Conservative editor warns: Don't fall for the spin on Trump's 'stupid war'

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a press conference at Trump National Doral Miami in Miami, Florida, U.S., March 9, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

On Wednesday, the big talk of the day was about the tenuous ceasefire agreement between the United States and Iran, and whether or not the war wrought consequences that are beneficial or harmful to the U.S. and wider world. According to the American Conservative Managing Editor Jude Russo, however, nobody should be “fooled” by those who praise the outcome of President Donald Trump’s “stupid war.”

While both the Trump Administration and Iranian government were quick to claim victory, they did so citing a 10 point plan that Trump called a “workable basis” for a peace deal. But as Russo points out, the president’s assertion is “a bit of a headscratcher” for anyone who has been paying attention to the White House’s stated goals over the course of the conflict, which have included everything from regime change to halting nuclear weapon development to doing it for God.

But now — after the war has already killed over a dozen Americans and thousands of Iranians, seriously disrupted the global economy, and shredded U.S. alliances — Russo argues that the proposed agreement “concedes several American redlines of yesteryear and throws in some extras that weren’t even on the table before the war started, like Iranian suzerainty in the strait.”

Russo suggests three interpretations of what is hard to argue is anything but a bad outcome for the U.S. First, he says that it’s possible Trump accepted the terms before actually knowing what was in them, which isn’t a stretch to believe, considering there has already been confusion among “ill-prepared” American negotiators. Second, it could be that “the negotiations are in bad faith on the American side,” as the Trump Administration has already made it clear that it is willing to pretend to negotiate as a means of buying time before a surprise attack. Finally, it could be that Trump realized that the cost of continuing the war was simply untenable, and decided that “cutting a deal that concedes much to the Iranians is better than chasing losses.”

If the last point is true, writes Russo, “this is a tacit admission that the war was a strategic loss, even as it was a military victory; the question is whether the administration can use the latter to spin away the former in selling this to the public.”

Now, as the Trump Administration struggles to explain its assertion of victory, Russo points out how few American objectives have actually been achieved. Despite claims to the contrary, “the clerisy and IRGC remain intact and in control.” Iran now enjoys “de facto” control over the Strait of Hormuz. It’s still able to attack American assets and allies with drones and missiles. “Our bases and radar systems across the Middle East have been immolated, our munitions have been depleted, and we have cannibalized our force posture in East Asia,” and it appears that Iran’s nuclear situation is no more degraded than it was before the war.

“This war has been very stupid,” Russo concludes. “So when the usual suspects start tooting about how this war was a great triumph… you are under no obligation to believe a lie. Nor are you under any obligation to take them seriously in the future. Don’t get fooled again.”

From Your Site Articles