- BIST10010,969-1.76%
- USD49.79+0.05%
- EUR55.52-0.41%
- GOLD3,977.50-1.34%
- INTEREST36.00%-1.00
- BITCOIN77,215-0.74%
- October 30, 202613°
- BIST10010,969-1.76%
- USD49.79+0.05%
- EUR55.52-0.41%
- GOLD3,977.50-1.34%
- INTEREST36.00%-1.00
- BITCOIN77,215-0.74%
- October 30, 202613°
U.S. citizens in New York oppose possible Trump attack on Iran
Some U.S. citizens speaking in New York opposed plans for President Trump to attack Iran again after the November 3 midterm elections. Participants said such a move would not solve the United States’ security and economic problems and could raise oil prices and consumer costs.
Some U.S. citizens speaking in New York criticized plans for President Trump to attack Iran again after the midterm elections scheduled for November 3. Participants argued that a new attack would not solve problems related to U.S. security and the economy.
Jamie Baeuir, a New York resident who said attacks on Iran and the U.S. military presence in the region were wrong, said U.S. troops should withdraw from the region. Baeuir said there was no right to bomb another country and kill its citizens.
Baeuir said the attacks against Iran in the early months of the year had caused major economic turmoil and opposed the possibility of launching a new attack after the congressional elections. Saying that Palestinians continued to face attacks despite the ceasefire in Gaza, Baeuir described condemning civilians to hunger and preventing them from accessing medical care as inhumane.
Baeuir said he was of Jewish descent and opposed Zionism, adding that the actions of the United States and Israel had made everyone, including Americans, Israelis, Palestinians and Iranians, less safe.
New attack would not improve security
Robert Queenquest, a retired U.S. citizen, described the war launched against Iran as a “terrible mistake.” He argued that a new attack on Iran would not make the world safer but would instead make it a worse place.
Queenquest said the world was on the brink of a nuclear catastrophe and that the United States, Russia and Israel possessed nuclear weapons. He said the consequences of an escalation could not be predicted in advance.
Sandy, a U.S. citizen, criticized President Trump’s foreign policy. Claiming that Trump was cooperating with Netanyahu to escalate the war against Iran, Sandy said the policy was harming the United States and that tensions had also spread to Europe.
Sandy also claimed that Trump was waiting for the midterm elections so oil prices would not rise further before the vote and planned to attack Iran afterward. Arguing that this was absurd, Sandy claimed the aim was to prevent a post-attack price increase from affecting the election results.
Economic cost of war highlighted
Barry Gooser, a New York resident, said the initial attack campaign against Iran had placed a major burden on the U.S. economy. Gooser argued that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should be removed from office and claimed that the military had gone out of control.
Gooser described planning a new attack after the congressional elections as “a very terrible thing” and said people would pay more for oil, natural gas and fertilizer. Saying that the war was driving the United States toward bankruptcy and angering consumers, Gooser argued that fighting Iran was unnecessary.
Gooser claimed that the war was Netanyahu’s war and that Trump had been persuaded to support it.
Linda, a U.S. citizen, said she had voted early in the midterm elections. Saying she did not believe gasoline prices would fall, Linda claimed that Trump was benefiting from the current situation.
Recalling that Trump had promised to stop wars during his election campaign, Linda said conflicts had turned into an endless cycle in which one side responds to the other side’s attack.
Courin, a New Yorker, argued that U.S. attacks on Iran were harming the country’s economy. Courin said Trump did not want the war to escalate further just days before the elections, but that the process had so far brought no benefit to the country and would not do so in the future.
Another New York resident, who did not disclose their name, also reacted to the possible plan for a new attack. Claiming that wars can be used to divert public attention from other issues and achieve different aims, the person criticized the Trump administration.
Stay Updated with Ally Daily
Subscribe to be informed about special news, developments and announcements. We will keep you informed.
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy
