
© The Postil Magazine
Violence is diplomacy — that is the essence of the Trumpian encounter with the world:
do as I say, or else. Versions of this approach are easily noted in most of President Trump's public pronouncements. The most recent iteration, in response to Trump's bombing of Iran, was
given by Vice President JD Vance at the Ohio Republican Party dinner in Lima, Ohio, on Tuesday, June 24, 2025. He later
summarized it on X also.
Here is what he said: "What I call the Trump Doctrine is quite simple: Number one, you articulate a clear American interest and that's, in this case, that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. Number two, you try to aggressively, diplomatically solve that problem. And number three, when you can't solve it diplomatically, you use overwhelming military power to solve it and then you get the hell out of there before it ever becomes a protracted conflict."
The contradictions from one through to three are obvious: how can there be a clarity of "American interest" when the policy is "Israel First?" America has long given up being clear about what it wants, since it wants so many different things which negate one another. It wants to be the hegemon, but also the beacon of "liberty." Number two: suddenly "American interest" is now a "problem" that needs to "solved" by diplomacy, because other countries do not agree with the "American interest." Was it not Zelinsky, sitting in the White House, who asked Vance, "What do you mean by diplomacy?" In other words, that "American interest" mentioned in Number one is actually an American demand.
And then we quickly move on to Number three — when America fails at diplomacy, it loves to drop bombs. Bombing, it would appear is the last resort of the scoundrel, to update a famous phrase.
What is the point of doing any diplomacy when the people you are trying to diplomatize already know that you are going to bomb them in the end? Iran found that out pretty darned quick — for they thought they were actually involved in diplomacy with Washington when Trump suddenly decided to drop some bombs all over Iran, thinking that this would be persuasive. So, how quickly does Washington move from the diplomatic table to the cockpit of a B2 bomber? In other words, how do bombs become diplomacy?
Vance then throws in the caveat that "you get the hell out of there before it ever becomes a protracted conflict." So, we are supposed to believe that bombing a country flat and flying back home magically avoids a "protracted conflict?" A recent example — how long has America been bombing Yemen — and what has it accomplished? America just bombed Iran — and what has that accomplished?
And, is there any need to mention the fact that Trump, in his first five months of his second term, has carried out 529 airstrikes against Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Somalia, and bombed 240 locations in these places — it is not known yet how many total civilians he has killed in the process. And whatever happened to Number two in all these cases? How did Trump move past diplomacy and get right to Number three with Iraq, Somalia and Yemen?
In other words, the world is viewed through simplistic Trumpian narratives and bombed accordingly.
It would seem that Vance is trying to lend coherence to a "foreign policy" that is no more than Trump's feelings. How such feelings, which are erratic at best, become a doctrine is beyond comprehension.
Comment: Good. "Public" broadcasting should stand or fall on the support of their audience. There are some stations that provide good local service to their communities, especially those underserved by major networks. There are others, located mostly in blue-voting cities, that drown listeners in a tidal wave of non-stop woke liberal nonsense. If that's what their public wants, let them open their wallets. Expect to see a string of stations shutting down in the near future.