The Shift: Is Trump careening into another war?

Shortly after Israel’s launched its unprovoked attacks on Iran, Donald Trump told reporters that he had advised Netanyahu against the bombing.

A short time after that, Trump acknowledged that the United States might become involved in Israel’s military effort. A couple days later he was posting threats to Tehran on Truth Social and declaring (without evidence) that Iran was on the verge of developing a nuke.

As with virtually any issue, it’s impossible to know what is going on in Donald Trump’s head. However, it is very clear who is surrounding him and what they want. His administration is loaded with hawks and those with dissenting opinions are seemingly being ignored or shut out.

When Trump was asked about Tulsi Gabbard telling congress that she didn’t believe Iran was working toward a nuclear weapon, he said he didn’t care. She wasn’t invited to an emergency Situation Room meeting where next steps discussed.

A sizable chunk of Congress is cheering on an intervention.

Lindsey Graham says that “the U.S. should be all-in to help Israel finish the job.” Chuck Schumer says U.S. support for Israel must be ironclad. John Fetterman says he hopes Trump bombs the country.

We also hear the drums of war from the usual pundits, including former members of the Bush team like John Bolton and Ari Fleischer. Without a hint of irony, this cadre of outlaws insists on playing the hits: Nuclear weapons. Imminent threat. Regime change.

However, it is not 2003.

Multiple Democrats have already voice opposition to U.S. involvement. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have both introduced legislation to limit Trump’s War Powers.

“It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,” said Kaine in a statement. “The American people have no interest in sending service members to fight another forever war in the Middle East. This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation’s men and women in uniform into harm’s way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress.”

Another bill, introduced by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY.) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), would force Trump to seek congressional approval for a war.

“This is not our war,” tweeted Massie. “But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution. I’m introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution tomorrow to prohibit our involvement. I invite all members of Congress to cosponsor this resolution.”

Massie is not the only Republican sounding the alarm. In a long Twitter post, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) criticized GOP hawks.

“We have spent TRILLIONS in the Middle East and we have dealt with the aftermath of death, blown apart bodies, never ending suicides, and disabling PTSD,” she wrote. “All because they told us propaganda as to why we must sacrifice our own to defend some other country’s borders and some other country’s borders.”

These fissures are developing across the wider U.S. right as well, with prominent conservative pundits voicing opposition to a war.

Chief among them is Tucker Carlson, who Trump has derided as “kooky” for breaking with him over the war. “If Israel wants to wage this war, it has every right to do so. It is a sovereign country, and it can do as it pleases,” he wrote in a recent newsletter. “But not with America’s backing.”

Days later, Carlson aired an interview with Ted Cruz on the issue, revealing that the Texas Senator knows virtually nothing about Iran. Here’s a small part of that:

Tucker: How many people live in Iran?

Carlson: I don’t know the population

Carlson: You don’t know the population of the country you seek to topple?

Cruz: How many people live in Iran?

Carlson: 92 million. How could you not know that?

At one point, Cruz said that “we” were attacking Iran, curiously conflating the U.S. and Israel.

“You’re breaking news here because the US government last night denied it,
Carlson responded. “The National Security Council spokesman Alex Heifer, denied, on behalf of Trump, that we were acting on Israel’s behalf in any offensive capacity.”

Watching the interview, I was reminded of Carlson’s late pal making a fool of Charlton Heston by asking him basic questions about Iraq during the lead up to the Gulf War.

The viral moment serves as an indictment of the mainstream media. Why is Tucker Carlson (of all people) one of the only media members challenging lawmakers directly on this issue?

Having said all that, the biggest difference between 2025 and 2003 is not the pundits or the lawmakers. It’s the American people.

In the early 2000s, poll after poll revealed that the public had a zeal for carnage, a sentiment at least partially generated by the Bush administration’s lies.

This time around, the numbers have flipped. A Economist/YouGov poll from last week found that just 16% of Americans think the U.S. military should join Israel’s war, while 60% are against the move.

With this push for war, you also need to factor Israel’s reputation, which has dropped considerably over the last 20 years. A recent Quinnipiac survey shows sympathy with Israelis at an all-time low.

The skepticism toward forever wars was definitely a factor in Trump gaining the GOP nomination in 2016.

“Obviously the war in Iraq was a big fat mistake, alright?” he told the crowd at a primary debate back then. “George Bush made a mistake, we can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty.”

“It took Jeb Bush — if you remember at the beginning of his announcement when he announced for president, it took him five days — ‘It was a mistake, it wasn’t a mistake,’ — it took him five days before his people told him what to say,” he continued. “We should have never been in Iraq, we have destabilized the Middle East.”

“They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction — there were none. And they knew there were none.”

If only this guy had the President’s ear.

Mamdani attacks

NYC’s mayoral primary vote is just days away.

For weeks, right-wing rags and pro-Israel websites have smeared Zohran Mamdani as an antisemite for backing the BDS movement and suggesting that apartheid should not exist.

For months, Mamdani’s candidacy was viewed by many as a long shot effort designed to boost DSA membership, but now he’s polling close to Cuomo and the establishment liberal media have joined the pile on.

We start with The Atlantic, where Annie Lowrey has written a piece declaring that New York City is suddenly not a democracy because it uses ranked choice voting. The process is “wonkish and confusing” says the person married to Ezra Klein.

Lowrey says Mamdani’s “résumé is thin.” His democratic socialist vision for the city sounds good, but it’s “impractical at best.” She says free buses would deprive the MTA of revenue and thinks that free childcare would require a “mammoth tax hike.” She thinks a rent freeze would make the city even less affordable.

The funniest line in Lowrey’s article? “One thing the candidates share, I suppose, is that both get accused of being nepo babies. Mamdani’s mother made the 1991 indie romance Mississippi Masala. Cuomo’s father was governor of New York.”

Basically the same thing, sure.

In an Op-Ed advising residents how to vote, the New York Times conjures up the same confounding energy that propelled its dual endorsement of Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for president.

The paper declines to endorse any candidate, but instructs readers to avoid ranking Mamdani.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Mamdani is running on an agenda uniquely unsuited to the city’s challenges,” laments the Times. “He is a democratic socialist who too often ignores the unavoidable trade-offs of governance. He favors rent freezes that could restrict housing supply and make it harder for younger New Yorkers and new arrivals to afford housing. He wants the government to operate grocery stores, as if customer service and retail sales were strengths of the public sector. He minimizes the importance of policing.”

The NYT and The Atlantic’s concern is presumably driven by Mamdani’s Bernie-style agenda, but we are talking about two outlets that have repeatedly favored Israel.

An improbable Mamdani victory would undoubtedly increase the anxiety level of the liberal establishment on matters foreign and domestic.

Odds & Ends

🇺🇸 Democrat and Republican lawmakers push to limit Trump’s war powers on Iran

⚕️ UC San Francisco fired me for speaking out against genocide, but as a physician I could not remain silent

🇮🇱 Israel started a war with Iran, but it doesn’t know how it ends

🕍 Joining forces: Time for Jews to unite in the struggle against Zionism, apartheid and genocide

🇮🇷 Israel launches unprecedented attack on Iran days before U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations

💥 Trump, lawmakers, and Israel lobby all celebrate Israel’s attack on Iran

🏫 Columbia student forced into exile over Palestine activism

🇵🇸 Electronic Intifada: Trump’s “aid” boss oversees lethal food distribution in Gaza

🗽 Common Dreams: ‘A Clear Choice’: Bernie Sanders Endorses Zohran Mamdani for NYC Mayor

⚖️ Truthout: “Disgraceful”: Judge Refuses to Order Mahmoud Khalil’s Release, Siding With DOJ

🪖 The Nation: If the War Between Israel and Iran Continues, the US Should Stay Out of It

🌐 Counterpunch: Once Again, the Stupidity of War

🎖️ Responsible Statecraft: Is Israel’s favorite US general helping to push us into war?

😬 Jewish Insider: Trump dismisses Gabbard’s assessment that Iran wasn’t building nuclear weapons

🇮🇶 Axios: Regime change emerges as unstated goal of Israel’s war in Iran