Posted on 09/23/2026 12:44:58 PM PDT by Miami Rebel
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told a local television news station in Shreveport, Louisiana, this week that President Donald Trump needs to bring the war in Iran “to a resolution.”
“It’s been a priority and an objective of every administration, for nearly 50 years, to ensure that Iran didn’t have a nuclear capability. Now that’s done. Operation Epic Fury was an epic success,” Johnson said dutifully, later adding:
The world is safer because of it. But now we’ve got to bring that to a resolution. And the Strait of Hormuz not being open affects commerce. It directly affects gas prices and fuel prices. And also you know the price of groceries, for example, because they got to be transported, and the higher fuel prices are a factor in that as well.
Now, all that said, we acknowledge it. We got a lot of work to do. I think as soon as the Strait of Hormuz is reopened, and I think we’re entering a new phase of that very soon, then the president’s right. Gas prices come back down.
Punchbowl’s Jake Sherman, who first reported on the comments, noted of the speaker’s remarks, “This is in line with what other Republicans are saying that it’s time for the Iran war to end.” Congressional Republicans are facing growing indications from pollsters of a possible November wipeout as high gas prices and the soaring cost of living turn voters toward the Democrats.
Johnson has previously broken with the president on the war and urged him to “wrap it up.”
“And I know this administration is working around the clock to resolve that in a way so they don’t suffer any more troop losses. This is a great tragedy — it shouldn’t happen. But it is a very important objective, one that I believe we’ve achieved, to ensure that the largest state sponsor of terrorism does not have a nuclear weapon. That would be a disaster for everybody, and everybody around the world understands that,” Johnson said in a July presser, adding, “Now we’ve got to wrap it up.”
A cease fire, not a full victory against the commies. We should have nuked China when they began sending their soldiers over to murder, mutilate and capture U.S. soldiers. Instead, we ended up with a negotiated cease fire agreement that didn't even bring home all our MIA from that war either.
“Trump would rather get wiped out in the midterms than allow Iran to have nuclear weapons they would use on us.”
************
If we accept the premise that Iran having nuclear weapons is an existential and intolerable threat then why waste time with MOU’s, frameworks for future negotiations, unofficial back channel talks, dubious mediators, and attempts at deals which everyone knows will never be honored by the Iranians? Iran sees any sign of hesitance or delays as weakness, and the more time they get the more trouble they create. Serious threats deserve a commensurate response and the resolve to finish what we started. Had this been a short and decisive war, the political fallout have been minimized IMO. In fact, Trump would probably have been heralded for winning one of the shortest wars in history.
Either that or they're responding to their constituents who, based on polling, are telling them that this war is a really stupid idea.
You answered your question right up front.
I think you’d have a hard time making the case that even a warmongering psychopath like Lindsey Graham — let alone Donald Trump — ever really believed either premise you’ve presented here.
These people aren't stupid. They know when President Trump has lost the room, and they can read polls even if they can't read anything else.
The US HAS already won. It just takes time and direction for all the “win pieces” to fall into place. Stop the forward action into that groove, and you’ve “snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.” That’s where this expression comes from.
My previous statement came from the observation that the Republicans’ perennial fear keeps them from a willingness to go as far as necessary for the process to be complete.
But let’s look at your reference. IMO, President Trump is like General George Washington in that famous portrayal of the latter’s crossing the Delaware: standing tall and strong, with eyes straight ahead. Trump is more determined than Iran, and will never quit. I’m certain of this because Trump fights for the good of mankind.
Additionally, there’s what a very feeble Mike Johnson says, and then there’s what a bullet hitting an ear says. When a man realizes that he’s still alive after the bullet has spoken, he gets a really big perspective of good and evil, and the part he must play - at that point, Johnson’s message rates only a shrug and a dispassionate “Who’s he?”
Sign something and get it over with, it’s time to get commerce in the energy markets moving in the right direction.
It was a huge military gamble with our middle east buddy and now it’s time to “cut bait.”
You give a strong reason to continue the “response” against Iran. I change my mind about a pause. I think Trump should make his case with a televised statement (even though the major networks will boycott). At least that broadcast will be seen by Iran and create a strong reaction.
I hope when Trump meets with Xi, this week, he gives strong words about their hand in aiding the Iranians.
“The justifications presented to the American public for the war in Iran were not the same military objectives we were briefed on today in the House Armed Services Committee. “
when I first read this quote a few months ago I didn’t give it any credence. She’s talking about two different things...justifications and objectives.
It still doesn’t make sense.
Mike Johnson did not say what your headline suggests he said.
Your demonrat “news” “source” Mediaite that you are in love with “because F Trump!” is once again, garbage.
Why don’t you find a nice progressive forum to expel your diseased snot in?
For now:
* Just get out and vote.
* Trust the Faith.
* And say theme Lord’s Prayer.
The “article” “directly” “quoted” Johnson.
Do you know what a “headline” is, “progressive” “ass for brains”?
1. Justifications are absolutely essential when you have to deal with political constraints in an elected government.
2. You'd think "justifications" and "objectives" should be directly related to each other -- no?
3. It's even worse when you look at this from the standpoint of objectives, as this administration has been either incoherent, unrealistic and/or all over the map on those.
Sure, and they have been degraded at what point and time in the last 50 years?
Johnson is a wimpy POS. Republicans deserve to lose.
...and they are going to...
...and they are going to...
The only way you can end a war before it’s done ...is to surrender.
I know this. You know this.
would you be happier over at Duhhhmocrat Underground?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.