Despite Campaign Rhetoric, Trump Wades Further Into Middle East

Despite that campaign platform and electoral mandate, now-President Donald Trump is doubling down on military intervention in the Middle East.
By |
Be Sociable, Share!
    • Google+

    Published in partnership with Shadowproof.

    ANALYSIS — In the 2016 election cycle, then-candidate Donald Trump drew widespread support for opposing military adventurism by the United States in the Middle East, famously slamming “dumb wars” like Iraq that cost lives and money and ultimately achieved “nothing.”

    This simple critique resonated across party lines and surely played a role in his success at the polls. The American people are sick of imperialism, and Trump appears to have soundly won the veteran vote.

    But despite that campaign platform and electoral mandate, now-President Donald Trump is doubling down on military intervention in the Middle East. Yesterday, it was reported that President Donald Trump ordered 400 more troops into Syria to fight to retake the city of Raqqa, ISIS’ de facto capital. The group includes a team of Army Rangers and a Marine Artillery unit-i.e. not “advisors.”

    These orders come on the back of reports that Trump is considering increasing U.S. forces in Afghanistan and a series of new military actions in Yemen against Al Qaeda, which included a raid that led to the death of Navy SEAL William Owens.

    This is, if anything, an escalation of the “dumb wars” in the Middle East, not an end to them. So how is one supposed to read these actions given Trump’s campaign rhetoric?

    One generous interpretation is that President Trump is keeping a pledge to destroy ISIS, and afterwards plans to limit U.S. involvement considerably in the region. But this does not explain the Yemen raids, Afghanistan increases, or increasing tensions with Iran.

    A more likely scenario is that Trump is ramping up to destroy what’s left of ISIS and will then just keep the kill machines rolling as he moves on to other things. That would rule out more Iraq-level blunders, but it substantively leaves the War on Terror in place—a military and political project that has actually led to more terrorism.

    In other words, interventionism leads to more interventions. The last 15 years prove that rather well, with a 2001 war in Afghanistan leading to multiple ground and air wars. The U.S. is currently bombing at least seven countries.

    So if Trump is, as he has repeatedly claimed, trying to get the U.S. out of the Middle East to focus more on rebuilding at home, this is the worst path to take. The wars will eat up yet more blood and treasure and sow another generation of animosity towards the U.S. in the region, leading to more terror and, subsequently, more intervention.

    Almost all of the U.S. foreign policy establishment hates President Trump. Some are undoubtedly playing a role in the current campaign to bring him down. This would seemingly give President Trump an opportunity to break from the past failures of U.S. foreign policy on which he so successfully capitalized during the presidential campaign.

    Instead, he is doing the same old thing and promising different results.

    Be Sociable, Share!


    Print This Story Print This Story
    You Might Also Like  
    This entry was posted in Foreign Affairs, Front Page: Foreign Affairs, Top Stories and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
    • tapatio

      Obviously, Reichskanzler Drumpf has been ordered to occupy the Middle East (the oil, anyway) for his Rothschild-Bilderberg masters.

      Hopefully, Russia, China, Iran, India and other countries will have a great deal to say about that…….all forcefully negative.

    • James Wherry

      if he gets in, gets ISIL and then gets the heck out, I’ll agree. So far, though, yes ANY “boots on the ground” are too much and only invite the killing of U.S. service members by ISIL.

      I’m not concerned in the least about “friendly fire” or “unfriendly fire” from Russia or Syria Defense Forces. NOTE how prominently American flags are displayed on the U.S. Marine vehicles. The U.S. is leaving nothing to chance, and so far, Syria and Russia are minding their own business.

    • tapatio

      What else could be expected from the trash in the WhiteHouse?

    • edfelien

      Trump needs military in Afghanistan to protect the $4 billion opium trade and the Russian Trans Afghan pipeline. Both of which require collaboration with Russia.

      • James Wherry

        Nope: President Trump needs a “win” in foreign policy – I urge him to KEEP HIS PROMISES and to stop the Deep State from trying to reignite the Cold War.

        • NCGran

          Not with Bannon by his side. Bannon is an avowed Leninist and a new “Cold War” is precisely his shot of Vidka, while His Orangeness collaborates with Putin and sells out this country! This is Trump’s show, all his and the scum he has surrounded himself with.