Latest news with #TuckerCarlson
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Israel-Iran war spotlights MAGA divide
President Trump's handling of escalating tensions in the Middle East is casting a spotlight on divisions among the president's supporters about whether the U.S. should have any involvement in a brewing conflict. Trump has had voices in his ear advocating for differing approaches to Iran as his administration sought to broker an agreement limiting Tehran's nuclear program. Figures like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson have argued voters backed Trump because he would not involve the nation in foreign conflicts. Carlson, in his morning newsletter Friday, said Trump is 'complicit' in Israel's attack on Iran and warned the escalating conflict between the two nations could lead the U.S. into war. 'What happens next will define Donald Trump's presidency,' Carlson wrote. Other MAGA figures, such as Fox News host Mark Levin, have advocated for a strong response to Iran, which hawkish figures in the MAGA movement see as a grave threat to the security of the U.S. and its key ally, Israel. All of this puts Trump at a potential crossroads about how to proceed. 'Our focus must not be on seeking regime change or any further escalation of America's involvement. The last thing America needs right now is a new war. Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible,' Charlie Kirk, an influential voice in the MAGA movement, posted Friday on social platform X. 'Israel believed their existence was at stake, and they acted accordingly and impressively,' Kirk added. 'This is Israel's fight to finish as they see fit, not America's.' Some Trump allies suggested to The Hill that Israel's strikes gave Trump an opening to split the difference among his supporters. His more hawkish backers who favored action against Iran have celebrated the strikes and credited, in part, Trump's support for Israel. 'Thanks to our great leader, President Trump, whose support for Israel and world peace has never wavered,' Levin posted on X. 'He's a truly historic and iconic figure.' Trump allies also suggested those who have warned against getting entangled in a foreign conflict could find reason to breathe a sigh of relief. They pointed to the fact that the U.S. was not involved in the strikes and to Trump's continued openness to brokering a deal with Tehran. 'Two months ago I gave Iran a 60 day ultimatum to 'make a deal.' They should have done it! Today is day 61,' Trump posted Friday on Truth Social. 'I told them what to do, but they just couldn't get there. Now they have, perhaps, a second chance!' Trump has built a durable and loyal political following on a foreign policy that favors steering clear of foreign conflicts and emphasizing an 'America First' approach. The president campaigned in 2024 on a pledge to end conflicts around the world, specifically in Ukraine and in the Middle East, where Israel and Hamas were at war. Trump's Cabinet in his first term featured more hawkish figures like John Bolton, who served for roughly a year as national security adviser, and Mike Pompeo, who had separate stints as CIA director and secretary of State. Bolton said Friday it was time for regime change in Iran, while Pompeo called Israel's strikes 'righteous and necessary.' Trump's top aides during his second term have focused more on outreach and avoiding conflicts. One of his closest confidantes is Steve Witkoff, a businessman and special envoy for Middle East affairs who has been at the center of peace negotiations in both Ukraine and the Middle East. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long been seen as a foreign policy hawk who has been particularly tough on China and Iran. But during his time as Trump's top diplomat, Rubio has aligned himself closely with Trump's 'America First' agenda. The president had last month extended an olive branch to Iran during a visit to the Middle East, insisting he wanted to see Tehran thrive economically. He even suggested the two sides had 'sort of' agreed to a nuclear deal. But that optimism gave way to tougher rhetoric in the days leading up to Israel's strikes. Trump described Iran as 'more aggressive' in negotiations and was adamant that Tehran could not enrich uranium as part of any agreement. As reports swirled about looming strikes against Iran, accentuated by news that the U.S. was evacuating some personnel from the Middle East, prominent MAGA voices appeared on edge about the potential for conflict. Kirk wrote Thursday morning, before Israel had carried out its attack on Iran, that a U.S. strike against Tehran would 'cause a massive schism in MAGA and potentially disrupt our momentum and our insanely successful Presidency.' Days earlier, Carlson had accused Levin, his former Fox News colleague, of 'lobbying for war with Iran.' Levin hit back by accusing Carlson of 'planting stories.' Levin has taken a victory lap in the wake of Israel's strikes against Iran, mocking Carlson as 'Chatsworth Qatarlson.' 'This battle is not over. It just began,' Levin said Friday. 'Please continue your prayers and support for the good guys, the Israelis, and our magnificent armed forces in the region.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘Drop Israel': How military escalation with Iran divides Trump's base
Washington, DC – After taking the oath of office for his second term in January, United States President Donald Trump said he would push to 'stop all wars' and leave a legacy of a 'peacemaker and unifier'. But six months in, missiles are flying across the Middle East after Israel attacked Iran, risking an all-out regional war that could drag US troops into the conflict. The Israeli strikes on Iran, which Trump has all but explicitly endorsed, are now testing the president's promise to be a harbinger of peace. They are also dividing his base, with many right-wing politicians and commentators stressing that unconditional support for Israel is at odds with the 'America First' platform on which Trump was elected. 'There is a very strong sense of betrayal and anger in many parts of the 'America First' base because they have truly turned against the idea of the US being involved in or supporting any such wars,' said Trita Parsi, executive vice president at the Quincy Institute, a US think tank that promotes diplomacy. 'They have largely turned sceptical of Israel, and they strongly believe that these types of wars are what cause Republican presidencies to become failures — and what causes their broader domestic agenda to be compromised.'Several conservatives questioned the Israeli strikes on Friday, warning that the US must not be dragged into a war that does not serve its interests. Influential conservative commentator Tucker Carlson — seen as a major figure in Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement — said the US should not support the 'war-hungry government' of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 'If Israel wants to wage this war, it has every right to do so. It is a sovereign country, and it can do as it pleases. But not with America's backing,' the Tucker Carlson Network morning newsletter read on Friday. It added that a war with Iran could 'fuel the next generation of terrorism' or lead to the killing of thousands of Americans in the name of a foreign agenda. 'It goes without saying that neither of those possibilities would be beneficial for the United States,' the newsletter said. 'But there is another option: drop Israel. Let them fight their own wars.' Republican Senator Rand Paul also cautioned against war with Iran and slammed hawkish neoconservatives in Washington. 'The American people overwhelming[ly] oppose our endless wars, and they voted that way when they voted for Donald Trump in 2024,' Paul wrote in a social media post. 'I urge President Trump to stay the course, keep putting America first, and to not join in any war between other countries.' Right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene also sent a message suggesting that she opposes the strikes. She has previously cautioned Trump against attacking Iran based on Israeli assertions that Tehran is about to acquire a nuclear weapon. 'I'm praying for peace. Peace,' she wrote on X. 'That's my official position.' While many of Israel's supporters have cited the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, the government in Tehran has long denied pursuing a nuclear weapon. Trump's own intelligence chief, Tulsi Gabbard, testified in March that the US 'continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon'. Charlie Kirk, a key Republican activist and commentator who is a staunch Israel supporter, also voiced scepticism about engaging in a war with Iran. 'I can tell you right now, our MAGA base does not want a war at all whatsoever,' Kirk said on his podcast. 'They do not want US involvement. They do not want the United States to be engaged in this.'Hours before Israel started bombing Iran on Friday — targeting its military bases, nuclear facilities and residential buildings — Trump said that his administration was committed to diplomacy with Tehran. ' Look, it's very simple. Not complicated. Iran can not have a nuclear weapon. Other than that, I want them to be successful. We'll help them be successful,' Trump said at a news conference on Thursday. A sixth round of denuclearisation talks between US and Iranian officials was set to be held in Oman on Sunday. Nevertheless, on Friday, Trump told reporters he had known about Israel's attacks in advance. He did not indicate he had vetoed the bombing campaign, though Secretary of State Marco Rubio did describe Israel's actions as 'unilateral'. Instead, Trump put the onus for the attacks on Iran, saying its officials should have heeded his calls to reach a deal to dismantle the country's nuclear programme. 'I told them it would be much worse than anything they know, anticipated, or were told, that the United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come,' Trump wrote in a social media post. Parsi said that, at the outset, Trump wanted to reach a deal with Iran, but his demands for Tehran to end uranium enrichment led to a deadlock in the talks. 'Instead of pursuing the negotiations in a reasonable way, he adopted the zero enrichment goal, which predictably would lead to an impasse, which predictably the Israelis used to push him towards military strikes and escalation,' he told Al Jazeera. Parsi added that he believed Trump engaged in deception over the past week by pushing diplomacy while knowing that the Israeli strikes were coming. 'Trump deliberately made statements in favour of diplomacy, in favour of not having Israel attack, leading everyone to think that, if there is an attack, it would happen after the six rounds of talks on Sunday,' he said. 'Instead, it happened sooner.'While the Israeli strikes garnered some criticism in Congress, many Republicans and Democrats cheered them on. But a key part of Trump's base has been a segment of the right wing that questions the US's unconditional support for Israel. 'They really are representative of a solid constituency within the Republican Party, especially if you look at younger individuals,' said Jon Hoffman, research fellow in defence and foreign policy at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Hoffman pointed to a recent Pew Research Center survey that suggested 50 percent of Republicans under the age of 50 have an unfavourable view of Israel. 'Among the electorate itself, the American people are sick and tired of these endless wars,' he told Al Jazeera. Foreign policy hawks who favour military interventions dominated the Republican Party during the presidency of George W Bush, who launched the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, those two conflicts proved to be disastrous. Thousands of US soldiers were killed, and many more were left with lasting physical and psychological scars. Critics also questioned whether the wars advanced US interests in the region — or set them back. The nation-building project in Iraq, for instance, saw the rise of a government friendly to Iran and the emergence of groups deemed to be a threat to global security, including ISIL (ISIS). In Afghanistan, meanwhile, the Taliban returned to power in 2021, almost exactly two decades after the group was ousted by US forces. The US-backed Afghan government quickly crumbled as American troops withdrew from the country. During his campaign for re-election in 2024, Trump tapped into the anger that the two conflicts generated. On multiple occasions, he sketched an alternative timeline where, if he had been president, the collapse of the Afghan government would have never occurred. 'We wouldn't have had that horrible situation in Afghanistan, the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country,' Trump said at one October 2024 rally in Detroit. The US president also slammed his Democratic opponent Kamala Harris for her alliance with Dick Cheney, who served as Bush's vice president, and his daughter Liz Cheney, criticising them as 'war hawks'. 'Kamala is campaigning with Muslim-hating warmonger, Liz Cheney, who wants to invade practically every Muslim country on the planet,' Trump told another crowd in Novi, Michigan. He added that Dick Cheney 'was responsible for invading the Middle East' and 'killing millions'. But critics say Trump's posture towards the Israeli strikes in Iran risks embroiling him in his own Middle East conflict. Hoffman, for instance, pointed to the closeness of the US-Israel relationship and the persistence of officials within the Republican Party who have been pushing for conflict with Iran for decades, like Senator Lindsey Graham. 'There is a tremendous risk of the United States being dragged into this war,' Hoffman said.
Irish Times
a day ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Moral Ambition by Rutger Bregman: An engaging attempt to get us to change the world
Moral Ambition: Stop Wasting Your Talent and Start Making a Difference Author : Rutger Bregman ISBN-13 : 978-1526680600 Publisher : Bloomsbury Guideline Price : £20 Rutger Bregman is one of the most refreshing thinkers to have appeared around the time of the global pandemic, when many of us were seeking new approaches to living after the seismic shock of seeing millions dying. Here was a new voice worth listening to; someone who looked at the rules of engagement honestly, whether he was slapping the barefaced cheeks of those at Davos by raising the subject of tax avoidance, or flummoxing Fox News's Tucker Carlson by calling him out during an interview as a millionaire funded by billionaires. [ A 'really subversive idea': Most people are pretty decent Opens in new window ] Bregman has never philosophised in fear, but rather in positivity, and now he wants us to stop wasting our time in life and use it instead to make lasting changes: to show 'moral ambition' so that we are not only on the right side of history, but make our own contribution, too. The Dutchman sets out that most people spend 80,000 hours of their lives working; time that, in the main, is meaningless if you exclude core services and essential jobs (he references David Graeber here, who conceptualised the idea of pointless, Sisyphean work in his essay Bullshit Jobs). READ MORE [ The Ultimate Hidden Truth of the World by David Graeber: Intense flares of thought from a brilliant mind Opens in new window ] 'Moral ambition is the will to make the world a wildly better place,' writes Bregman, 'to devote your working life to the great challenges of our time, whether that's climate change or corruption, gross inequality or the next pandemic. It's a longing to make a difference – and to build a legacy that truly matters.' Bregman won't tell you how to do this. But he does show you ways in which it has been done, by rummaging through history and academia and gathering data and a cast of activists, innovators and entrepreneurs who – with the required moral ambition – achieved tectonic changes in issues such as slavery, racism and rights, medicine and science, and so on. (He admits many of those featured, but not all, shared degrees of privilege.) It's an engaging, valid argument in the main, even if the book's own ambition can at times make it feel unwieldy, and some of the material may be overly familiar to some readers (Ralph Nader, Peter Singer, etc), whereas the moral ambition of someone such as Rosa Parks is a self-evident if necessary inclusion. The author's ambitious optimism for a better tomorrow will see you through to the end though, and he's right about the next moral hurdle that humans must overcome: eating animals and feeling fine about it.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Tucker Carlson blasts Trump over Iran attack
US President Donald Trump's support for Israel's strikes in Iran could spark an 'all-out war' in the Middle East, American journalist Tucker Carlson has warned. Early Friday morning, Israeli jets bombed nuclear and military sites across Iran, prompting Tehran to retaliate with a barrage of drones and missiles targeting Israeli cities. The escalation threatens ongoing negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, which Trump revived earlier this year. In what he described as possibly his 'final newsletter before all-out war,' Carlson – a key Trump ally during the 2024 presidential election – argued that the US was 'complicit in the act of war.' 'While the American military may not have physically perpetrated the assault, years of funding and sending weapons to Israel, which Donald Trump just bragged about on Truth Social, undeniably place the US at the center of last night's events,' Carlson wrote. 'Washington knew these attacks would happen. They aided Israel in carrying them out. Politicians purporting to be 'America First' can't now credibly turn around and say they had nothing to do with it,' he added. In a post on X, Carlson contended that 'the real divide' is not between supporters of Israel or Iran, but 'between warmongers and peacemakers.' 'Who are the warmongers? They would include anyone who's calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran,' he said. Carlson stated that the 'warmongers' include talk show hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and Republican donors Ike Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson. While the US State Department has denied involvement in the strikes, Trump confirmed he had prior knowledge of the Israeli operation and praised the attacks as 'excellent.' He blamed Iran for the hostilities and accused it of refusing to accept the terms of his proposed nuclear deal. Addressing the UN Security Council, Iranian envoy Amir Saeid Iravani said the US and other Israeli allies 'share full responsibility for the consequences' of Israel's actions.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
‘Drop Israel': How military escalation with Iran divides Trump's base
Washington, DC – After taking the oath of office for his second term in January, United States President Donald Trump said he would push to 'stop all wars' and leave a legacy of a 'peacemaker and unifier'. But six months in, missiles are flying across the Middle East after Israel attacked Iran, risking an all-out regional war that could drag US troops into the conflict. The Israeli strikes on Iran, which Trump has all but explicitly endorsed, are now testing the president's promise to be a harbinger of peace. They are also dividing his base, with many right-wing politicians and commentators stressing that unconditional support for Israel is at odds with the 'America First' platform on which Trump was elected. 'There is a very strong sense of betrayal and anger in many parts of the 'America First' base because they have truly turned against the idea of the US being involved in or supporting any such wars,' said Trita Parsi, executive vice president at the Quincy Institute, a US think tank that promotes diplomacy. 'They have largely turned sceptical of Israel, and they strongly believe that these types of wars are what cause Republican presidencies to become failures — and what causes their broader domestic agenda to be compromised.' Several conservatives questioned the Israeli strikes on Friday, warning that the US must not be dragged into a war that does not serve its interests. Influential conservative commentator Tucker Carlson — seen as a major figure in Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement — said the US should not support the 'war-hungry government' of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 'If Israel wants to wage this war, it has every right to do so. It is a sovereign country, and it can do as it pleases. But not with America's backing,' the Tucker Carlson Network morning newsletter read on Friday. It added that a war with Iran could 'fuel the next generation of terrorism' or lead to the killing of thousands of Americans in the name of a foreign agenda. 'It goes without saying that neither of those possibilities would be beneficial for the United States,' the newsletter said. 'But there is another option: drop Israel. Let them fight their own wars.' Republican Senator Rand Paul also cautioned against war with Iran and slammed hawkish neoconservatives in Washington. 'The American people overwhelming[ly] oppose our endless wars, and they voted that way when they voted for Donald Trump in 2024,' Paul wrote in a social media post. 'I urge President Trump to stay the course, keep putting America first, and to not join in any war between other countries.' Right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene also sent a message suggesting that she opposes the strikes. She has previously cautioned Trump against attacking Iran based on Israeli assertions that Tehran is about to acquire a nuclear weapon. 'I'm praying for peace. Peace,' she wrote on X. 'That's my official position.' While many of Israel's supporters have cited the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, the government in Tehran has long denied pursuing a nuclear weapon. Trump's own intelligence chief, Tulsi Gabbard, testified in March that the US 'continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon'. Charlie Kirk, a key Republican activist and commentator who is a staunch Israel supporter, also voiced scepticism about engaging in a war with Iran. 'I can tell you right now, our MAGA base does not want a war at all whatsoever,' Kirk said on his podcast. 'They do not want US involvement. They do not want the United States to be engaged in this.' Hours before Israel started bombing Iran on Friday — targeting its military bases, nuclear facilities and residential buildings — Trump said that his administration was committed to diplomacy with Tehran. ' Look, it's very simple. Not complicated. Iran can not have a nuclear weapon. Other than that, I want them to be successful. We'll help them be successful,' Trump said at a news conference on Thursday. A sixth round of denuclearisation talks between US and Iranian officials was set to be held in Oman on Sunday. Nevertheless, on Friday, Trump told reporters he had known about Israel's attacks in advance. He did not indicate he had vetoed the bombing campaign, though Secretary of State Marco Rubio did describe Israel's actions as 'unilateral'. Instead, Trump put the onus for the attacks on Iran, saying its officials should have heeded his calls to reach a deal to dismantle the country's nuclear programme. 'I told them it would be much worse than anything they know, anticipated, or were told, that the United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come,' Trump wrote in a social media post. Parsi said that, at the outset, Trump wanted to reach a deal with Iran, but his demands for Tehran to end uranium enrichment led to a deadlock in the talks. 'Instead of pursuing the negotiations in a reasonable way, he adopted the zero enrichment goal, which predictably would lead to an impasse, which predictably the Israelis used to push him towards military strikes and escalation,' he told Al Jazeera. Parsi added that he believed Trump engaged in deception over the past week by pushing diplomacy while knowing that the Israeli strikes were coming. 'Trump deliberately made statements in favour of diplomacy, in favour of not having Israel attack, leading everyone to think that, if there is an attack, it would happen after the six rounds of talks on Sunday,' he said. 'Instead, it happened sooner.' While the Israeli strikes garnered some criticism in Congress, many Republicans and Democrats cheered them on. But a key part of Trump's base has been a segment of the right wing that questions the US's unconditional support for Israel. 'They really are representative of a solid constituency within the Republican Party, especially if you look at younger individuals,' said Jon Hoffman, research fellow in defence and foreign policy at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Hoffman pointed to a recent Pew Research Center survey that suggested 50 percent of Republicans under the age of 50 have an unfavourable view of Israel. 'Among the electorate itself, the American people are sick and tired of these endless wars,' he told Al Jazeera. Foreign policy hawks who favour military interventions dominated the Republican Party during the presidency of George W Bush, who launched the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001. But those two conflicts proved to be disastrous. Thousands of US soldiers were killed, and many more were left with lasting physical and psychological scars. Critics also questioned whether the wars advanced US interests in the region — or set them back. The nation-building project in Iraq, for instance, saw the rise of a government friendly to Iran and the emergence of groups deemed to be a threat to global security, including ISIL (ISIS). In Afghanistan, meanwhile, the Taliban returned to power in 2021, almost exactly two decades after the group was ousted by US forces. The US-backed Afghan government quickly crumbled as American troops withdrew from the country. During his campaign for re-election in 2024, Trump tapped into the anger that the two conflicts generated. On multiple occasions, he sketched an alternative timeline where, if he had been president, the collapse of the Afghan government would have never occurred. 'We wouldn't have had that horrible situation in Afghanistan, the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country,' Trump said at one October 2024 rally in Detroit. The US president also slammed his Democratic opponent Kamala Harris for her alliance with Dick Cheney, who served as Bush's vice president, and his daughter Liz Cheney, criticising them as 'war hawks'. 'Kamala is campaigning with Muslim-hating warmonger, Liz Cheney, who wants to invade practically every Muslim country on the planet,' Trump told another crowd in Novi, Michigan. He added that Dick Cheney 'was responsible for invading the Middle East' and 'killing millions'. But critics say Trump's posture towards the Israeli strikes in Iran risks embroiling him in his own Middle East conflict. Hoffman, for instance, pointed to the closeness of the US-Israel relationship and the persistence of officials within the Republican Party who have been pushing for conflict with Iran for decades, like Senator Lindsey Graham. 'There is a tremendous risk of the United States being dragged into this war,' Hoffman said.
