to add another heavy issue? Probably not… but explaining how it might affect us is the easiest way to get people’s attention.
I welcome the time when I don’t wake up in the morning and my first thoughts are what horrific things will happen today as a direct consequence of the unserious, unprepared and dangerous man in the White House. We have Rubio, Hegseth and Trump to lead us through a very dangerous situation in the Middle East. God help us.
I wonder about this too, but the fact also seems to be that the IRI is a lot like Putin: they have idealogical goals that no treaty or concessions will ever really stop or satisfy. The IRI's goals (destruction of Israel and the West) are as real and clear as Putins goal of expanding the Russian border over Ukraine (and possibly beyond).
Did the deal with Obama buy time? Almost certainly. But was it going to hold them back from nuclear weapons forever? I don't honestly know.
It’s also important to note how the Iranian regime has funded terror across the region via their militant proxies like Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas. Those are all real
terrorist organizations who routinely carry out attacks on shipping lanes and other things. They did not comply entirely with Obama’s deal. Sometimes people assume that only the West has agency and that other countries are always just reacting to whatever we do, but they also have their own goals and are trying to influence events in a direction they prefer. Anne Applebaum has written for years about how Iran and Russia have helped each other circumvent sanctions imposed by the West.
I wish there was anyone in this administration that I thought had the knowledge and skill to deal with this situation. They have generally shown a woefully shallow historical understanding of anything.
Oh man. I've been an og governerd and here reading since we got discount.
I have maybe commented 1x. But the absolute anger I felt when reading "Israel has been decimating Hamas" are you freaking kidding me?!?!?!?! It's a genocide!!!!! Words matter and unfortunately after reading that, I will take everything the rest of this article and from this author with a major grain of salt.
Trump has no credibility or standing as a world leader. He is mocked and ridiculed by the leaders of all our peer nations. The United States itself, may hold some left over power from when we had leaders with morals and character, but that’s the most rosy assessment. He’s also surrounded by completely unqualified people so who knows where this goes. The only thing for sure, is that it won’t be anywhere good, and it will happen again before he’s gone.
Thanks for this write up, I didn’t actually know that the IAEA conclusions and Iran’s flouting of them was a catalyst here. (As the article states, it does seem like Israel has been strategizing and taking advantage of the timing more so than reacting in the moment, though.) It does feel very early 2000s to talk about Middle East conflict and oil prices. I have never felt that the Trump administration had a good grasp of national security strategy so I worry that the bravado and flexing for the international community will take priority over any kind of deescalation strategy.
Literally in a matter of hours Trump demonstrates his unfitness for this moment: he's now demanding "unconditional surrender" from Iran and threatening assassination of a head of state.
Please report honestly that this fascist monster is endangering millions of people. This is not some clever negotiation tactic, this is a malignant narcissist and wannabe strongman who has had all checks on his power removed.
I would deescalate by reiterating a commitment to dialogue and safety, and proceed with the conversations which had already been planned. I would seek to negotiate a ceasefire so that talks and agreements can resume.
The only issue is that you have to have a good faith partner in negotiations in order to negotiate a ceasefire. The other side also has to want to negotiate a peace. Iran’s regime hasn’t wanted peace, it has wanted the total
destruction of Israel and the US, and it has wanted a nuclear weapon, it just hasn’t wanted a full-out confrontation with Israel or the US. It killed around 603 American service men and women in Iraq through its proxies according to the Pentagon in an article published in 2019. I am not read into all the intel on how close Iran is/was to developing a nuclear bomb and I am aware that people (Netanyahu in particular) have been saying for like 30 years that they were doing so. So I remain skeptical and worried about the situation, but I recognize that it is very complicated. Iran is an aggressor in the region and it disguises its own violence by acting through the Houthis (who shut down shipping for a long time), Hezbollah, and yes, Hamas. I don’t know how true it is that they were rushing towards a nuclear weapon, it would wonderful if we had military and intelligence leaders we could trust or who were at least competent. I would just be cautious about rushing to judgment that Israel is simply the aggressor here. The French and other European countries are supportive of this action so far and they have been very critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza. That tells me that there must be some credibility to the Un report about Iran’s efforts to develop a bomb. If they did even make a small nuclear weapon, most countries in the Middle East would also rush to gain nuclear weapons. The situation is very dangerous, the fact that we don’t have competent leaders is terrifying, and clearly, Trump’s grasp of the issues and his ability to influence Netanyahu is pretty weak, it’s very very dangerous
I'm not suggesting the situation is easy, but I am saying that the responsible thing for any leader to do is try to reduce the temperature, and that's the opposite of what Trump is doing. Further, whatever nefarious plans Iran may have, you can't say they're the aggressor in the same way that for instance Russia was with Ukraine. Preemptive action, especially destabilizing regime change, comes with enormous risks and people like Netanyahu and Trump have demonstrated recklessness with civilian lives and safety.
I deleted my long comment because I read more today about the situation and I am growing ever more skeptical about the nuclear weapon issue. I don’t think Israel should attempt to regime change. We saw how taking out Saddam Hussein led to the rise of ISIS. We have a lot to be worried about. I think Iran is in a weakened state and Netanyahu thinks this is a good time to strike. I don’t think Trump necessarily wants a war, I think he only wants to claim credit if it goes in his favor. And any declaration of war better come from Congress and not just from Trump.
I agree that Israel is not launching these attacks because Iran was about to directly strike them, so there’s no justification for this escalation unless they were truly rushing for nuclear weapons. I think we mostly agree, lol.
I have zero confidence that Trump and his sycophantic admin have the smarts or the understanding of the big picture here, to manage this crisis effectively. They’re the opposite of diplomats. They suffer from tunnel vision. They’re above all about the money when it comes to dealing with this region, and have little grounding in (or interest in learning about) the complexities and long-simmering tensions and relationships between countries in this region. I couldn’t imagine a worse president and cabinet to have at this point in history. We are all at risk now.
Returning to this article post Trump’s solo decision to bomb Iran. Congress found out afterward(?), and Trump claims that this is one and done unless Iran retaliates. I openly have no idea what’s happening, and I’m not convinced that the media commentators do either. I’m assuming we are about to find out if we just created long term instability in the Middle East with US commitment, or perhaps by some miracle Iran doesn’t retaliate and decides to end their nuclear program. And…congress? Does anyone else remember when we had elected representatives? I’m hearing different arguments around whether or not Trump should have involved Congress with the cons referencing targeted strikes like with Clinton in Kosovo, and the pros referencing the constitution. I also keep hearing that Iran can’t meaningfully retaliate, but didn’t the laws of warfare just change with Ukraine’s drone operation in Russia? Maybe now is not the best time to have a 22 year old in charge of a chunk of counter terrorism when our actions are directly provoking terrorism? I have overconsumed info to the point that my brain is goo, but I wanted to throw this out there to the Preamble team. This was a very helpful article to reread after the events. Thank you, Elise.
Huh? Where is the evidence and actual factual citations that show proof of these Iranian 2-3 week distance between here and a nuclear weapon? Who con confirm this? It’s been being said this is the case since the 90’s. It seems like Netanyahu himself wrote this.
Trump absolutely is responsible for his actions and the US support of Israel, therefore he has responsibility to stop this, and to “make a deal” as he loves to say, with Israel to stop this.
Israel is the aggressor. And we fund Israel. So how is this about our gas tank and not about Israel’s ongoing genocide of Palestine, and their list for ultimate control of the Middle East in every way shape and form?
Thank you for this article. I feel like it was well written and explains a lot of what’s going on in the Middle East. I absolutely do not want to go to war, but I am extremely concerned about Iran ever having a nuclear bomb. I am not a fan of the current administration, but I do hope they can solve this problem once and for all.
Ok yeah I think I'm done paying for this neocon stenography. In all the handwringing about potential Israeli losses, nowhere is it mentioned that at least 224 Iranians have already been killed so far, overwhelmingly civilians including children. Netanyahu's actions in Gaza are described as "crippling Hamas" rather than carrying on a sustained campaign of deliberate starvation of the civilian population (again, many children) and allowing snipers to target desperate people looking for food, bombing indiscriminately, etc. It's a genocide, not a "calculated" military action.
Also who is this President Trump you're describing? This sober leader struggling to avoid conflict, keep campaign promises, and follow a thoughtful strategy in the Middle East? That's not the colossally stupid and trigger-happy fool we've all watched for the last 10 years. He's not the man for this moment and every honest person knows it.
Anyway, Iranians are people too, and this perspective on a potential war and its impact to oil prices in the US is some 90s-2000s-era BS. Do better.
Thank you, Missy.
Seriously? This piece ends with Americans worried about filling up their gas tank?
The human toll is absolutely appalling in any war. However I think there are also absolutely people across America only watching snippets of news who only see a war in the Middle East and think, how will this impact me? To think there aren't and to think that those impacts won't change how they view American politicians doesn't make that not true. And I agree that Trump probably isn't thinking through the Middle East conflicts like previous presidents. But a war in the Middle East, that we are a part of, would absolutely change his presidency. I didn't read that section and think wow Trump is so good at this. I thought this will either end well in spite of him, or go badly because of him.
I've read other content from Elise and she has been very critical of the Trump admin. As well as Netanyahu's decisions. Hamas though alongside other terrorist organizations (alongside unfortunately again the every day people) are not what they were a year ago. It is devastating to sit and think about the average every day people across the world impacted by war. It's hard for me not to wonder how we can fix it. I wish Trump wasn't the one in charge. I wish he had better people surrounding him. And it is a concern. I also know there are people living next door to me (both literally and figuratively) who think the fix to this is to just nuke them all and be done with it. Human cost be damned. Who do care more about their gas prices than someone else's life.
I was out with my dad when I read the news if the bombs being dropped. He of course wanted to see what was being said. He turned on CNN (mostly to make it look like he wanted to hear both sides) before turning on Fox. They talked about the bomb for maybe 15 minutes before jumping into another story. To me it seemed like Fox wanted to distract from this new potential war.
Thanks for saying this. I canceled yesterday when the post was all about bravery and not being silenced and yet total silence on Netanyahu’s genocide and the U.S. being complicit. A year decimating Hamas indeed.
I’ve noticed this too, and not just here, but news media like NBC, ABC, CBS, and even NPR are so desperate to seem unbiased that they actually completely miss the truth of the situation. Both-sidsing also isn’t helpful and just muddles the truth. Calling a spade a spade isn’t bias, it’s truth. Yet so many are so scared or unwilling to just plainly describe the facts. I much prefer Heather Cox Richardson’s Substack these days.
Thank you for another helpful post. Some commenters clearly missed the title of this article stating “How Israel’s Iran strikes could change everything for AMERICA”. This post was designated as a discussion about how these events would likely impact Americans right from the start. The likely scenarios include high gas prices. So its place in this article makes more sense than delving in to the effects for civilians in Iran, as horrific as those are. This is one article in a sea of past writings coming from the Preamble as well as the many still expected to come. Don’t whine over ONE post not including every single issue you feel needs to be included when the article tells you what it will be about. Sharon has always given us considered, balanced, nuanced posts. If you believe she or her team don’t cover the heart-breaking realities for the innocent people in Gaza or elsewhere, you clearly don’t engage with her posts consistently. In a time where finding unbiased, non-sensationalist and ACCURATE updates is difficult, don’t crack it at the few people working overtime to provide us this because one post wasn’t exactly how you would have written it.
I critique the Preamble team BECAUSE I respect them and I think they can do better than both-sidesing us into oblivion. And this isn't one post, this is a pattern.
I agree. Gabe’s last post about this also showed and affinity for one side.
Why doesn’t the worst case scenario part about potential conflict on American soil, and the killing of US troops make it to the top of the worst part. As well as the idea that Americans have to live with the loss of their nation’s moral compass and lack of humanity. Gas prices are already $5.50/gal in California every day we fill up. We know it will be higher.
I’m concerned about humanity.
Neocon?! That is absolutely laughable.
It’s hard to imagine people rallying to Trump’s support the way most Americans did around Bush after 9/11, or how citizens have historically united behind presidents during collective national emergencies. The trust and social cohesion that makes effective crisis response possible has been systematically eroded.
Just yesterday I saw a friend post definitively, without any real proof, that the 2024 election was stolen by Musk for Trump, and Harris actually won. His friends piled on with “💯” and “I knew it all along, why didn’t the Democrats do anything??” Meanwhile, we’re witnessing Trump use the military as his pawns in an effort to crush domestic dissent for his authoritarian policies. If this Middle East situation does erupt into the kind of conflict that would necessitate bipartisan enthusiasm for national defense, I know the love of country is still there, but it seems like half the country doesn’t feel like they can trust our current government to competently utilize that energy. When a president has spent years attacking the legitimacy of democratic institutions and deploying divisive rhetoric as a political strategy, it becomes nearly impossible to activate the kind of national solidarity that complex international crises demand.
I’m part of the problem here, and not a problem I think should be fixed, to be clear. What I mean is I have been using my time to research the many ways we can counter the “promises made, promises kept” lie that Trump’s supporters constantly parrot. They basically say “you may disagree with his values, but he is doing exactly what he said he would do during his campaign, and people voted for it.” I think there’s some intentional collective amnesia here, so it’s important to remember the actual claims he made and how that message got interpreted by voters. My hope is that by cataloging this stuff we can counter the propaganda that’s being used to gaslight Americans.
One of the biggest lies Trump told people was how quickly he’d be able to solve international conflicts. During his 2024 campaign, Trump repeatedly claimed he could end Russia’s war in Ukraine “within 24 hours” if returned to office. In March 2023, he told Sean Hannity there was “a very easy negotiation to take place” and that he could “solve” the war in a single day. At a CNN Town Hall in New Hampshire, he insisted “They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done — I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” At a July 2023 rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, Trump boasted that the resolution would come “before I even arrive at the Oval Office” and would be “done within 24 hours, you watch.” During a speech to the National Guard, he promised service members they wouldn’t be deployed because “I’ll get it settled very fast.” What did get settled very fast was breaking any illusion that Putin felt Trump had any leverage on him.
Trump made similarly grandiose claims about the Israel-Gaza conflict. On the day of the Hamas attack in October 2023, he immediately posted on Truth Social that this “would NEVER have happened if I were President!” At campaign rallies, he blamed American “weakness” and claimed “it would not have happened if we were in office.” After his election, he doubled down alongside Netanyahu, claiming “the horrors of Oct. 7 would never have happened if I were president.” Throughout the campaign, Trump positioned himself as uniquely capable of bringing “quick” peace. However, just like with the friendship he thought he had in Putin, he’s come to realize that he didn’t have as much leverage as he assumed he did with Netanyahu, and this latest attack was clearly started against Trump’s wishes.
These promises about the simplicity of foreign policy were enthusiastically amplified by conservative media figures who presented his claims as credible policy positions. Fox News pundits regularly echoed Trump’s confidence, with conservative commentator Nick Solheim labeling Trump “the No New Wars President,” a moniker that circulated widely in MAGA circles. Charlie Kirk reinforced the messaging that conflicts like Ukraine weren’t in America’s interest and that Gen-Z could trust Trump to end them quickly, while op-eds in The New York Post hailed Trump’s “24-hour Ukraine plan” as “bold” and columnists in The Federalist argued that only Trump had the “deal-maker savvy” to bring world leaders to the table.
Many voters genuinely believed these promises. Arab-American voters in Michigan, upset with Biden’s handling of Gaza, shifted toward Trump explicitly because they believed he could bring peace to the region: many first-time Republican voters said they backed Trump hoping for swift peace in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe, saying things like “If he could do that, [he] could be the chosen person from God.” Trump rally attendees regularly cheered his vows to “stop World War III,” with supporters echoing his talking points: “There were no new wars on Trump’s watch, and I trust that he’d end the Ukraine war immediately.”
Now, Trump finds himself managing contradictions between his campaign rhetoric and geopolitical reality. His base expects him to avoid entangling wars, but the scenarios outlined in this analysis suggest he may face choices between abandoning key allies or entering precisely the kind of prolonged military engagement he campaigned against. The president who promised 24-hour solutions is discovering that complex international conflicts resist simple fixes, and the voters who believed those promises are about to learn the same hard lesson.
That being said, we know his base excuses everything he does, but his election victory depended on a lot of people outside of his base. This is the kind of thing that will break that support.
This! The article above does have some good analysis, but portraying Trump as savvy is nonsensical. His skill at the negotiating table is smoke and mirrors. His book was ghost written - not uncommon for famous people to use, but they usually actually contribute content, if not style. His ghost writer has long claimed that there's nothing real in that book. I'm pretty certain that certain global events were planned to improve Trump's chances of getting back into office BECAUSE he's an ineffective leader and easily flattered and bribed, to boot. That doesn't mean that I believe that the "election was stolen." But the American people were certainly manipulated by people who do NOT have the best for America and Americans in mind. And this kind of "serious" writing is part of the problem. Stop imagining elected officials as having skills or motives they do not clearly have evidence for. None of this is likely to end well for anybody. At this point, I just want the facts, ma'am, not some hot air blown up the president's skirt. It's not likely he's paying attention to this group, so flattery toward him is unnecessary.
Thank you for this! Well done.
People demanding perfection from a free, stand alone article that is clearly titled is mind blowing.
Helping Americans understand how a war in another country might affect them is SO important because most of us are saturated with caring about what’s happening here. Do we have the capacity to add another heavy issue? Probably not… but explaining how it might affect us is the easiest way to get people’s attention.
I welcome the time when I don’t wake up in the morning and my first thoughts are what horrific things will happen today as a direct consequence of the unserious, unprepared and dangerous man in the White House. We have Rubio, Hegseth and Trump to lead us through a very dangerous situation in the Middle East. God help us.
Agree 1000%. We are all f*****.
Does Trump tearing up the nuclear treaty the Obama administration signed play into this at all?
That's a good question. I think it's a VERY important question at this moment. Maybe THE important question.
I wonder about this too, but the fact also seems to be that the IRI is a lot like Putin: they have idealogical goals that no treaty or concessions will ever really stop or satisfy. The IRI's goals (destruction of Israel and the West) are as real and clear as Putins goal of expanding the Russian border over Ukraine (and possibly beyond).
Did the deal with Obama buy time? Almost certainly. But was it going to hold them back from nuclear weapons forever? I don't honestly know.
It’s also important to note how the Iranian regime has funded terror across the region via their militant proxies like Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas. Those are all real
terrorist organizations who routinely carry out attacks on shipping lanes and other things. They did not comply entirely with Obama’s deal. Sometimes people assume that only the West has agency and that other countries are always just reacting to whatever we do, but they also have their own goals and are trying to influence events in a direction they prefer. Anne Applebaum has written for years about how Iran and Russia have helped each other circumvent sanctions imposed by the West.
If Trump hadn’t done away with the original anti nuclear deal with Iran, would we be facing this threat today?
I wish there was anyone in this administration that I thought had the knowledge and skill to deal with this situation. They have generally shown a woefully shallow historical understanding of anything.
Oh man. I've been an og governerd and here reading since we got discount.
I have maybe commented 1x. But the absolute anger I felt when reading "Israel has been decimating Hamas" are you freaking kidding me?!?!?!?! It's a genocide!!!!! Words matter and unfortunately after reading that, I will take everything the rest of this article and from this author with a major grain of salt.
Thank you! That’s how I felt too. It’s like Netanyahu is writing this article himself. What is this?!!
Trump has no credibility or standing as a world leader. He is mocked and ridiculed by the leaders of all our peer nations. The United States itself, may hold some left over power from when we had leaders with morals and character, but that’s the most rosy assessment. He’s also surrounded by completely unqualified people so who knows where this goes. The only thing for sure, is that it won’t be anywhere good, and it will happen again before he’s gone.
Thanks for this write up, I didn’t actually know that the IAEA conclusions and Iran’s flouting of them was a catalyst here. (As the article states, it does seem like Israel has been strategizing and taking advantage of the timing more so than reacting in the moment, though.) It does feel very early 2000s to talk about Middle East conflict and oil prices. I have never felt that the Trump administration had a good grasp of national security strategy so I worry that the bravado and flexing for the international community will take priority over any kind of deescalation strategy.
Literally in a matter of hours Trump demonstrates his unfitness for this moment: he's now demanding "unconditional surrender" from Iran and threatening assassination of a head of state.
Please report honestly that this fascist monster is endangering millions of people. This is not some clever negotiation tactic, this is a malignant narcissist and wannabe strongman who has had all checks on his power removed.
Missy, if you were in charge right now, what would you do given the current circumstances?
I would deescalate by reiterating a commitment to dialogue and safety, and proceed with the conversations which had already been planned. I would seek to negotiate a ceasefire so that talks and agreements can resume.
The only issue is that you have to have a good faith partner in negotiations in order to negotiate a ceasefire. The other side also has to want to negotiate a peace. Iran’s regime hasn’t wanted peace, it has wanted the total
destruction of Israel and the US, and it has wanted a nuclear weapon, it just hasn’t wanted a full-out confrontation with Israel or the US. It killed around 603 American service men and women in Iraq through its proxies according to the Pentagon in an article published in 2019. I am not read into all the intel on how close Iran is/was to developing a nuclear bomb and I am aware that people (Netanyahu in particular) have been saying for like 30 years that they were doing so. So I remain skeptical and worried about the situation, but I recognize that it is very complicated. Iran is an aggressor in the region and it disguises its own violence by acting through the Houthis (who shut down shipping for a long time), Hezbollah, and yes, Hamas. I don’t know how true it is that they were rushing towards a nuclear weapon, it would wonderful if we had military and intelligence leaders we could trust or who were at least competent. I would just be cautious about rushing to judgment that Israel is simply the aggressor here. The French and other European countries are supportive of this action so far and they have been very critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza. That tells me that there must be some credibility to the Un report about Iran’s efforts to develop a bomb. If they did even make a small nuclear weapon, most countries in the Middle East would also rush to gain nuclear weapons. The situation is very dangerous, the fact that we don’t have competent leaders is terrifying, and clearly, Trump’s grasp of the issues and his ability to influence Netanyahu is pretty weak, it’s very very dangerous
I'm not suggesting the situation is easy, but I am saying that the responsible thing for any leader to do is try to reduce the temperature, and that's the opposite of what Trump is doing. Further, whatever nefarious plans Iran may have, you can't say they're the aggressor in the same way that for instance Russia was with Ukraine. Preemptive action, especially destabilizing regime change, comes with enormous risks and people like Netanyahu and Trump have demonstrated recklessness with civilian lives and safety.
I deleted my long comment because I read more today about the situation and I am growing ever more skeptical about the nuclear weapon issue. I don’t think Israel should attempt to regime change. We saw how taking out Saddam Hussein led to the rise of ISIS. We have a lot to be worried about. I think Iran is in a weakened state and Netanyahu thinks this is a good time to strike. I don’t think Trump necessarily wants a war, I think he only wants to claim credit if it goes in his favor. And any declaration of war better come from Congress and not just from Trump.
I agree that Israel is not launching these attacks because Iran was about to directly strike them, so there’s no justification for this escalation unless they were truly rushing for nuclear weapons. I think we mostly agree, lol.
I have zero confidence that Trump and his sycophantic admin have the smarts or the understanding of the big picture here, to manage this crisis effectively. They’re the opposite of diplomats. They suffer from tunnel vision. They’re above all about the money when it comes to dealing with this region, and have little grounding in (or interest in learning about) the complexities and long-simmering tensions and relationships between countries in this region. I couldn’t imagine a worse president and cabinet to have at this point in history. We are all at risk now.
Returning to this article post Trump’s solo decision to bomb Iran. Congress found out afterward(?), and Trump claims that this is one and done unless Iran retaliates. I openly have no idea what’s happening, and I’m not convinced that the media commentators do either. I’m assuming we are about to find out if we just created long term instability in the Middle East with US commitment, or perhaps by some miracle Iran doesn’t retaliate and decides to end their nuclear program. And…congress? Does anyone else remember when we had elected representatives? I’m hearing different arguments around whether or not Trump should have involved Congress with the cons referencing targeted strikes like with Clinton in Kosovo, and the pros referencing the constitution. I also keep hearing that Iran can’t meaningfully retaliate, but didn’t the laws of warfare just change with Ukraine’s drone operation in Russia? Maybe now is not the best time to have a 22 year old in charge of a chunk of counter terrorism when our actions are directly provoking terrorism? I have overconsumed info to the point that my brain is goo, but I wanted to throw this out there to the Preamble team. This was a very helpful article to reread after the events. Thank you, Elise.
Huh? Where is the evidence and actual factual citations that show proof of these Iranian 2-3 week distance between here and a nuclear weapon? Who con confirm this? It’s been being said this is the case since the 90’s. It seems like Netanyahu himself wrote this.
Trump absolutely is responsible for his actions and the US support of Israel, therefore he has responsibility to stop this, and to “make a deal” as he loves to say, with Israel to stop this.
Israel is the aggressor. And we fund Israel. So how is this about our gas tank and not about Israel’s ongoing genocide of Palestine, and their list for ultimate control of the Middle East in every way shape and form?
Thank you for this article. I feel like it was well written and explains a lot of what’s going on in the Middle East. I absolutely do not want to go to war, but I am extremely concerned about Iran ever having a nuclear bomb. I am not a fan of the current administration, but I do hope they can solve this problem once and for all.