Donald Trump grabs his presidency with the United States entering the war with Iran

Donald Trump took the largest gamble in four and a half years in the White House on Saturday evening in Iran’s amazing and joining Israel’s war against the Islamic Republic.

Trump’s primary bet is that Iran and its entirety in the Middle East have been so much that the American president can intervene as limited and successful. It is also a bet that Tehran will quickly seek to settle instead of revenge.

If Trump is right, he will achieve a goal of US foreign policy that extends to multiple departments – eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat – and doing it at a relatively low cost.

But this step involves a great danger of amplification in the Middle East more – endangering the security of the United States and Israel and the opposite consequences of a president who pledged not to attract America to new global conflicts.

“All of this depends on how the Iranian-and-not regime interacted is clear what the capabilities of the regime and the will at this stage. (But) the Iran network throughout the region is still operating, and it is able to plant more instability and terrorism if it chooses.”

Trump spent a lot of his 2024 presidential campaign on the pretext that he would be a peacemaker in his second term, as he resolved global conflicts instead of raising new conflicts.

But the president, under pressure from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saw a strike against Iran both as an opportunity to seize it, and an opportunity to secure a legacy as a leader ready to use American military force.

On Saturday, Trump seemed to enjoy his move from isolation to Davung. The president wore a red hat “Make America great again” while gathering with senior assistants in the White House room. During his speech after the strikes, he warned that he was ready to expand the military campaign against Iran, if necessary.

“There will be either peace or there will be a much greater tragedy for Iran than what we have seen over the past eight days,” Trump said. “Remember that there are many remaining goals … but if peace does not come quickly, we will obey those other goals with accuracy, speed and skill.”

Iran has always been an exception to Trump’s unprofitable talisman. In early 2020, near the end of his first term, he launched a high -risk military operation to assassinate the Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad.

“If the Americans are threatened anywhere, we have all these goals that were already identified, and I am ready and ready to take any necessary action. This, in particular, refers to Iran,” Trump said at that time.

On him Visit last month to the Gulf regionThe US President issued a clear warning to Tehran. “We want them to be a wonderful, safe and great country, but they cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said. “This is an offer that will not last forever.”

These general warnings to Tehran climbed greatly over the past week, as it left early from the 7 Group Summit in Canada to consider strikes against Iran. His proposal on Thursday that the Islamic Republic had two other weeks to bend the demands of the United States.

Dana Stroll, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Middle East, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that Trump’s retarded transformation in Iran was at odds with his previous position on foreign policy.

She said, “Trump has repeatedly mentioned his preference for diplomacy, his desire to conclude a deal, and his desire to judge it by wars that the United States does not enter.”

“We are here, after five months of the second administration, and the United States entered a direct conflict with Iran, in the absence of the dangerous expression of the American people about the image of intelligence, in the absence of dangerous communication with Congress … about the use of military power.”

Chris Van Holin, a Senate member of Maryland, has expressed his anger, indicating the type of local attacks that Trump can expect in the coming days.

“The war in Iraq also started with false allegations,” Van Holin said. “The United States has supported the defense of Israel’s right, but it should not join Netanyahu to launch this war of choice.”

Alexandria Okasio Cortez, a member of the Democratic Congress in New York, called for Trump to remove military measures without permission from the US Congress. Republican Congress member Thomas Massi books On Trump’s decision to attack: “This is not constitutional.”

But some other Republican lawmakers praised this step.

Parliament Speaker Mike Johnson said: “The decisive action of the president prevents the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world, who chants” death for America “, from obtaining a more deadly weapon on this planet. This is the first policy of America at work,” said Parliament Speaker Mike Johnson.

Trump’s action against Iran with 51 percent of Americans who refuse to perform in office, and the approval of 46.9 per cent, according to the polling site Realclearpolitics.com.

Aaron David Miller, a former US State Department negotiator in the Middle East in Carnegie for International Peace, said Trump had a “politically margin” to continue fighting, especially if Iran retaliated.

But he also warned that the window may not be open for a long time, especially if the war expands or ignited a new energy crisis. “How to play this with the killing of Americans, and the oil price of more than $ 100 a barrel, is another issue.”

Jacques Reed, the largest democracy in the Senate Armed Services Committee, put in another way: “This was a huge gamble by President Trump, and no one knows yet whether it will pay its fruits.”