What Past Presidents Have Said About the Wars They Fought

July 25, 2017 by Katherine Smith

Fully one-third of US presidents had to oversee a major US war. This country emerged from the smoke of battlefields. We were carried on the backs of patriots to the position of world leadership that we enjoy today. And while war is a bleak reminder of the depths from which we have risen, it is also a beacon illuminating the path to heights we have yet to reach.

As the Massive Mobile Naval Military Base sets course to the Middle East, we are reminded that peace is fragile, and must be paid for with eternal vigilance.

PBS Newshour placed the total number of US soldiers who died in war at over 1.1 million. About half of that was during the civil war. Surviving presidential autographs from that time are some of the most historically valuable there are.

We value the autographs from wartime presidents so highly because they tell us a lot about who we once were, and what we ultimately can be. Here are a few examples of those words that push us to be our best selves:

The Importance of the Constitution

Our first president, George Washington, took to arms to secure the freedom we enjoy today. But war was not his goal. He was not trying to obtain freedom through superior firepower. For Washington, freedom was about the Constitution. War was just a means to secure it. This is what he had to say on the matter.

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance. They are the teeth of the people’s liberty.” George Washington

The Constitution is a document of law.But it is also a statement of moral principles. We are not to be a nation founded on might makes right. Rather, the greatest good for humankind is what is worth defending to the death. May we always keep the Constitution and what it represents in view.

The Purpose of War Is Peace

Although a soldier by profession, I have never felt any sort of fondness for war, and I never advocated it, except as a means of peace. Ulysses S. Grant

Ulysses S. Grant reminds us that war is not an end unto itself. It is not a show of force. It is not a means of destroying the enemy.War should only end one way, in peace, not in pieces.

His war saw the death of a half a million US soldiers. We did obtain peace. But it was the costliest peace America has ever known. And in some ways, we are still paying the bill to this day.We have seen wars before and since that did not end in peace. But his words are a reminder of the ultimate goal in the event of future wars.

War is Despicable

Every gun that’s made, every warship launched, every rocket fired,signifies a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms…is spending the genius of its scientists, the sweat of its laborers, Dwight D. Eisenhower

President Eisenhower oversaw WWII as supreme commander of Allied forces in Western Europe.He hated war with great fervor. In his own words:

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.

In some ways, Eisenhower oversaw America’s finest hour. It is a reminder that we should be wary of leaders who have a taste for war.War is not glorious. It is awful, and to be avoided whenever possible.

Enrich the World

At the end of the day, war should leave the world a better place than it was before. And the winners are not just the soldiers who remain standing but the entirety of humanity. This was best expressed by our 28th president:

You are not here merely to make a living.You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.Woodrow Wilson

While war was not the subject, it still applies to all our endeavors including war. If we can enable the world to live more amply, we have remembered our mission. At the heart of these, and countless other fighting words are the seeds of an abiding peace.May we never lose track of where we’ve been, or where that bright beacon points.

https://militarybases.com/military-articles/presidents-said-wars-fought/

The Peace Presidents

May 7, 2007 6:36 pm, Feb. 8, 2004,1/2

George W. Bush proudly proclaimed to Tim Russert on “Meet the Press,” “I am a war president.” Like an 8-year-old playing with toy soldiers, Bush, an Air National Guard dropout, looked at war with vicarious enthusiasm.

Contrast the attitude of the nation’s “peace presidents”– supreme commanders who led the nation to victory in the greatest wars the country faced: men who had experienced the grim reality of battle and wanted no part of it. (The difference now, is no presidents ever go to war, they just order it.)

Ulysses S. Grantcondemned war as “the most destructive and unsavory activity of mankind.”

Surveying the carnage at Fort Donelson during the Civil War,he told an aide, “this work is part of the devil that is left in us.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower, another former general, was equally outspoken:“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, as only one who has seen its brutality, its futility and stupidity…. War settles nothing.”

Both Grant and Eisenhower were elected with expectations that they would put a victorious end to conflicts in which the country was then engaged.Both presidents did end the fighting. But not in ways that their bellicose supporters anticipated.

In Grant’s case, the frontier was ablaze, and it was widely assumed that the general-in-chief who had bested Robert E. Lee would make quick work of the Plains Indians who were slowing the nation’s westward expansion.That bet was misplaced.

Grant admired the integrity and lifestyle of Native Americans and ordered an end to the slaughter. He reined in Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Philip Sheridan (who seemed bent on annihilation), dispatched a brace of “humanitarian generals” to the West,provided aid and comfort to entice the tribes onto reservations, and replaced corrupt Indian agents with Quakers.

“Grant’s peace policy” – as it is called by historians – brought peace to Great Plains without racial genocide.

Twice moreGrant faced down the hawks clamoring for war — first with Great Britain, then with Spain. British-American relations had not recovered from the Civil War for several reasons: Irish-American expatriates were conducting cross-border raids into Ontario; conflicting claims to fishing rights in the North Atlantic often resulted in bloodshed; a boundary dispute in the Pacific Northwest lay unresolved; and the unpaid claims from Union shipping losses continued to fester.

Grant rejected the possibility of a military solution, and with the cooperation of the Gladstone government in Britain, he submitted the issues to arbitration.This marked a breakthroughin the settlement of international disputes and paved the way for the Anglo-American accord that survives to this day.

https://archive.nytimes.com/campaigningforhistory.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/the-peace-presidents/

>>23204477

2/2

The issue with Spain involved Cuba. Portions of the island were in revolt against Spanish rule, and American public opinion demanded intervention on the side of the rebels.Grant not only refused, but deployed the Navy to prevent American freebooters from joining the conflict.

In 1952, Eisenhower was elected with the expectation he would win the war in Korea. After the electionIke went to Korea, measured the situation firsthand, and concluded the war was unwinnable.Without hesitation he negotiated an armistice.

After Eisenhower made peace in Korea, not one American serviceman was killed in combat during the next eight years. Like Grant,Eisenhower believed the United States should never go to war unless national survival was at stake.

He resisted calls for preventive war against China and Russia, reached out to the Soviet Union after Stalin’s death and slashed the Defense Department budget.

He declined to take military action to defend the Chinese offshore islands of Quemoy and Matsu, stepped aside when Hungary exploded in 1956 and refused to deploy American forces in situations that might lead to combat without Congressional authorization.

When the National Security Council – Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, Vice President Richard Nixon and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff –unanimously recommended the use of nuclear weapons at Dien Bien Phuto rescue the beleaguered French garrison,Eisenhower summarily rejected the proposal.

“You boys must be crazy,”he told Robert Cutler, the national security adviser.“We can’t use those awful things against Asians for the second time in less than 10 years. My God.”

In 1956, when Britain, France and Israel colluded to invade Egypt, Eisenhower forced them to withdraw, toppling Anthony Eden’s government in London and threatening financial reprisals against Israel.

That repudiation of what Ike called “old fashioned gunboat diplomacy” not only kept the peace but enhanced American prestige throughout the world.

George Bush and the neocons have no monopoly on glorifying military adventure. Madeleine Albright, President Clinton’s secretary of state, caused General Colin Powell a case of near cardiac arrest when she asked at a meeting of the National Security Council, “Why do we have an Army if we are not willing to use it?”

War is not an instrument of policy.It is an act of desperation.(or an act of Great Greed)

“Any course short of national humiliation or national destruction is better than war,” Grant told Prince Kung of China in 1879.

“War itself is so great a calamity that it should only be invoked when there is no way of saving a nation from a greater [one].”

(https://archive.nytimes.com/campaigningforhistory.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/the-peace-presidents/

This a written when the NYT’s was somewhat sane.

19 Jun, 2025 07:23

Putin reveals pitfalls of potential meeting with Zelensky

The head of the Ukrainian “regime” can finalize peace talks but cannot sign a peace treaty, the Russian president has said

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he could meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to conduct peace talks between the two countries, butexpressed doubt regarding Zelensky’s authority to sign a treaty.

Zelensky has repeatedly called for a meeting with Putin, claiming that he alone can resolve key bilateral issues, including territorial disputes.

Speaking late Wednesday with international media at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Russian president reiterated Moscow’s concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy.

”If the Ukrainian state entrusts someone to negotiate on its behalf, suit yourself, let it be Zelensky,”Putin said.

“The question is, who will sign the document?”

Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, and no successor has been elected due to martial law. Zelensky insists that he has the right to remain in office, even though the Ukrainian Constitution calls for the transfer of presidential powers to the speaker of the parliament.

”Propagandistically, one can say anything about the legitimacy of the current authorities,but we care about legal aspects and not propaganda when dealing with serious issues,” Putin said.

He added that since Ukrainian officials are appointed by the president,Zelensky’s questionable legitimacy calls into question the authority of those serving under him.

We don’t care who conducts negotiations, even if it is the head of the regime. I am even willing to meet with him for some final phase, where we won’t be spending endless amounts of time divvying things but would just put a stop to it all.

But the signature must come from legitimate authorities

,” Putin stressed.

“Otherwise, whoever comes after him will toss it to the dumpster. That’s not a way to conduct serious business.”

https://www.rt.com/russia/619764-putin-zelensky-peace-talks/

Putin studied law, he will not be trapped again trusting them, like at the Minsk Agreements.

Hey the funny thing of Zelensky never getting to meet with Trump in Canada, his Ukrainian press couldn’t take tons of pictures with the President and Zelenskylike they did at the Vatican. I bet Trump did that intentionally.

It’s as if Zelensky, was not even there.

Gordon Chang Outlines Quiet Administration Motive to Support Israeli Strikes Against Iran

June 19, 2025 | Sundance |

In the beginning of this discussionwe might discover the deeper motive for President Trump to support Israeli strikes against Iran.

Remember, President Trump proactively diffused any reactionary Russian response by talking directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin prior to the eruption of conflict inside Iran. That discussion puts the Chinese interests into a somewhat isolated position. From recent Trump comments we can also see the carrot of sanction removal at play.

China has significant economic exposure within Beijing’s financial ties to Iran. With 90% of Iranian oil production fueling the Chinese economy any disruption would have considerable impact. As Gordon Chang notes in the interview with Maria Bartiromo,no one knows what China is currently sending into Iran via air cargo flights over the past several days. WATCH: https://youtu.be/JF6qKfxAHN0

The surface benefit to Israeli attacks against Iran is the elimination of the nuclear threat. The underlying benefit from a USA perspective is the weakening of Chinese economic power that comes as an outcome of the current Iranian regime.

Chang is correct to put emphasis on these mysterious cargo flights.

The USA drone war capability has been tested in Ukraine and Russia. That capability, an enhanced capability thanks to the work of Palantir, could very well be deployed deep inside Iran as the IDF retains total air dominance.Palantir (Peter Thiel and Alex Karp) are ideologically aligned with the goals and objectives of Israel.

This seven-year-old video has aged very well:Anon will post this next

MICRO DRONES KILLER ARMS ROBOTS - AUTONOMOUS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - WARNING !!

Killer drone arms, articial intelligence an increasingly real fiction, Social and Smart Phone Facial Recognition, Smart swarms, Warning !

Nov.17, 2017

7:47

https://youtu.be/TlO2gcs1YvM

First Up

Chang sounds alarm over alleged mysterious Chinese flights into Iran: 'We know this isn't good'

Gatestone Institute senior fellow Gordon Chang breaks down the impact of the Israel-Iran conflict on China, their threat to global supply chains and a bipartisan bill aiming to combat foreign ownership of American farmland.

9:08

https://youtu.be/JF6qKfxAHN0

>>23204836

2/2

Chang is correct to put emphasis on these mysterious cargo flights.

The USA drone war capability has been tested in Ukraine and Russia. That capability, an enhanced capability thanks to the work of Palantir, could very well be deployed deep inside Iran as the IDF retains total air dominance.Palantir (Peter Thiel and Alex Karp) are ideologically aligned with the goals and objectives of Israel.

This seven-year-old video has aged very well:

(Weird synchronicity: Look at at date and length of this video, month and year Trump first elected 2017, and seconds is 47)

MICRO DRONES KILLER ARMS ROBOTS - AUTONOMOUS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - WARNING !!

Killer drone arms, articial intelligence an increasingly real fiction, Social and Smart Phone Facial Recognition, Smart swarms, Warning !

Nov.17, 2017

7:47

https://youtu.be/TlO2gcs1YvM

>>23204865 this is creepy and the guy is creepy

19 Jun, 2025 18:15

Nazi symbols prevalent in Ukrainian military – Le Monde

The French outlet has identified hundreds of soldiers in Kiev’s 3rd Assault Brigade who publicly display neo-Nazi emblems

Ukrainian soldiers continue to publicly display neo-Nazi symbols – including swastikas, SS tattoos, and Nazi salutes – according to an investigation by French outlet Le Monde.

In its report, published on Wednesday,Le Monde identified nearly 350 Ukrainian troops posting neo-Nazi imagery online, including Nazi salutes, swastika tattoos, Black Sun emblems, and Totenkopf insignias. According to the research, at least 200 of those identified serve in Kiev’s 3rd Assault Brigade.

Russia has repeatedly accused Kiev of fostering neo-Nazi ideology and glorifying WW2-era Hitler collaborators andhas demanded the “denazification” of Ukraine as part of a negotiated peace agreement.

Formed in 2023, the 3rd Assault Brigade is a direct successor of the Azov Regiment – originally created in 2014 by far-right figure, Andrei Biletsky.Azov has been accused by multiple human rights groups, as well as the UN, of war crimes and torture and has been widely criticized for its use of symbols tied to the Waffen-SS.

According to Le Monde,the 3rd Assault Brigade has received military training from several NATO countries, including France, Spain, Germany, the UK and Canada, who have also poured in billions in military support to Ukraine. The paper noted that some soldiers sent to France in 2023 bore visible SS tattoos. When questioned, theFrench Ministry of the Armed Forces stated that it was the responsibility of Ukraine to vet the personnel.

The report also stated that a number of foreign volunteers who have joined Ukraine’s forces, including French nationals, have affiliations with far-right groups. Some were shown posting Nazi tributes and displaying related tattoos online.

Le Monde further stated thatthe 3rd Assault Brigade, now expanded into a full corps under Biletsky’s command, has been playing an increasingly central role in Ukraine’s military. The outlet reported that its units continue to use Nazi-associated emblems and feature commanders with visible far-right markings.

Moscow has long condemned Kiev’s elevation of Nazi collaborators to national hero status and has accused Western governments of deliberately ignoring continued neo-Nazi activity in Ukrainian ranks.

In April, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev stressed that the rebirth of Nazism cannot be allowed and outlined the destruction of the “Kiev neo-Nazi regime” as a necessary outcome of the Ukraine conflict. He insisted that “a real de-Nazification is required” and that the ideology “needs to be rooted out not only in Ukraine, but in all of Europe.”

(So European countries and Canada are allowing Nazis to fight against Russia, in the Ukraine war. So these countries are using the Nazis to fight Russia, the very country that defeated them in WWII. How fucked up is Europe that they can justify this?)

https://www.rt.com/russia/619862-lemonde-ukraine-nazi-symbols/

19 Jun, 2025 14:15

Israel makes Iran-related promise to Russia

The Jewish state has given security assurances for Russian personnel working at Iran’s nuclear power plant, the Kremlin spokesman has said

Israel has assured Russia it will guarantee the safety of Russian specialists working at Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Thursday, Peskov noted that “just yesterday,”President Vladimir Putin referred to an understanding with Israel regarding the safety of Russian specialists working at the nuclear power plant.

Peskov added that despite the current conflict, Russia maintains a partnership with Iran and a relationship of trust with Israel. At the same time, he acknowledged that unresolved issues remain and there is a need for mediation.

On Wednesday, during a meeting with heads of international news agencies, Putin stated that Moscow had reached an agreement with the Israeli leadership that the safety of Russian personnel involved in building two additional units at the Bushehr facility would be ensured. The Russian leader said that resolving the conflict between Iran and Israel must take into account Iran’s interests while also guaranteeing the security of the Jewish state.

Moscow has been a key supporter of Iran’s civilian nuclear program, most notably through its involvement in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Originally launched by German firms before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the project was revived in the 1990s when Russia’s state atomic agency Rosatom took it over. The plant’s first reactor was commissioned in 2011, and earlier this year, Tehran reported that construction of Units 2 and 3 had reached 17% completion.

Israel launched strikes on Iran last Friday, claiming that Tehran is close to developing a nuclear weapon. Iran rejected the accusations and responded with a series of drone and missile attacks targeting Israel.

The Israeli strikes have drawn international criticism, including from Russia, which condemned the attacks on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure as “illegal” and warned they could lead to a “nuclear catastrophe.”

Since launching its campaign against Iran, Israel has targeted uranium enrichment infrastructure, bombing centrifuge facilities and laboratories used to convert uranium gas into metal, according to Israeli officials and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has argued that Israel’s actions violate international law and pose a threat to global stability.

https://www.rt.com/russia/619826-iran-russian-specialists-peskov/

Jeffrey Sachs: Stop Netanyahu Before He Gets Us All Killed 1/3

June 17, 2025

We could soon see several nuclear powers pitted against each other and dragging the world closer to nuclear annihilation.

For nearly 30 years, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has driven the Middle East into war and destruction.

The man is a powder keg of violence.

Throughout all the wars that he has championed, Netanyahu [who is wanted by the International Criminal Court]has always dreamed of the big one: to defeat and overthrow the Iranian government.

His long-sought war, just launched, might just get us all killed in a nuclear Armageddon, unless Netanyahu is stopped.

Netanyahu’s fixation on war goes back to his extremist mentors, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin. The older generation believed that Zionists should use whatever violence — wars, assassinations, terror — is needed to achieve their aims of eliminating any Palestinian claim to a homeland.

The founders of Netanyahu’s political movement, the Likud, called for exclusive Zionist control over all of what had been British Mandatory Palestine.

At the start of the British Mandate in the early 1920s, the Muslim and Christian Arabs constituted roughly 87 percent of the population and owned 10 times more land than the Jewish population.

As of 1948, the Arabs still outnumbered the Jews roughly two to one. Nonetheless, the founding charter of Likud (1977)declared that “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”

The now infamous chant, “from the River to the Sea,” which is characterized as anti-Semitic,turns out to be the anti-Palestinian rallying call of the Likud.

The challenge for Likud was how to pursue its maximalist aims despite their blatant illegality under international law and morality, both of which call for a two-state solution.

‘Clean Break’ Strategy

In 1996, Netanyahu and his American advisors devised a “Clean Break” strategy. They advocated that Israel would not withdraw from the Palestinian lands captured in the 1967 war in exchange for regional peace.Instead, Israel would reshape the Middle East to its liking.

Crucially, the strategy envisioned the U.S. as the main force to achieve these aims— waging wars in the region to dismantle governments opposed to Israel’s dominance over Palestine. The U.S. was called upon to fight wars on Israel’s behalf.

The Clean Break strategy was effectively carried out by the U.S. and Israel after 9/11.As NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark revealed, soon after 9/11, the U.S. planned to

“attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.”

The first of the wars, in early 2003, was to topple the Iraqi government. Plans for further wars were delayed as the U.S. became mired in Iraq.

Still, the U.S. supported Sudan’s split in 2005, Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, and Ethiopia’s incursion into Somalia that same year.In 2011, the Obama administration launched C.I.A. operation Timber Sycamore against Syria and, with the U.K. and France, overthrew Libya’s government through a 2011 bombing campaign. Today, these countries lie in ruins, and many are now embroiled in civil wars.

Netanyahu was a cheerleader of these wars of choice – either in public or behind the scenes – together withhis neocon allies in the U.S. government including Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and others.

Testifying in the U.S. Congress in 2002, Netanyahu pitched for the disastrous war in Iraq, declaring “If you take out Saddam, Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region.”

He continued, “And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran, young people, and many others, will say the time of such regimes, of such despots is gone.”

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/06/17/stop-netanyahu-before-he-gets-us-all-killed/

>>23205207

2/3

He also falsely told Congress, “There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking, is working, is advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.”

The slogan to remake a “New Middle East” provides the slogan for these wars. Initially stated in 1996 through “Clean Break,” it was popularized by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in 2006. As Israel was brutally bombarded Lebanon, Rice stated:

“What we’re seeing here, in a sense, is the growing — the birth pangs of a new MiddleEast and whatever we do we have to be certain that we’re pushing forward to the new Middle East not going back to the old one.”

In September 2023, Netanyahu presented at the U.N. General Assembly a map of the “New Middle East“ completely erasing a Palestinian state. In September 2024, he elaborated on this plan by showing two maps: one part of the Middle East a “blessing,” and the other – including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran – a curse, as he advocated regime change in the latter countries.

Israel’s war on Iran is the final move in a decades-old strategy. We are witnessing the culmination of decades of extremist Zionist manipulation of U.S. foreign policy.

Nuclear Weapons Propaganda

The premise of Israel’s attack on Iran is the claim that Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons.Such a claim is fatuous since Iran has repeatedly called for negotiations precisely to remove the nuclear option in return for an end to the decades of U.S. sanctions.

Since 1992, Netanyahu and his supporters have claimed that Iran will become a nuclear power “in a few years.” In 1995, Israeli officials and their U.S. backers declared a five-year timeline. In 2003, Israel’s director of military intelligence said that Iran will be a nuclear power “by the summer of 2004.”

In 2005, the head of Mossad said that Iran could build the bomb in fewer than three years. In 2012, Netanyahu claimed at the United Nations that “it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.” And on and on.

This 30-year-plus pattern of shifting deadlines has marked a deliberate strategy, not a failure in prophecy. The claims are propaganda; there is always an “existential threat.” More importantly, there is Netanyahu’s phony claim that negotiations with Iran are useless.

Iran has repeatedly said that it does not want a nuclear weapon and that it has long been prepared to negotiate. In October 2003, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa forbidding the production and use of nuclear arms — a ruling later officially cited by Iran at an IAEA meeting in Vienna in August 2005 and referenced since as a religious and legal barrier to pursuing nuclear weapons.

Even for those skeptical of Iran’s intentions, Iran has consistently advocated for a negotiated agreement supported by independent international verification.In contrast, the Zionist lobby has opposed any such settlements, urging the U.S. to maintain sanctions and reject deals that would allow strict IAEA monitoring in exchange for lifting sanctions.

In 2016, the Obama Administration, together with the U.K., France, Germany, China and Russia, reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran — a landmark agreement to strictly monitor Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/06/17/stop-netanyahu-before-he-gets-us-all-killed/

>>23205214

3/3

Yet, under relentless pressure from Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby, President Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018. Predictably, when Iran responded by expanding its uranium enrichment, it was blamed for violating an agreement that the U.S. itself had abandoned. The double-standard and propaganda is hard to miss.

On April 11, 2021, Israel’s Mossad attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities in Natanz.Following the attack, on April 16, Iran announced that it would increase its uranium enrichment further, as bargaining leverage, while repeatedly appealing for renewed negotiations on a deal like the JCPOA. The Biden administration rejected all such negotiations.

At the start of his second term, Trump agreed to open a new negotiation with Iran. Iran pledged to renounce nuclear arms and to be subject to IAEA inspections but reserved the right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. The Trump administration appeared to agree to this point but then reversed itself. Since then, there have been five rounds of negotiations, with both sides reporting progress on each occasion.

The sixth round was ostensibly to take place on Sunday, June 15. Instead, Israel launched a preemptive war on Iran on June 12. Trump confirmed that the U.S. knew of the attack in advance, even as the administration was speaking publicly of the upcoming negotiations.

Israel’s attack was made not only in the midst of negotiations that were making progress, but days before a scheduled U.N. Conference on Palestinethat would have advanced the cause of the two-state solution. That conference has now been postponed.

Israel’s attack on Iran now threatens to escalate to a full-fledged war that draws in the U.S. and Europe on the side of Israel and Russia and perhaps Pakistan on the side of Iran. We could soon see several nuclear powers pitted against each other and dragging the world closer to nuclear annihilation. The Doomsday Clock is at 89 seconds to midnight, the closest to nuclear Armageddon since the clock was launched in 1947.

Over the past 30 years, Netanyahu and his U.S. backers have destroyed or destabilized a 4,000-km swath of countriesstretching across North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Asia.

Their aim has been to block a Palestinian State by overthrowing governments supporting the Palestinian cause.

The world deserves better than this extremism. More than 180 countries in the U.N. have called for the two-state solution and regional stability.That makes more sense than Israel bringing the world to the brink of nuclear Armageddon in pursuit of its illegal and extremist aims.

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the U.N. Broadband Commission for Development.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/06/17/stop-netanyahu-before-he-gets-us-all-killed/

>>23205195 sauce That is the same thing Bannon said the other day, Trump is under intense pressure