Trump's move against Iran may draw more criticism from MAGA's anti-interventionists
's decision to strike three nuclear sites in Iran could deepen a divide among some of the Republican's supporters, including high-profile backers who had said any such move would run counter to the anti-interventionism he promised to deliver.
Notably though, immediately following
Trump
's Saturday announcement of the strike, some of those who had publicly spoken out against U.S. involvement voiced their support.
The lead-up to the move against Iranian nuclear sites had exposed fissures within Trump's "Make American Great Again" base as some of that movement's most vocal leaders, with large followings of their own, expressed deep concern about the prospect of US involvement in the Israel-Iran war.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Villa For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You
Villas in Dubai | Search ads
Learn More
Undo
With the president barred from seeking a third term, what remains unknown is how long-lasting the schism could be for Trump and his current priorities, as well as the overall future of his "America First" movement.
Among the surrogates who spoke out against American involvement were former senior adviser
Steve Bannon
, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., commentator
Tucker Carlson
and Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point. Part of their consternation was rooted in Trump's own vocalized antipathy for what he and others have termed the "forever wars" fomented in previous administrations.
Live Events
As the possibility of military action neared, some of those voices tamped down their rhetoric. According to Trump, Carlson even called to "apologize."
Here's a look at what some of Trump's biggest advocates had said about U.S. military involvement in Iran:
Steve Bannon
On Wednesday, Bannon, one of top advisers in Trump's 2016 campaign, told an audience in Washington that bitter feelings over Iraq were a driving force for Trump's first presidential candidacy and the
MAGA movement
. "One of the core tenets is no forever wars," Bannon said.
But the longtime Trump ally, who served a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, went on to suggest that Trump will maintain loyalty from his base no matter what. On Wednesday, Bannon acknowledged that while he and others will argue against military intervention until the end, "the
MAGA
movement will back Trump."
Ultimately, Bannon said that Trump would have to make the case to the American people if he wanted to get involved in Iran.
"We don't like it. Maybe we hate it," Bannon said, predicting what the MAGA response would be. "But, you know, we'll get on board."
Tucker Carlson
The commentator's rhetoric toward Trump was increasingly critical. Carlson, who headlined large rallies with the Republican during the 2024 campaign, earlier this month suggested that the president's posture was breaking his pledge to keep the U.S. out of new foreign entanglements. Trump clapped back at Carlson on social media, calling him "kooky."
During an event at the White House on Wednesday, Trump said that Carlson had "called and apologized" for calling him out. Trump said Carlson "is a nice guy."
Carlson's conversation with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that day laid bare the divides among many Republicans. The two sparred for two hours over a variety of issues, primarily about possible U.S. involvement in Iran. Carlson accused Cruz of placing too much emphasis on protecting Israel in his foreign policy worldview.
"You don't know anything about Iran," Carlson said to Cruz, after the senator said he didn't know Iran's population or its ethnic composition. "You're a senator who's calling for the overthrow of a government, and you don't know anything about the country."
Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene
The Georgia Republican, who wore the signature red MAGA cap for Democratic President Joe Biden's State of the Union address in 2024, publicly sided with Carlson, criticizing Trump for deriding "one of my favorite people."
Saying the former Fox News commentator "unapologetically believes the same things I do," Greene wrote on X this past week that those beliefs include that "foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction."
"That's not kooky," Greene added, using the same word Trump used to describe Carlson. "That's what millions of Americans voted for. It's what we believe is America First."
About an hour before Trump's announcement, Greene posted on X that, "Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war."
"This is not our fight," she added. "Peace is the answer."
In another post following Trump's announcement, Greene urged, "Let us all join together and pray for peace."
Alex Jones
The far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars host posted on social media earlier in the week a side-by-side of Trump's official presidential headshot and an artificial intelligence-generated composite of Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush. Trump and many of his allies have long disparaged Bush for involving the United States in the "forever wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Writing "What you voted for" above Trump's image and "What you got" above the composite, Jones added: "I hope this is not the case..."
Charlie Kirk
Kirk is among those who seemed to have made a quick about-face.
About an hour after Trump's announcement, Kirk posted a series of messages on social media supportive of Trump, saying Iran had given the president "no choice." Kirk praised Trump for acting "with prudence and decisiveness" and "for the betterment of humanity."
Kirk also reposted a 2011 tweet in which Trump had written that "Iran's quest for nuclear weapons is a major threat to our nation's national security interests. We can't allow Iran to go nuclear."
"When Trump speaks, you should listen," Kirk added.
It was a different tone from the start of the week, when Kirk said in a Fox News interview that "this is the moment that President Trump was elected for." But he had warned of a potential MAGA divide over Iran.
Days later, Kirk said that "Trump voters, especially young people, supported President Trump because he was the first president in my lifetime to not start a new war." He also wrote that "there is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East. We must work for and pray for peace."
In Kirk's view, "The last thing America needs right now is a new war. Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Caving to a bully only fuels more demands: Former Indian envoy on Trump's tariffs
The former diplomat also criticised Washington's deepening engagement with Pakistan, calling it a "strategic mistake" given Islamabad's close ties with Beijing. "I think it's a strategic mistake on the part of the US that you are getting in bed with Pakistan, which is in bed with China. China is the US's strategic competitor," Swarup said. "If you cave in to a bully, then the bully will increase his demands. Then there will be even more demands. So, I think we have done the right thing. India is too large, too proud a country to become a camp follower of any other country. Our strategic autonomy has been the bedrock of our foreign policy right from the 1950s. I don't think that any Govt in Delhi can compromise on that," he added. On criticism over India's foreign policy, Swarup said India should not cave in to any pressure, as India's strategic autonomy is non-negotiable. "Here, I would not blame our diplomats at all. I think what has happened is Pakistan, through some intermediaries, has gotten the ear of the US President, and that is why, two visits by Asim Munir to Washington, the so-called "deal" with America on the so-called "oil reserves" of Pakistan," the former diplomat said. "More importantly, I think Pakistan is now trying to position itself as the 'Crypto King' of South Asia and there, through World Liberty Financial, in which Trump's family has stakes, Steve Witkoff's family has a stake, through that I think Pakistan has managed to project an image of itself as a reliable these things have led to Trump having a softer approach towards Pakistan," Swarup said. "But that does not mean that he has given up on India or that India is now an adversary for him. I think this is part of his pressure tactics to secure a more favourable deal. India should not cave in because our strategic autonomy is non-negotiable," he added. Swarup, also a noted author, added that Trump has made no secret of his longing for the Nobel Peace Prize, and while he is a dealmaker, he has now made it his USP that he is the peacemaker.
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
Putin's 3 Big Demands For Trump Before Alaska Summit; 'No Compromise, No Bargain...'
Russia has reaffirmed its hardline conditions for ending the war in Ukraine, just days before a high-stakes summit between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump in Alaska. Moscow insists Ukraine must withdraw its forces from contested regions, abandon its NATO ambitions, and recognise Russian control over Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. These terms, first outlined by Putin in 2024, also demand guarantees for Russian-speaking citizens and legally binding international agreements. Ukraine has rejected the demands as an 'absurd ultimatum,' vowing never to recognise Russian occupation. President Volodymyr Zelensky says a ceasefire must precede any territorial discussions and refuses to abandon defensive lines in the Donbas. The Alaska summit will be the first US–Russia leaders' meeting since 2021, with Trump suggesting that both sides may need to swap land to reach peace. However, both Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart, raising doubts over any immediate breakthrough.#Russia #Ukraine #Putin #Trump #AlaskaSummit #UkraineWar #PeaceTalks #Geopolitics #Zelensky #BreakingNews
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
5 reasons not to read much in Trump's ‘very severe consequences' warning for Putin
While US President Donald Trump warns his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, of severe consequences, here are five reasons why the threat holds no substance ahead of the Alaska talks While speaking to the reporters on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump warned that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, would face ' very severe consequences' if he did not agree to a ceasefire in the Ukraine war at the Alaska Summit on Friday. Trump's remarks on the matter came after he held talks with the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, along with other European leaders. While Trump's latest warning against Putin drew significant attention ahead of the Alaska summit, many wonder if the threat holds any substance. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While speaking to the reporters on Wednesday, Trump also suggested that if his meeting with Putin goes well, he will organise a second summit, which would include Zelenskyy as well. 'If the first one goes OK, we'll have a quick second one,' Trump told reporters in Washington. 'I would like to do it almost immediately, and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin, President Zelenskyy and me, if they'd like to have me there.' Trump will be meeting Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday. The summit will reportedly be held at the Joint Base Elmendorf–Richardson, a military facility crucial to countering the Soviet Union during the height of the Cold War. Here are 5 reasons why Trump's threat might fizzle out. 'Feel-out' session Ahead of the talks in Alaska, Trump's White House has already lowered expectations for any breakthrough from the meeting. In the run-up to the meeting, the Trump administration often used terms like 'listening session' and ' feel-out meeting' to describe the planned discussion about the war in Ukraine. Even Trump himself has indicated that the Friday summit in Alaska is not meant to be one that ultimately brings an end to the Ukraine war, which has been raging on for three years. 'There's a very good chance that we're going to have a second meeting that will be more productive than the first,' Trump said Wednesday. 'Because the first is I'm going to find out where we are and what we're doing.' Meanwhile, the White House has also steered clear of making any firm commitments about what will come out of Friday's gathering in Anchorage. 'This is a listening exercise for this president,' Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday. 'Look, only one party that's involved in this war is going to be present. And so this is for the president to go and to get, again, a firmer and better understanding of how we can hopefully bring this war to an end.' Hence, Russia poses no immediate threat to the Trump administration after the Friday meeting. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD TACO? There has been a peculiar term going around on social media describing Trump's frequently shifting stance. The term is called ' TACO', and it is not about the famous Mexican food. The full form of the term is 'Trump Always Chickens Out'. Before the Alaska meeting was announced, on July 28, Trump set a new deadline of '10 or 12 days' for Russia to reach a peace deal in its war on Ukraine. The American leader warned that if Russia failed to do so, it would face tough new sanctions and tariffs. Interestingly, Trump's warning came as he shortened a 50-day deadline he had set this month. However, the deadline is long gone, and the US did nothing to Russia. Instead, the Trump administration unleashed wrath on India by imposing nearly 50 per cent tariffs on Indian goods. Trump went on to threaten secondary sanctions on India for purchasing Russian oil. While speaking to _Firstpost_ earlier this week, Trump's former National Security Adviser John Bolton called out the president's duplicity of standards. 'Another 25 per cent imposed on Indian exports to the US because of the purchase of Russian oil and gas. Yet at the same time, within days, Trump was agreeing to a summit meeting with Putin in Alaska this coming Friday and not proceeding with his threat to impose tariffs on Russia or put further sanctions on Russia,' Bolton told Firstpost on Tuesday. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'During all this time, no sanctions were imposed on China for its even larger purchases of Russian oil and gas. So I think it's just typical of the confusion in the way Trump does business. But it's going to cause, I think, severe difficulties between the US and India at a time when we should be doing exactly the opposite,' he said. The former US ambassador to the UN pointed out how Russia was not harmed by any of Trump's initiatives. When asked about Trump's reluctance to hold trade talks with India until it stops purchasing oil from Russia, Bolton emphasised that the whole thing is 'self-defeating'. He said, 'It is indicative of Trump's inability to prioritise among competing objectives.' 'He hoped that this [secondary sanctions] would affect the negotiations that will take place in Alaska this Friday. But the fact is, it hasn't hurt Russia at all. India still buys oil from Russia. So tariffs hurt India, but don't hurt Russia.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The secondary tariff is not as effective as dealing with Russia directly, but I'm not sure anybody in the White House has explained that to Trump,' he added. Already pushing for a second summit Even before the Alaska summit, Trump is already preparing for a second summit. Part of the reason the Potus is pushing for a second summit is that this one won't involve Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Ukraine and several European leaders have already made it clear that a peace deal cannot be signed without Ukraine's say in it. Earlier this month, there were reports that the Trump administration was pushing for Zelesnkyy's inclusion in the Alaska meeting. However, the Kremlin insisted that the meeting should be kept bilateral. Putin said that he was not ready to meet his Ukrainian counterpart even as the Kremlin claimed preparations were underway for a set-piece bilateral summit with Donald Trump next week. 'I have nothing against it in general; it is possible, but certain conditions must be created for this,' the Russian leader averred when asked about the meeting with Zelenskyy. 'But unfortunately, we are still far from creating such conditions," he added. Trump ultimately bowed down to Putin's wishes and said that he is willing to talk to him at first without Zelenskyy. While speaking to the reporters in the Oval Office on the same day of the Kremlin's request, Trump said Putin did not have to meet with Zelenskyy first before the US and Russian presidents could meet. 'No, he doesn't,' Trump said. 'They would like to meet with me, and I'll do whatever I can to stop the killing.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It might come as reassurance to Zelenskyy and European leaders Trump's warning against Putin came after his phone call with Zelenskyy and European leaders. In the impromptu call, US Vice President JD Vance was also in attendance. Trump said that he had a 'very good call' with European leaders in which he consulted them about the general goal and strategy for his summit. He told reporters that he gave reassurances to the European leader that a ceasefire was his priority and he would not make any territorial concessions without Kyiv's full involvement. Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron said that Trump's approach at the video conference appeared to reassure some of the leaders, who were making a final collective plea to the unpredictable US president that he had a duty to protect Ukraine's sovereignty – and European security – at the talks. Hence, Trump's remarks after the call can be seen as just his way to assure Zelenskyy and European leaders without any anger directed towards Putin. Putin has his cards to play While we contemplate Trump's strategies for the Alaska meeting, the key piece of the puzzle is what Russian President Vladimir Putin brings to the table. 'Well, for most of the first six months, what Trump was trying to do was use what he thought was his friendship with Vladimir Putin to negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine. Now I'll just tell you from my own experience,' Ambassador Bolton told Firstpost. 'Putin doesn't see Trump as his friend. He sees them as somebody that he thinks he can manipulate in true, true fashion of a former KGB agent. And I think he's been pretty successful with it. But at some point toward the end of the first six months, whether intentionally or unintentionally, I think Putin pushed Trump a little too far, and Trump concluded that Putin wasn't interested in a ceasefire.' 'That's what angered him. He threatened tariffs on Russian exports to the US and secondary sanctions or tariffs on countries that were buying Russian oil and gas. So all of these issues with the secondary sanctions have arisen within the past 30 or 45 days,' he explained. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Bolton emphasised that the Russian president had already won with the meeting in Alaska. 'Well, I think Putin has seen the playbook, so it wouldn't surprise me if he came with a big plaque that said 'Here's my letter of nomination [Nobel Peace Prize] for you.' I think what Putin really wants to do is use his KGB training and try to get Trump back under his influence,' Bolton said. 'I do think he recognises he pushed Trump too far. Maybe he did it intentionally, maybe unintentionally. I don't know. It is a big win for Putin to come to the United States. He's a pariah leader of a rogue state that committed unprovoked aggression against Ukraine.' 'On Friday, he's going to get to stand next to the President of the United States and get his picture taken on territory that used to be Russian. Nobody in Russia has missed the fact that we bought Alaska from Russia in 1867. So it's what Trump can do. I think a lot of people are going to be watching. But the main thing is to see if Putin emerges with Trump thinking that they're friends again,' Ambassador Bolton concluded. Hence, all five reasons point to the fact that Trump's latest threat against Putin might not be of much substance. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
