A Democratic senator calls the current war humiliating to Trump and American power, and asserts that Netanyahu ignored Trump's request and exposed Washington's gross incompetence.
Afrasianet - Democratic U.S. Senator Chris Murphy has launched a sharp attack on U.S. President Donald Trump's policy in the region, describing the war that has been going on since yesterday as "humiliating to Trump and American power in general."
Referring to Washington's inability to influence its ally's decisions, Murphy said, "When Trump announces that he will call Netanyahu to ask him not to respond, and then Netanyahu responds within hours, the insult intensifies and intensifies."
The Democratic senator asserted that Trump "has lost complete control of the conduct of this war for a long time," noting that with a total war tragically breaking out again in the region, "it is not difficult to overstate how utterly incompetent he is."
The senator's remarks come amid an escalating debate within the United States over the Trump administration's policy toward Iran and the Middle East, with criticism from some members of Congress for using the military option instead of the diplomatic track.
Why don't U.S. foreign policymakers learn from the mistakes of wars?
In the same vein, the New York Times published an article strongly criticizing U.S. foreign policies, and wondering why previous wars were not mentioned, especially the war on Iraq, as well as the Iran war , whose initial results he described as "shocking."
Writer Peter Beinart warned against repeating previous major mistakes without real political or intellectual accountability.
He sees the ongoing war against Iran as a "realistic test" of the ideas of the hawks in Washington , who have long pushed for a full-scale military confrontation.
He noted that the initial results of this war are shocking, both in terms of economic and humanitarian costs. He estimates that the war could cost more than $1 trillion, along with significant damage to U.S. military bases in the Middle East and a dwindling stockpile of missile defense systems, which could weaken Washington's ability to counter other strategic adversaries.
The article also points to broader global implications, including rising famine risks in some regions, rising inflation rates within the United States, and significant human casualties.
Despite this high cost, the declared goals of the war have not been achieved. Iran still retains a large part of its missile arsenal, and its nuclear program has not been eliminated or its political system overthrown. On the contrary, Tehran is more capable of influencing the global economy, especially by threatening navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.
Lack of accountability
The article then moves on to a deeper critique of the political and intellectual structure in the United States, arguing that the problem is not limited to the war decisions themselves, but extends to the lack of accountability for those who miscalculate. He cites the experience of the Iraq war, where a number of its supporters continued to occupy influential positions despite their miscalculations.
This recurring pattern of "no reckoning" leads to the reproduction of the very policies that lead to new wars. Many of the think tanks and officials who supported the Iraq war remain prominent voices in favor of military escalation today.
Admitting mistakes
The article emphasizes that what is needed is not to exclude them completely, but to oblige them to reevaluate their ideas and admit their mistakes in a clear and radical way, rather than settling for formal remorse. The absence of such a deep assessment makes U.S. foreign policy spin in the same cycle of errors.
Continued this approach will lead to more "self-made disasters," weakening U.S. global influence and undermining citizens' confidence in democracy, calling for a real shift toward diplomatic solutions rather than over-reliance on military force.
The New York Times also stopped at a stark shift in the U.S. way of waging wars under President Donald Trump , which has become imperialist, so that Washington no longer covers up the justifications and costs of the war, but treats it as digital content.
In an analytical article titled "America Used to Hide Its Wars and Trump Is Doing the Exact Opposite," Charles Homans noted that previous American presidents have sought to "beautify" the image of military interventions or obfuscate their costs, but President Trump has turned war into a form of "digital content," severing the last remaining links between civil responsibility and state power.
Homans, a reporter covering U.S. domestic affairs, kicked off President Trump's State of the Union address from the White House last Wednesday (April 1) after 32 days of intensified air strikes on Iran.
In that surrealist speech, Mr. Trump tried to historicize his actions and a series of "disconnected foreign adventures" from Venezuela and Cuba to the Danish island of Greenland , Homans said.
In that speech, President Trump compared his 32-day military campaign on Iran to the time spans of World War I , the Vietnam War and the Iraq War. Commenting on this, Homans said that Trump invoked a "linear understanding" of the war that is fundamentally at odds with contemporary American reality.
Homans points out that Trump's rhetoric treats war as a series of "episodes" that follow the logic of social media news chains, and according to that perspective, conflicts do not necessarily end with treaties or strategic victories, but simply "retreat to the bottom of the news list."
A century of hidden costs
To understand how the United States came to this approach to war, Homans follows the approach used throughout the 20th and 21st centuries to cover up the course of war, by abolishing conscription and switching to a professional military system, where human casualties are confined to a small demographic.
Previous administrations have also adopted the principle of economic ambiguity, and since the lessons of the Vietnam War, presidents have moved away from "war taxes" and have preferred to finance military operations by borrowing and printing money, which has hidden the actual cost from the average taxpayer.
Homans noted that the U.S. administration under President Barack Obama (2009-2017) mastered what he called "covert warfare" by relying on drones to achieve its goals without endangering American lives, which reduced the amount of human casualties among Americans.
On the other hand, although the War Powers Act of 1973, which emerged from the Vietnam experience, affirms Congress's authority to openly discuss wars before they are initiated, all presidents except George W. Bush have launched foreign military operations without congressional approval.
Imperialism
Homans highlighted a striking shift in President Trump's style between his first and second term, as in the first (2017-2021) he was convinced that "great nations do not fight endless wars."
In his second term, Homans adds, President Trump is embracing "a long legacy of American imperialism," and in doing so, he is no longer just waging "eternal wars," but also promoting them.
There is a stark contrast to Trump's aggressiveness during his second term, particularly in the current war on Iran, where the White House's content on Iran is an explicit justification for U.S. hard power.
However, this method is merely a parody of a country that relies on technological power in its military intervention, and he said that this digital content is appropriate for a country that asks its citizens only to receive passively, after they have long since lost the intellectual and moral capabilities necessary to engage in issues of war and peace.
Israel cannot afford Netanyahu's appetite for the never-ending war
Haaretz newspaper reported: In an article published by the Israeli website Haaretz, writer David Rosenberg believes that Israel is no longer economically and politically able to tolerate what he described as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's appetite for open and protracted wars, considering that the transformation led by Netanyahu since the October 7, 2023 attack has pushed Israel towards a state of "permanent war alert" that drains the economy and society and puts the future of the state in front of heavy challenges.
Rosenberg notes that U.S. President Donald Trump, despite his rush toward confrontation with Iran, quickly recognized the dangers of getting involved in a protracted war and later sought to reduce U.S. involvement. But Netanyahu is going in the exact opposite direction, becoming more inclined to expand military operations and always be prepared for new rounds of fighting.
Radical change
Prior to the October 7 attack, Netanyahu was known to be wary of fighting long wars, preferring swift military operations that ended in political settlements that would reduce the cost to Israel, recognizing that Israel's economy could not afford open conflicts, and that an army heavily reliant on reserve forces was not designed for long wars of attrition.
But Rosenberg asserts that this approach has changed dramatically after the current war, citing the continued Israeli bombing of Beirut and what he described as Netanyahu's unspoken desire to resume the attack on Iran.
Despite nearly three years of fighting against Hamas,Hezbollah , and Iran, Netanyahu has not achieved what he calls a "complete victory" and has not been able to remove the strategic threats Israel faces. Yet he continues to push for a policy that puts Israel in a state of constant readiness for war, even if there are no ongoing open confrontations.
The financial burden has become cumbersome
Rosenberg points out that the cost of the war has become enormous for the Israeli economy, explaining that the first two years of the war before Operation Roaring Lion cost the government about $120 billion, according to Bank of Israel estimates. The recent war with Iran has also added at least another $12 billion in military and civilian spending, figures that the author believes are likely to be underestimated.
The article adds that military spending continues despite the ceasefire agreement with Lebanon, as Israel continues to occupy large areas of southern Lebanon and carry out raids on Hezbollah targets, in addition to the continuation of military operations in the Gaza Strip, the presence of Israeli forces inside Syria, as well as the increasing deployment in the West Bank.
According to Rosenberg, the financial burden of the reservists alone has become strained, with the cost of each 10,000 reservists costing about $109 million per month. The 2026 budget had predicted that there would be 40,000 reservists on duty per day, but the actual number has now reached an average of 100,000 soldiers, in the absence of any clear plan to get out of the various battlefields.
Reasons for the economy to bear the effects of the war
Rosenberg adds that the Israeli economy has so far been able to withstand the effects of the war for several reasons, the first of which is the long experience of Israeli companies in dealing with the conditions of war, and the second is the psychological trauma of the events of October 7, which led large segments of Israelis to consider the war a matter of national survival regardless of the economic cost.
The third reason is that the Israelis have not yet borne the full financial cost of the wars, with U.S. military aid covering a large portion of the expenses, while the rest has been financed through government borrowing. But the bill will emerge later through higher taxes or cuts in spending on education, health, and infrastructure.
Impact on Israel's image
The war in Gaza and Israel's role in pushing Trump toward a joint attack on Iran have led to a decline in U.S. public support for Israel, not only among Democrats and progressives, but even within Republican and evangelical circles that have traditionally supported Tel Aviv.
Rosenberg points out that this decline may be reflected in the future on U.S. military aid itself, pointing to votes in the U.S. Senate last month in which a majority of Democratic Party members supported bills aimed at halting arms deals to Israel, although those bills ultimately did not pass.
Netanyahu himself has implicitly acknowledged that U.S. aid could be cut after the current aid deal expires in 2028, and possibly disappear entirely, which will compound the financial pressure on the Israeli economy.
Israel's public debt has risen significantly since the beginning of the war, accounting for about 60 percent of GDP before Oct. 7, but rising to about 69 percent by the end of 2025. Bank of Israel Governor Amir Yaron says that the full implementation of Netanyahu's military plan could push the debt ratio to 81 percent by 2035, and possibly to 83 percent if U.S. support is reduced.
Source: Haaretz – The New York Times
