TÜRKİYE ORTA ASYA HABER KKUORDİNATÖRÜ

WORLD TURKISH NEWS Donald Trump is lost in the fog of war. After his naive expectation of a lightning-fast victory in the Strait of Hormuz was dashed, he is further increasing confusion with fabricated statements. He was confident that Iran would easily follow Venezuela's "perfect scenario," agreeing to appoint a leader who would instantly obey his orders, and that there would be no disruption in the oil markets – a "powerful game plan," as White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt vehemently defended. There may be little, or even no, truth underlying the illusions upon which Trump's nonsensical statements and volatile strategies are built. To believe that a coherent meaning can be extracted from Trump's convoluted words is a weakness of the rational mind that refuses to accept the impulses of the hardened demagogue as they are. Searching for logic in the jungle of Trump's stories can force desperately rational people to fabricate logic where there is none, in order to satisfy, however superficial, appearances of soundness. Trump’s incoherent attempts to reshape his justifications further expose his inadequacy and incomprehensibility; a situation entirely predictable, yet now having deadly consequences on a global scale. However, his incoherent statements have laid bare the ground that congressional investigations into the origins, planning, and conduct of the war must examine. Trump is also at war with the English language. He insists that his war is not a war, but rather a “short trip” used to evade congressional and international accountability. Then, when asked whether it was a trip or a war, he replied: “Well, both. A trip to keep us out of war.” His rhetorical acrobatics are equivalent to René Magritte’s painting “Ceci n'est pas une pipe” – “This is not a pipe” – depicting a pipe. Magritte called the painting “The Treachery of Images.” Orwell or Magritte? Propaganda or surrealism? Trump announced he would either force "regime change" or negotiate with an unnamed figure in the recently assassinated regime. "Most of the people we had in mind are dead," he said. Following a one-hour meeting with Vladimir Putin, Trump demanded "unconditional surrender," otherwise he declared the war "completely over." Putin had pledged "unwavering support" to the new religious leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, the 56-year-old son of the assassinated 86-year-old former religious leader. Trump had said he was "not happy" with Khamenei's rise and had called him a "lightweight." Even if we accept Trump's confusing justifications for war with Iran as they are, it's still a complete disaster | Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Freedland Read more On March 3, Trump refused to answer to Secretary of State Marco Rubio's explanation of why Trump would start the war. Rubio stated that the U.S. expected Israel to launch a preemptive strike and Iran to attack "American forces." According to Rubio's logic, which may contain some truth, "There was definitely an imminent threat, and that imminent threat was that if Iran were attacked—which we believed they would be—they would immediately attack us." But if that's true, it was Israel that triggered the "imminent threat," and it was Bibi Netanyahu who dragged Trump into war. Rubio seems like a contestant on "The Apprentice Goes To War" in his quest to find the answer. However, Trump rejected Rubio's claims: "On the contrary, I may have put Israel in a difficult position," he said. Trump claimed he initiated the chain of "imminent threats." However, the Pentagon informed congressional staff that it had no intelligence information about an "imminent threat." Then Trump tweeted that he had made a hasty decision: “From what Steve [Witkoff], Jared [Kushner], Pete [Hegseth] and others told me, Marco was so involved that I thought they were going to attack us.” Here, Trump seemed to endorse an element of Rubio's narrative he had previously dismissed. “The Apprentice Goes To War” is going on its championship tour. According to Trump, the “trip” is ending “very soon”; or, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth put it, “just the beginning”; or, as Trump indicated in his response to questions at a March 9 press conference, “both.” Earlier that day, in response to rising oil prices, Trump had boasted to the New York Post, “I have a plan for everything. You’ll be very happy.” But he fought the gas pump, and the gas pump is winning. Trying to explain his ultimate war objective, Trump told House Republicans on March 9: “In many ways we’ve already won, but we haven’t won enough.” One of the most unpopular presidents of the century is trying to regain popularity with an unpopular war. Winning is not visible through the dark clouds of acid rain over Tehran.