Trump may have just started the next forever war. If you were a casual listener of last week’s State of the Union, you’d have heard the president offer some forceful words about Iran without mentioning he had already amassed an armada outside Iran so big it is the largest show of U.S. naval power in the Middle East since Iraq. Only a few days later, against the counsel of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, despite having neither a clear rationale nor a plan for involvement, let alone presenting one to Congress or the American public, the U.S. began reckless and illegal strikes on Iran. For weeks prior, rumors had been circulating that Trump was considering a fully fledged, enduring conflict. Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene’s response on X summed up what many of us were thinking: “Americans do not want to go to war with Iran!!!…And they voted for NO MORE FOREIGN WARS AND NO MORE REGIME CHANGE.” None of this registered with a President who had already bombed seven countries since returning to power. With Trump and Hegseth so hellbent on hellfire at our expense, we all must speak up to stop them. That’s why they’re coming after our freedom of speech–and starting with the troops on purpose.
The U.S. military’s weaponization of poverty presents a financial incentive to stay in line. By design, the military is one of the most foolproof ways in America to get education, healthcare, a steady paycheck, and even citizenship. In return, young servicemembers risk their lives while oligarchs profit. This is the military industrial complex, and it is not a secret. As long as Trump can extract and exploit, he doesn’t see a cost to war. He’s a draft dodger who has called fallen American soldiers ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ and “finds the notion of military service difficult to understand, and the idea of volunteering to serve especially incomprehensible.” Those of us who have served or are serving see it differently. But unfortunately, when the consequences can be cuts to rank, pay, or benefits, dishonorable discharge, court-martial, or getting deported, what 18-year-old enlisted kid is prepared to disobey or speak out against the officers above them?
To the regime’s chagrin, veterans are trying to help. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro attempted to convince a Grand Jury to indict several members of Congress–who are also all veterans–after they posted a 90-second video reminding servicemembers they could refuse to follow an unlawful order, which is–and this is true–the law. Trump’s response was swift and chilling; he called the video “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” branded the lawmakers “traitors,” demanded they be “ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL,” and called their actions “punishable by DEATH!” That a Grand Jury refused to indict hardly lessens the blow that a sitting American president is weaponizing our justice system to intimidate dissenters.
Obviously, this wasn’t sedition. If anything, reciting American laws ought to be considered patriotic. But for a man who believes his will is the only law that matters, those who would amplify the existence of an actual law that does limit him are, naturally, “traitors.” More than the speakers or their speech, however, Trump might have blown a gasket over their video’s potential audience; the simple notion that soldiers could learn about lawfully challenging orders sent Trump on a tirade so unhinged that he threatened sitting Congressmen with death. Clearly, between an unprecedented firing spree of leaders that continues to destabilize the military and Secretary Hegseth’s attempt to muzzle the press at the Pentagon, the regime is in overdrive to reduce the military to Trump-loyalists while also reducing oversight and accountability.
To be clear, servicemembers already accept limits on speech, but memos instituted under Trump have threatened greater consequences for certain criticisms of the president or other superior officers. In fact, one Air Force lawyer, who spoke only under the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation, called the new guidance both troubling and threatening. Now, retired General Keane, former Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, claims Hegseth just wants to “spoon-feed information to the journalists.” He adds, “That’s not journalism.” No kidding. That’s propaganda.
Notably, CEO of Anthropic Dario Amodei said of this topic: “The constitutional protections in our military structures depend on the idea that there are humans who would — we hope — disobey illegal orders. With fully autonomous weapons, we don’t necessarily have those protections.” Now, Trump and Hegseth are threatening that Anthropic better let them use its AI tools for “all lawful purposes” or else. They want to make fully autonomous weapons and conduct mass surveillance on Americans, and they already admitted they used Anthropic’s Claude in Maduro’s kidnapping. With a man famous for violence and uncomplicated celebrations of death at the helm, and a plan to ramp up the unlawful orders as he wages an illegal war, solidifying silence for those with a front row view is an important preparation step to getting away with it. Of course, the regime is hoping to decrease disobedience. Most humans have a conscience but AI is programmed.
Servicemembers may soon find themselves stuck between a rock and Fascism. Our military is not Trump’s private muscle, but there is currently immense pressure on servicemembers to make that distinction. Unfortunately, insubordination–even of a feckless authoritarian demagogue–takes courage. So, call your elected officials and tell them to step up. Military personnel have a duty to disobey unlawful orders, and we should make sure they know that. Threatening the lives of Americans for exercising their rights under the First Amendment should not be tolerated, and we should make sure Trump knows that. And if striking Iran, or anywhere else, were ever truly necessary, then at least the American public could have been persuaded through a proper Congressional debate. We must scrutinize the military now more than ever, and pay attention to who stands to gain from the next war. It is time to support the troops against their Commander in Chief.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.




















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.