Forum Topic

Is Trump completely unhinged?

I think you know the answer to that: a resounding YES! First he launches a massive war on Iran because of its (nonexistent) imminent threat to produce nuclear bombs, or to produce regime change, or to stop it producing long-range rockets, or something – the supposed threats keep changing so no one really knows what the aims of the war are, except for the aggrandisement of President Donald J. Trump...
Then when the regime reacts with its only effective countermeasure (which anyone with a brain in the White House should have predicted), to close the Straits of Hormuz, he walks away saying he didn’t care, nothing to do with him, and someone else should clear up the mess he’d just made.
Now he’s been issuing ultimata (several times postponed!) to bomb Iran into the stone “ages” [sic] by bombing its energy sites and, by implication, its desalination plants – a war crime in itself.
Finally, we get yet another postponement: in an expletive-laden rant he has threatened Iran with “hell” if it doesn’t back down – to which the response is likely to be to destroy the desalination plants of the Gulf allies, which would render life there unsupportable.
You don’t have to be a supporter of the vile regime in Iran (and I’m certainly not one) to regard this as completely unhinged, the behaviour of a frustrated toddler, lying on the ground and kicking his legs in a temper - except that it is much more serious than that. Time to invoke the 25th Amendment I think, if anyone in Congress has the bottle to do it.

Richard Carter ● 21h36 Comments

oh and btw, Trump has been telling us for two weeks that the "Iranians are begging for a deal"How's that going?

Michael Brigo ● 6h

"and now has attacked several Arab nations and closed the Straits of Hormuz "Odd statement to make considering you have been telling us for a couple of years that Israel has a right to defend itself.TBH - If you didn't know the first thing that Iran would do was close the straight of Hormuz when attacked then you are as utterly imbecilic as the Orange one.

Michael Brigo ● 6h

To be accurate, the Arab countries which  Iran has attacked and the closing of the Stait of Hormuz were in retaliation against the US and Israel's attacks. One would have thought it was predictable that the Strait might be used as a bargaining chip and what seems odd is that the US had no prepared contingency plan for that before starting the action. I guess the attacks on Arab countries is in retaliation for them hosting US bases (I believe those countries asked the US not to attack Iran) and attacks initially were targeted on the bases and US assets such as AWS data centres, although they have since spread to petroleum installations. I'm not saying that's good but perhaps to be expected unless one seriously underestimated Iran's military capability?

Michael Ixer ● 7h

‘…. Even one or two individuals have sought to downplay the murderous nature of the Uranian regime, suggesting that the number of victims may have been as low as 7000.’I don’t want to get into a scrap about numbers of Iranian protesters deaths, I’m sure we can all agree that bandying about with numbers is quite grotesque and dehumanising; but at the same time facts do matter, the truth matters. I have no idea how many protesters have been killed by the Iranian regime, so I look at figures that are widely available for some indication:HRANA (Human Rights Activists News Agency – US-based, February 2026 deaths: 7,007 verified (6,488 protesters, 236 minors; 11,000+ under investigation)The Guardian (citing medics/morgue staff) January 2026 >30,000 deaths, (possible; official registrations <10% of real toll)Iran International (opposition/exile media, leaked docs) January 2026 36,500+Three different sources, three different estimates. Just the facts. Not ‘one or two individuals trying to downplay’ anything. Not ‘40,000 plus’ deaths that some individuals assert to justify an illegal, unplanned and chaotic attack putting the lives of millions at risk.

Gerry Boyce ● 7h

There's no evidence that Iran has ever tried to test a nuclear bomb - nuclear tests are being monitored to check compliance with various treaties- so it's very unlikely Iran could produce a viable nuclear device without testing. Although the scientific principles of making a bomb are reasonably straightforward, the engineering technicalities of delivering and triggering are, I think, a little more complex and would need a test programme. One could be fairly certain Iran hasn't yet produce a device - unless another nuclear state has assisted them.

Michael Ixer ● 8h

Donald Trump makes a bewildering number of statements. I am more interested in what he dies than what he says. So far he has committed no war crimes. Yet all the talk on the BBC this morning was about America and potential  war crimes. There was no mention and there has been none for weeks about Iran's actual crimes against humanity. Even one or two individuals have sought to downplay the murderous nature of the Uranian regime, suggesting that the number of victims may have been as low as 7000. Evidently for some people antipathy to Trump is greater than antipathy to the Iranian regime.The attack on Iran, however has little to do with the oppressive nature of the Iranian regime. The reason is that Iran in breach of undertakings has stockpiled hundreds of kilos of purified uramium, has sponsored terrorism, has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and now has attacked several Arab nations and closed the Straits of Hormuz and has so far refused to stop doing any of these things.

Steven Rose ● 8h

Hello Sue,I found this Chatham House article a few days ago and it  explains it all very well indeed.  The main reason that Iran was attacked is that it does not have nuclear weapons, at least, not yet.  Ukraine, Iraq and Libya all agreed to stop their nuclear programmes...  Surprisingly, they were all attacked....https://www.chathamhouse.org/2026/03/iran-war-risks-triggering-new-wave-nuclear-proliferationAnother article that also helps is this one:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weaponsI suspect, and I stress the word suspect, that Iran was attacked mainly because of its hydrocarbon (10% of the world's oil reserves and 15% of gas reserves) plus, of course, uranium. From Wikipedia, "Trump and his administration made clear that access to Venezuelan oil was a core reason for the action [military strike in Venezuela]. The US announced a 50-million-barrel oil supply deal with the remaining government in Venezuela, with the first $300 million already received on 20 January. On 29 January, a new law was passed by Rodríguez to give private companies control over the production and sale of oil. In parallel, the US lifted sanctions imposed on Venezuelan oil trade and issued licenses for companies to trade Venezuelan oil.[18][19] According to US secretary of energy Chris Wright, who visited Venezuela in February, sales of Venezuelan oil have already reached over $1 billion since Maduro's capture and about $5 billion are expected in the upcoming months.[19]"  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_VenezuelaCoincidence?

Ivonne Holliday ● 8h

Yes, Robert, estimates on the number of murders of protesters varies, if you’re struggling to get your head around this, Wikipedia could enlighten you. My point is that estimates vary because the Iranian regime, like Netanyahu in Gaza, do not allow the press or any independent agencies in to verify the numbers. I think we all agree that the Iranian authorities treat protester’s appallingly. Where, perhaps, we differ, is whether this illegal attack on Iran is motivated by genuine concern for the treatment of the protesters, or if the murder of them is used as a cynical cover to justify the attack.Threatening to bomb them back into the stone ages doesn’t sound like much of a helping hand to me.

Gerry Boyce ● 8h

So what you are saying is "because Iran committed a war crime the US is now allowed to commit war crimes against it"I had no idea that's how it worked!

Michael Brigo ● 9h

@Ivonne 20.17* 1950s–1970s: The program began with US assistance under the Shah, focusing on civilian energy.* Post-1979 Revolution: The program was temporarily halted but later revived.* Late 1980s–2003: Intelligence suggests Iran actively pursued a structured nuclear weapons program known as the Amad Project, which was allegedly halted in 2003.* 2002–Present: Discovery of undeclared nuclear sites (Natanz, Arak, Fordow) sparked international concern regarding weaponization.* 2021–2026: Iran began enriching uranium to 60%, a short technical step away from weapons-grade (90%), with reduced International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring. BTW, where is the proof that Iran doesn’t have functioninal nuclear weapons?

Sue Hammond ● 9h

“Testimony from medics, morgue and graveyard staff reveals huge state effort to conceal systematic killing of protesters” source the Guardian say 35,000 plus.Just ask google Gerry.

Robert Wheeler ● 10h

‘….. no mention at all of  Iran’s actual crimes against humanity, the systematic murder of over 40 000 of their own citizens over two weeks in January. Why is that?’I’ve no idea where you get your news from; perhaps try The Guardian and The BBC, plenty of coverage on the murders of Iranian protesters at the beginning of this year. Estimates range from 7000 to 36500. Can’t see your point, really.

Gerry Boyce ● 10h

Yes, Sue.  Attack is the best form of defence.  Could you please expand on the aspect of possible attack?By the way, where is the proof that Iran actually produced nuclear weapons?

Ivonne Holliday ● 10h

Steven. Yes. Iran is an authoritarian dictatorship. Can you explain how destroying the Pasture Institute Vaccine Research facility will help the people of Iran? It's likely going to result in more illness and deaths. Trump's plans doesn't seem to include how a significantly different regime is installed. I think with the targeting of civilian facilities Iranian's are becoming doubtful about the US intentions ...

Michael Ixer ● 10h

There is much concern about Trump’s potential war crimes but no mention at all of  Iran’s actual crimes against humanity, the systematic murder of over 40 000 of their own citizens over two weeks in January. Why is that?

Steven Rose ● 11h

Hello Steven,Please bear in mind that Trump cancelled Obama's agreement in 2018 - only because it was an Obama Agreement......

Ivonne Holliday ● 11h

NATO would never agree to use a nuclear weapon, for one instance it would take too long to agree to anything .  Europe can’t even protect its borders.This would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic.  The hand wringing over whether this war was legal when we had nothing of use to send anyway.  We are involved in this war whether we like it or not due to energy costs.

Robert Wheeler ● 11h

The US attacks last year destroyed Iran's nuclear bomb making ability.  There was no excuse for targeting Pasteur Institute in Tehran. I expect the lawyers will come to the conclusion that was a war crime.https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2026/04/03/what-is-irans-historic-pasteur-institute-that-was-destroyed-in-us-israeli-attacks/What I find interesting is that everyone seems to have forgotten the MAD principle that has prevented war between the USSR, Russia, Britain, France, China and those that have protection under degfence alliances such as NATO. Even if Iran developed a nuclear capability, would they risk attacking another country such as the UK with a nuclear response - or Israel with the Iron Dome protection and nuclear weapons to decimate Iran - and even if the US leaves NATO. the organisation has the UK and France as nuclear responders.

Michael Ixer ● 11h

Yes, obviously Trump has the best interest of the Iranians at heart; I’m sure they are beside themselves with joy at the prospect of being bombed back to ‘the stone ages’.

Gerry Boyce ● 12h

So if Iran had not been halted in its quest and actually produced nuclear weapons that had the capability to reach the UK which is extremely likely, would NATO be there to protect us?  Doubtful because it is toothless without America. The best form of defence is attack …

Sue Hammond ● 12h

Thanks for linking that article, Ivonne.I think Montgomery is too understanding of Trump. Under normal circumstances my instinct would be for politicians to engage with other leaders to attempt to overcome differences, and find a compromise solution that probably leaves everyone somewhat frustrated, but avoids catastrophic showdowns. But Trump is a different beast altogether, and I certainly would have no idea how to deal with him; obviously, different tactics have been used from, playing along with his whims, to pushing back and drawing a line. Nothing has worked so far, he just gets more outrageous, reckless and impossible to deal with. Pedro Sanchez is a very skilled politician who has managed to navigate the tightest of political margins in Spain ; Catalunya was in open rebellion a few years ago and is now relatively calm, Vox ( the Spanish Reform Party) were on the rise and he’s managed to slow that momentum down, he’s also overseen a very successful economy and has managed to introduce a sense of humanity into the discussion surrounding immigrants. Asshole is definitely not an accurate description of him.The issue with NATO and Europe countries spending goes in part to the heart of the problem; eastern countries see Russia as a massive threat and want proportionate spending, this is not the case for Southern countries where immigration is a huge issue. This division in priorities needs to be sorted out.I think Sanchez made the decision re US planes using their airspace in the best interest of Spain, why would he jeopardise the security of his nation by going along with an illegal attack?I don’t think this article displays an understanding of the current situation under Trump.I hope Europe has the wherewithal to figure out how best to deal with current and future threats that does not rely on the US.

Gerry Boyce ● 12h

NATO is a defence alliance - an attack on one is an attack on all. It does not initiate wars on countries. Trump forgets that the only time the NATO mutual defence alliance was triggered was when the 9/11 attack took place on the World Trade Centre, New York City, and George W Bush wanted assistance. 

Michael Ixer ● 12h

NO!I would like to ask our resident pearl-clutcher and all the the other TDS-afflicted members currently pee’ing their pants with feverish derision of Trump, what should have been done to stop Iran’s evil slaughter of 30.000+ of its habitants; and to prevent the completion of a nuclear weapons program which started in the 1980’s ie the AMAD Project. So, who would/should have taken a stand against the evil fanatical Ayatollahs?  NATO?  The mythical European army? Well they’ve all had 40+ years to do something but  nothing, nada, naught  zilch!  Well done to Trump for taking it on and shame on Starmer and the EU for cowering on the sidelines.

Sue Hammond ● 12h

In 2015 the Iranians agreed not to enrich uranium beyond 3,6% . They are clearly in breach of the agreement with President Obama.

Steven Rose ● 12h

Perhaps Trump is looking at his usual metrics of US gas prices, stock market indices, etc and getting worried? His MAGA vase might be forgiving but not many people with pensions, and most of the US where there's no public transport. These Christian Nationalist have invaded Venezuela, and have eyed up Greenland and Canada. I guess as they control the most powerful army in the world they're not considered terrorists, but similarly we don't consider the Russian attack on Ukraine as being terrorism, do we, it's an illegal war?Iran still has its uranium, without a US ground force to seize it they'll keep it, won't they? Trump cancelled the Obama talks so we don't know how they would have concluded. It would seem the strike last year stopped the nuclear weapons development as there's been no attempt to use the uranium.Who next, North Korea, who probably have a realistic chance of developing a nuclear weapon and missile to reach part of the US?Obviously, much of this is speculation ...

Michael Ixer ● 13h

1) I don’t think Trump is ‘unhinged’. His threat to destroy Iranian infrastructure is designed to bully the Iranians into opening the Straits of Hormuz as well as extorting other concessions. According to the BBC News site, there is now frantic diplomacy taking place, which suggests to me that the Iranians are taking his threats seriously.2) The threat from Iran is not ‘non-existent’ though it may not be imminent. Given that Iran has stockpiled over 400 kilos of uranium purified to 60%, amassed hundreds if not thousands of missiles and drones, armed terrorist groups  and states that it wishes to ‘wipe Israel off the map’, I think the world and Israel in particular has every right to take the threat seriously. Does anyone believe that the world should wait until the Iranian regime has produced all the weapons it needs to achieve its aims? If not, what should be done? More negotiations? What have negotiations achieved since the Obama deal in  2015?3) I don’t think the world is threatened by ‘white Christian nationalists’ right now. Are Christians responsible for the terror plots which now take up most of MI5’s time? The threat comes from militant Islamists.

Steven Rose ● 13h

This is an interesting article.  Continue beyond the title please.  It is an interview by the i with Mark Montgomery, a retired vice-admiral.https://inews.co.uk/news/world/trump-leave-nato-unless-european-leaders-stop-being-aholes-4335182

Ivonne Holliday ● 14h

The problem is Vance and a majority of Trump’s appointed cabinet would need to instigate section 4 of the 25th  Amendment. The VP becomes acting President. The "disabled" President can challenge the move, and a two thirds majority of Congress is necessary to ratify the VP as President ...

Michael Ixer ● 16h

I suppose the problem I have with guys like JD Vance, Hegseth, Trump and, to a lesser extent, Rubio, is that I don't even believe that they believe the nonsense they come out with; it all seems like performative stuff for the gallery.Hegseth's claim to be a religious fundamentalist is about as credible as any of the TV Preacher's who are found in motel rooms shagging their assistants and claiming their private jets are necessary tools to spread the Lord's message!By the way, his broker tried to make an enormous investment in defence funds just prior to the Iran attack! That's the real Hegseth, the rest is just nonsense for his base.Someone said once 'follow the money'; I think it as simple as that with these guys. They're not particularly complex individuals, just utter dicks out to enrich themselves.

Gerry Boyce ● 16h

I agree, Richard, he is totally unhinged - completely lost it.  His post on his beloved Truth Social was as unbelievable as it was shocking.  And to finish it Praise be to Allah is shameful.  The man has shown in his latests statements that he is not fit to be a president.I also wish somebody would invoke the 25th Amendment - soon please!

Ivonne Holliday ● 17h

However, J D Vance claiming UFOs and  aliens are demons isn't very encouraging should anything happen to Trump (there were reports he'd been hospitalised but I think that was disinformation)https://www.unilad.com/news/us-news/avi-loeb-responds-jd-vance-claims-aliens-demons-759579-20260405https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/article/white-house-denies-viral-rumors-trump-was-hospitalized-at-walter-reed-180849977.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALh74KUrA0I88y1_eebDg3oR_iiD_bF3tO8ZrJiNUMkvAexSFAE2-KfRZSF5wOnjFGqKVclEViyKWw9H7Vo6MxCEozEP-jXPBaTltk0XYdmQSPK5C_5JwCdp-bGyetadN9zTvdVqMPezicA3wICx3wCgmvRvz4t7Sl3Vrud6EuRZ

Michael Ixer ● 17h

Congress has a Republican majority and many of the federal courts, where Trump has appointed judges, are supporting his MAGA initiatives but I think there's some concern that he's not working within his original remit. I've seen unverified reports that Vance was against the war with Iran, and he's certainly been quiet recently? Of course, unlike the positions appointed by Trump, Bondi & Noem, Trump is stuck with Vance as the Vice President is elected by the American people. It will be interesting to see if Congress and the courts start pushing back on Trump's orders ... "Birthright" will be a good test.The religions extremism is concerning - apparently the rescue mission of the two air men is an "Easter Miracle" - surely a well managed execution of military planning, albeit several expensive aircraft in the process (perhaps that's why Trump is annoyed?) - and why his reference to Allah in his Truth Social post?Sounds like he's stressed out. Let's hope Pakistan (and Egypt & Turkey?) can bring some sanity to the region ...

Michael Ixer ● 17h

It definitely speaks volumes about Trump when even Marjorie Taylor concludes that he has lost the plot.In fairness to her though, she has been very consistent with her ‘American First’ line; whereas Trump is literally all over the place. What is really concerning is the complete failure of any state institution to limit Donald’s insanity; what may have been excused as his recklessness is now the US’s ; it is a failed state; no system, no structure and no ability to curtail a rogue leader. They own it as much as him.I hope Europe wake up and realise this is not an Issue which ‘revert to normal’ when this presidency is over, it runs much deeper than that.

Gerry Boyce ● 18h

Even Marjorie Taylor Greene thinks he has gone mad and the 25th amendment should be invoked. I never thought I would ever agree with a thing that woman said!

Jonathan Callaway ● 19h

I think his outburst has shocked a lot of people who worry there’s nobody around him to control his wilder impulses. I have read that Pakistan has prepared new ceasefire terms that might at least get the warring parties back round the table. Let’s hope so. This war of choice is costing European and Asian economies billions and they are seemingly unable to influence any of the combatants. What is also very worrying is the growing influence of the white Christian nationalists, who are essentially religious fundamentalists (such as Hegseth and any number of Bible Belt tele-evangelists) and see this war as a form of religious crusade. Fundamentalists and extremists of any religion are impossible to bargain with, so utterly convinced are they of the justness of their cause.

Jonathan Callaway ● 19h

An interesting outburst, and he seemed to be so pleased about the rescue of the two airmail who bailed out over Iran (and that was an amazing exercise, I doubt whether Hesgeth or Trump had much to do with that, just experienced military planners). Worrying that Hesgeth has sacked some of his senior commanders; did they give him some honest feedback on some of his plans?One can only assume Trump's upset because he's miscalculated and underestimated Iran's military and government capabilities? It's an appalling regime but seems to be tightly controlled and, of course, Iran's scientists and technicians are well educated.I find a certain irony in that at the same time as Trump's outbursts Artemis II is heading for the far side of the moon. Or,  as Pink Floyd erroneously called it, the Dark Side of the moon. His irrational outburst made me think of Brain Damage from that album ...https://genius.com/Pink-floyd-brain-damage-lyrics

Michael Ixer ● 20h