Trump’s Stupid-Is-As-Stupid-Does War

Donald Trump at Versailles on Wednesday. Jean-Bernard Vernier/Sipa/AP

For this issue, I was going to write about Tulsi Gabbard’s parting gift to Vladimir Putin. As she readied to leave her post as director of national intelligence at the end of this month, Gabbard last week released four slides of declassified intelligence that she claimed showed the United States had funded dangerous biolabs in Ukraine that engaged in risky gain-of-function research. The material, not surprisingly, did not back up her assertion. But it was quickly embraced by Russian media and propagandists as proof of Moscow’s long-standing (and false) charge that Ukraine set up US-financed bioweapon labs that threatened Russia—which was a pretext for Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Gabbard, who has done much as DNI to advance pro-Russian conspiracy theories, was pulling off one last information op for Moscow. But rather than delve more deeply into this, I need to vent.

Donald Trump’s war in Iran is one of the stupidest foreign policy ventures in US history.

I know that’s not a new or hot take. When he attacked Iran on February 28, it immediately became clear that he had no idea what he was doing. Karoline Leavitt, his press secretary, said he had initiated the attack based on a “feeling”—while negotiations to limit Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs were ongoing.

Trump then had a tough time explaining to the nation what the hell this war was for. To eliminate a nuclear program he had claimed was obliterated by a previous bombing raid? To address an “imminent threat” because Iran was, he falsely claimed, within two weeks of developing a nuclear bomb? To achieve regime change? To wipe out Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles? To protect Iranian anti-government protesters? To diminish Iran’s ability to strike at US allies and bases, if Israel attacked Iran? To end Tehran’s support of terrorism? To “get rid of evil”?

If you don’t know why you’re warring, it’s tough to figure out when to stop. After all, what counts as victory?

Then the war became mostly a matter of addressing unintended—but utterly predictable—consequences. Iran shut the Strait of Hormuz, which was an easy-to-foresee possibility, and sparked a global economic crisis. Trump had no plan for that—just as he had no plan to achieve any of the assorted aims he had expressed at different times. Now the mission was to undo what his war had caused.

So dumb. Trump spent gazillions of taxpayer dollars on this endeavor, only to end up fighting for a return to the status quo. He had to put out the fire he started. And thousands of Iranian civilians—including an estimated 168 schoolgirls—have been killed, as well as 13 American servicemembers. It’s a pointless loss of treasure and lives. With the higher gas prices, the war so far has cost Americans $132 billion. This folly has also raised food prices—which has an especially dramatic impact on poorer, food-stressed nations. It further strained US ties with its closest allies.

The signing this week of a memo of understanding between Washington and Tehran to end the war highlighted the imbecility of this action. The terms met none of the revolving goals Trump had tossed out. It kicked down the road any discussion of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic programs. But the deal handed the repressive government of Iran much-desired deliverables, such as an end to sanctions, an unfreezing of assets, and a $300 billion reconstruction fund. Iran could immediately start to sell oil. Ka-ching! It only had to keep the strait open, as it had always done prior to the war. It looked as if Trump was rewarding the mullahs with tremendous riches for doing what they used to do for free. Art of the deal, right? Trump had previously called for a “unilateral surrender” from Iran. This was not that.

Critics of all ideological stripes blasted the deal. Hawks and Republicans saw it as a total sellout, as well as an abandonment of Israel. (The agreement called for an end to Israeli attacks in Lebanon—a provision that did not please the Netanyahu crowd.) The New York Post lambasted Trump. Neocons exclaimed on podcasts, “What’s going on?” Democrats and liberals noted this was the equivalent of an American surrender to a government still presumably committed to running a repressive regime and supporting terrorism, and it fell far short of the agreement that the Obama administration had forged with Iran in 2015. It was good that the fighting was over—at least for the moment—but nothing had been settled. Only the most cultish of Trump cultists (Jesse Watters, I’m looking at you) could hail the deal as a masterpiece of statesmanship and a win for the United States.

Trump signed the MOU during a trip to Versailles, which in a previous era hosted the signing of a notoriously lousy accord that led to a conflagration we call World War II.

What was especially ludicrous was how Trump and his crew talked about the deal. On March 1, the White House declared that Trump had attacked Iran to “destroy its ballistic missile arsenal.” On Wednesday, he said it was no biggie for Iran to retain ballistic missiles: “If other countries have them, it's a little unfair for them not to have some.” He added, “Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles, but [Iran] can't have them? It doesn’t work that way.”

As for Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium—which is now not suitable for use in a nuclear bomb but could be refined to weapon-grade level—Vice President JD Vance on MSNOW said, “One of the core parts of the agreement is that the [International Atomic Energy Agency] and the United States are going to help Iran destroy the highly enriched stockpile, and that’s something that’s spelled out very clearly in the MOU.”

But the MOU said nothing about this. And Trump sent conflicting signals about what he hoped to do about this half ton of material that ostensibly was one of the key reasons for the war. At one point on Wednesday he said, “We’re going to get it.” At another, he remarked, “I don’t think anybody could get at it.” (This material is apparently beneath a mountain that was bombed last year by US and Israeli warplanes.)

Trump zigged and zagged on another issue. At the start of the war, he said, “We're now totally independent of the Middle East. We don't need their oil.” A few weeks in, he reaffirmed this: “It doesn't really affect us. We have so much oil. We have tremendous oil and gas, much more than we need.” On Wednesday, he asserted that if he didn't agree to the MOU, we “would run out of reserves at about four weeks…We would really run out, and there'll be a time when you wouldn't be able to get it.”

Once this war was about ballistic missiles and highly enriched uranium and oil was no concern. Now, who cares about the missiles or the uranium? And Trump had to give Iran so much to get the oil flowing. Meanwhile, instead of regime change, it’s likely there’s been regime worsening. As for helping the Iranian people rise up against the tyrannical mullahs? Fuggedaboudit.

No sane person expects consistency from Trump. But during a war, erraticism is particularly dangerous and idiotic. His impulsive attack on Iran has accomplished none of his stated objectives. It’s been a foolish waste.

During a press conference on Wednesday at the G7 meeting in France, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick standing behind him, Trump mused, “In war, terrible things happen. Like you mentioned...the [girls’] school gets hit. Other things get hit. Bad things happen in war. War is a nasty place. I see it. I see it better than maybe anybody has ever seen it.” Yes, even at this point, Trump was claiming he understands this war better than anyone else. But he had no vision of what this war was for, of how to wage it, or of how to win it. This was a vanity project for him. He thought he could unleash violence and chaos—threaten to commit war crimes and destroy an entire civilization—and end up the star triumphantly bathed in military glory and, oddly, deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize.

In the end, this disaster does not demand deep analysis. It was a dumb move from a narcissistic numbskull who now cares more about a ballroom, an arch, and a reflecting pool than the carnage and damage he wreaked. A stupid war is yielding stupid results—and with Trump its author that’s no surprise.

Got anything to say about this item—or anything else? Email me at ourland.corn@gmail.com.

Time for me to go a-wanderin’. I’ll be on the road for a fortnight. In the meantime, the nearly sentient robots at Our Land World Headquarters will zap out a few oldie-but-goodies from the well-preserved Our Land archives, which are maintained at a constant 72 degrees Fahrenheit in an underground bunker in an undisclosed location off the grid. When I return, I will have some exciting news. Stay tuned.

My old pal Greg Mitchell has written and directed a wonderful documentary called Woody Guthrie and the Ghost of Tom Joad Today. It chronicles the intertwining paths of Guthrie and writer John Steinbeck in the 1930s, as the author chronicled the travails of migrant workers, culminating in The Grapes of Wrath, and the singer-songwriter gave voice to the Dust Bowl refugees, immigrants, and itinerant workers exploited, oppressed, and assaulted in the fields of California. But the film goes beyond depicting this important history and draws a poignant connection to the plight of migrant workers today and the cruelty and brutality they currently face from ICE raids and Trump’s anti-immigration crusade.

The film will be shown on PBS stations, starting with KCET in Los Angeles on June 25 and other stations across the country on July 1. It will also stream at PBS.org and on PBS apps. Here’s the trailer:

JD Vance is on the hustings peddling his new memoir called Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith. It’s an accounting of his spiritual journey to Jesus, God, and Catholicism. And we’re expected to take this seriously, given that he loyally serves a liar and a most ungodly guy? No shocker, in selling the book, Vance has struck a rather un-Christian-like pose, denigrating fellow Christians who happen to be Democrats. On Fox, he griped:

It doesn’t bother me when congressional Democrats disagree with our policies. It bothers me that they’re just terrible people, so many of them. But what really does bother me is that they don't show gratitude for the United States of America. Disagree with our policies. But if you don't feel grateful to live here…then what are you even doing being in public service?

Democrats have fought for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, labor laws, anti-pollution laws, voting rights, food-safety standards, equal pay—and much else that has made this a better country, almost always over GOP opposition. Maybe Vance should show some gratitude for that.

And we have a Vance double bill! As noted above, Trump vowed that the only conclusion to his war in Iran would be “unconditional surrender” on the part of Tehran. Well, the White House 86’ed that, and Trump’s crew became big fans of a negotiated settlement—even one that favors Iran. On Meet the Press, Vance insisted that all wars finish that way:

This is how wars ultimately get settled. If you go back to World War II, if you go back to World War I, you go back to every major conflict in human history, they all end with some kind of negotiation.

I guess I missed the History Channel documentary on how FDR negotiated the end of WWII with Hitler.

The only folks supporting the Iran deal are Trump’s toadies. Even some Fox commentators seemed to realize this was a dumb ending to a dumb war. Looking to protect Trump from criticism of the MOU, Fox host Brian Kilmeade tried to tie this albatross to Vance and let Trump off the hook:

All I'm going to say the vice president was here [on Fox] and did a wonderful job on every outlet, including The View. But this is his deal. It's not the president's deal. And it's his deal and Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner together. I just hope they didn't let the president down. Because the president is putting a lot of stock in them. He can't do everything himself. I just hope they didn't let him down.

This is Trump’s deal. It was his decision to go to war. It was his decision to end it (if it is ending) this way. Kilmeade’s attempt to separate Trump from the MOU is one big sign that Kilmeade knows it’s a stinker and can become a political liability for Trump.

Trump, too, was prepping his Vance excuse. At a news conference, he said, “If if works out, I’m going to take the credit. If it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming JD.”

It was a joking/not-joking comment.

During an interview at a recent Turning Point USA Women's Leadership Summit, right-wing and trad-wife influencer Savanna Stone said that she’s all for disenfranchising women: “I would gladly give up my right to vote to have a more conservative country.”

Because women voters trend Democratic, they ought not be permitted to vote—that’s now an acceptable position within the MAGA women’s movement.  

There was much that was objectionable about Trump turning the White House into a big cage for a crass UFC extravaganza on Sunday. But one moment was especially outrageous: After winning his bout, UFC fighter Josh Hokit, during an interview with Joe Rogan, shouted, “Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America?”

That’s about as dumbass as it gets. But this week’s prize doesn’t go to Hokit. Instead, the winner is Dave Portnoy, the social media entrepreneur who founded Barstool Sports. He’s been a Trump backer. During the 2016 campaign, he said, “I am voting for Donlad Trump. I don't care if he's a joke. I don't care if he's racist. I don't care if he's sexist...I love the fact he says shit nobody else will say, regardless of how ridiculous it is.” In 2024, he also declared his support for Trump.

But this week, he was upset about Hokit’s crack and called on Trump to condemn it:

There was one moment [at the UFC event] I do think Trump has to denounce and anybody associated with it has to denounce…He made a derogatory comment about Michele Obama. To me that on the White House lawn, these are UFC guys. They are crazy, they’re idiots…But when you have that on a White House lawn…that has to be an immediate denounce…[Trump] should say that was totally wrong.

Portnoy, of course, is correct. Any decent person would have denounced that comment. But Trump is not a decent person. This week he called Barack Obama a “son of a bitch” and referred to Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) as “Os(jerk!)off.” What wins Portnoy the trophy is his obliviousness. You don’t ask a skunk not to stink, and you don’t ask Trump to denounce an offensive remark directed at the Obamas. It’s stupid to even try.

This video from the Australian team is one reason to relish the World Cup, despite the corruption, commercialism, and politics of international soccer. It’s a lovely contrast to Trumpian racism.

AI does have its benefits:

There were many emails in response to the issue noting that Elon Musk is the worst trillionaire ever. Most were short and essentially expressed the same sentiment: What a jerk.

Replying to the issue about Trump’s recent false statements about election fraud and the concern they raise about a potential Trump assault on the midterms, Bill Gray observed:

Thank you for this one. These facts can't be repeated often enough, even if half the country isn't listening.

It's probably more than half. But it's still important to get the truth out there and prep for what may be coming this fall.

Bruce Devlin shared this:

My neck is a cramping mess from head shaking, every day another blather of bullshit from DJT. I am old but hope to see the carnage put right.

Bruce sent this note before Trump’s blather about the Iran deal. I believe we will eventually see some of the carnage put right. But the dismantling of USAID, the decimation of NIH and CDC, the brutal deportations of law-abiding residents, and much else that Trump has done have consequences that cannot be undone.

Teresa Harper had a request:

I'm cleaning out my bookcase and ran across your and Michael Isikoff's book, Russian Roulette. I was wondering if I mailed the book to you, including a return label, would you autograph the book? I have quite a few signed books, including from Pete Buttigieg, Jim Clyburn, Cory Booker, and Barbara Ehrenreich. I'd love to include yours.

I’m honored that your cleaning of your bookcase did not lead to Russian Roulette being placed in a Little Free Library. It would be an honor to be part of any collection with Barbara Ehrenreich.

Greg Hill shared a fear:

My concern, which I haven't seen made mention of anywhere, is that feckless toady Mike Johnson is speaker of the House, and the speaker after the Civil War simply refused to call out the names of the representatives from the South and so did not swear them in. The House then ran without a full set of representatives. I hope in their ignorance the GOP doesn't remember this history, so please don't mention this publicly unless you know the workaround.

I don’t think such a scenario needs to be feared. According to the Congressional Research Service, on the first day of the new Congress, nothing happens until a new speaker is elected. The clerk of the House presides over that election. After a speaker is chosen, members are sworn in. If the Democrats have the majority, under the rules, there ought not be an opportunity for Johnson or any other Republican to gum up the works.

Jack Zelver took issue with my review of the new Spider-Noir series, which one can watch in either black-and-white or color:

Regarding Spider Noir, you said, “But only a sap would fall for the full-spectrum rendition.” I watched it that way and loved it. I tried both, and the color added a lot to it and, in my humble opinion, was better. I never thought of you as a Luddite.

I will not begrudge Jack the rainbow. But B&W captures the soul of noir.

“Moxie, check out that beautiful blue flower.”
“Are you just saying that because dogs are dichromatic and can see blues and yellows but not reds and greens?”
“No, I just thought it was pretty.”
“Okay. But can you smell it from where you are?”