The New York Times to Trump: Why did you start this war Mr. President?
The editorial board of the New York Times published an editorial in which it strongly criticized President Donald Trump’s decision to launch a large-scale military attack on Iran in cooperation with Israel, pointing to the significant discrepancy between his 2024 election promises to end wars and his actions on the ground that led to the expansion of military interventions in seven countries over the past year.
The editorial asserted that Trump didn’t provide a convincing justification for attacking Iran, didn’t engage Congress, which the Constitution alone gives the power to declare war, and didn’t specifically clarify his military objectives.
The article also accuses Trump of lying about the past results of the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities last June, which undermines his credibility with US citizens and raises questions about his future goals.
While the editorial board condemns the Iranian regime for its internal repression and killing of protesters, the New York Times editorial board believes that Trump’s behavior toward Iran is reckless and irresponsible, because the attack carries a high risk for both US soldiers and the civilian population in the region, as well as the potential for a violent Iranian response, including short- and medium-range missiles at Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and neighboring countries.
A responsible approach to any military intervention would have required clear objectives, whether limited to halting Iran’s nuclear program or encompassing broader goals such as ending support for terrorist groups, obtaining congressional approval and cooperation with international allies, as well as carefully assessing risks and preparing a plan to manage any potential Iranian response.
Instead, Trump is relying on his vague promises and the support of the Iranian people to justify the attack, while ignoring international and US law, continuing to pursue a volatile policy toward allies, and providing protection for officials who have made serious mistakes.
The New York Times editorial board points to attempts by members of Congress from both parties, such as Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massey, as well as Senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul, to limit the president’s ability to wage war on Iran without congressional approval, arguing that asserting congressional authority is the most appropriate way to rein in the president and prevent uncalculated escalation.
In conclusion, the article emphasizes the protection of US forces and innocent Iranian civilians, and expresses regret that Trump doesn’t take the war with the seriousness and respect it requires.
The editorial warns that Trump’s lack of clarity in his goals opens the door to an open conflict similar to the Iraq-Afghanistan wars, which has protracted and weighed heavily on US forces and the American public.
