WorldNetDaily did its usual Trump Regime Media routine on President Trump’s bombing of Iran. For instance:
- ‘They were already heroes’: 3 U.S. service members killed, 5 seriously wounded in Operation Epic Fury
- ‘BETTER NOT DO THAT’: Trump gives fresh warning to Iran after revenge threat against U.S.
- ‘Be relentlessly lethal’: See the instructions U.S. military got from top admiral just before Iran action
- ‘Absolutely insane’: Trump urges asylum for Iranian women’s soccer team who may be killed as ‘traitors’ for not singing regime’s national anthem
- ‘Destroy their lives’: Sean Duffy says Dems ‘losing their mind’ on DHS and war with Iran
- Report: Iran’s new supreme leader is … GAY!
- ‘The president is not messing around’: Trump sets new deadline for Iran, top adviser says this commander in chief stands by his red lines
- ‘GOOD CONVERSATIONS’: Trump orders Department of War to postpone military strikes on Iran power plants
Interestingly, WND also touted criticism of Trump’s war by its fellow right-wingers. Joe Kovacs wrote in a March 1 article:
Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News anchor who has been extremely critical of Israel in recent months, is reportedly going scorched earth against President Trump in the wake of Operation Epic Fury as the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran to completely destroy its nuclear weapon capabilities.
In a video posted on social media, ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl said he reached out to Carlson for comment on the military action.
“He told me of the president’s decision is ‘absolutely disgusting and evil.’ This is Tucker Carlson who was at the White House just last week, said that the decision to go to war with Iran is absolutely disgusting and evil,” Karl explained.
“Now that’s just one person, a prominent one in Trump’s movement. But this is a momentous and potentially defining or maybe redefining move for President Trump. He got in to politics, in part, promising to end what he called ‘forever wars.’ He [Trump] was harshly critical of the war with Iraq. He claimed that he had always been against it. And now he finds himself starting what could be a major conflict with Iran.”
[…]Former Republican Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a previous staunch ally of Trump, also slammed the president for the strike on Iran.
“We said ‘No More Foreign Wars, No More Regime Change!’ We said it on rally stage after rally stage, speech after speech. Trump, Vance, basically the entire admin campaigned on it and promised to put America FIRST and Make America Great Again.”
Kovacs also made sure to note right-wing criticism of Carlson’s stance:
Fox News anchor Mark Levin called Carlson a “deranged traitor” in reaction to his remarks.
“For now I’ll say he’s a disgusting Woke Reich lowlife. He trashes our country and president in the middle of a military campaign against an enemy that has murdered over 1,000 Americans and maimed thousands more.”
“This bum has pranced around the Middle East giving aid and comfort to our enemies. And today he’s stabbing the president in the back and smearing our nation. He lies and propagandizes, and spews his cancerous bigotry, anti-Semitism, and Christian-trashing. Even Qatar is condemning Iran. But not Carlson. He attacks his own country. You’ve every reason to despise him.”
The next day, Kovacs served up another criticism of Trump’s war from a fellow “conservative champion”:
Conservative champion Matt Walsh, who gained worldwide notoriety with his eye-opening documentary “What Is a Woman?,” is now seriously questioning President Donald Trump’s Operation Epic Fury in Iran.
In a series of posts on social media, Walsh wondered: “What exactly is the end game? ‘The Iranian people rise up and take control of their government’? Okay what does that mean exactly? Which people? How are they taking control? What happens after they do take control?
“Are we sure the new people, whoever they are, will be better than the old people? How are we going to make sure of that? How are we going to make sure of it while also not putting boots on the ground? This has not been explained. It needs to be.”
After noting that White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt “posted a statement reiterating the president’s goals,” Kovacs wrote:
In response to Leavitt, Walsh indicated: “So far we’ve heard that although we killed the whole Iranian regime, this was not a regime change war. And although we obliterated their nuclear program, we had to do this because of their nuclear program. And although Iran was not planning any attacks on the US, they also might have been, depending on who you ask. And although we are not fighting this war to free the Iranian people, they are now free, or might be, depending on who seizes power, and we have no idea who that will be. The messaging on this thing is, to put it mildly, confused.”
He also noted: “It’s just a basic fact of life that, generally speaking, the most ruthless and violent forces will be the ones who seize the crown. What exactly is the mechanism by which we plan to ensure that the secular ‘pro-western’ factions in Iran, who are by definition not barbaric killers, somehow manage to fill the power vacuum and prevail over the factions that are indeed barbaric killers? I’m not a foreign policy expert. I admit that. I’m just a common sense guy, and a student of history. So someone explain it to me.”
“Regime change wars in the Middle East coupled with a homeland flooded with third world Islamist migrants is a very volatile combination,” Walsh added.
“I know some of my followers here are annoyed at me but I have to call it like I see it. A basic level of honesty is an obligation that comes with having a public platform. This operation seemed like a bad idea to me before it happened, and I said so. Now that it is happening, I’m not going to suddenly change my tune. It still seems like a bad idea to me. I hope I’m wrong. But that’s how I see it.”
Sean Davis, CEO and founder of the right-leaning Federalist, also is wondering aloud about “any coherent objective.”
“Is the goal to eliminate the Iranian regime or free the Iranian people or degrade their nuclear capability or degrade the conventional weapons capability or eliminate their regional hegemony or to cut off their oil supply to China or to help Israel or what?” Davis said on X.
“The lack of any coherent message seems to suggest the lack of any coherent objective.”
It seems WND is the one that lacks a coherent message.