Category: Ended Wars

Trump falsely claims he ended several wars, which did not exist or he had no part in.

Trump Bizarrely Claims Credit For Ending 1/4 of a War on Fox

During a Fox News interview Thursday night, President Trump claimed credit for ending “eight and a quarter” wars, adding a fractional war to his repeated assertions of peace-brokering accomplishments. Trump attributed the quarter-war credit to Thailand and Cambodia “going at it again,” contradicting his claim of having stopped conflicts entirely. His statements came in response to discussion of María Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize recipient who recently offered to give her award to Trump for “liberating” Venezuela.

Trump has routinely inflated his war-ending record on social media and in public appearances, variously claiming to have ended 8, 9, or 10 wars without factual support. Fact-checkers have repeatedly debunked these assertions, yet Trump continues to invoke the falsehood as evidence of his diplomatic achievements and as grounds for his own Nobel Prize candidacy. His willingness to revise the number mid-interview—from “eight” to “eight and a quarter”—demonstrates the malleable nature of his claims.

Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize for her activism against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s regime and dedicated the honor to Trump during her acceptance. Trump publicly justified the U.S. invasion of Venezuela by stating the operation would secure control over Venezuelan oil reserves. When asked by Hannity whether he would meet with Machado and accept her prize, Trump expressed willingness but pivoted to amplifying his unsubstantiated war-ending claims instead of addressing her political situation or offering concrete support.

The interview highlights Trump’s pattern of manufacturing achievements through rhetorical inflation and repetition rather than documented accomplishment. By presenting fractional credit for unresolved conflicts as proof of peace-brokering success, Trump conflates aspiration with outcome while avoiding accountability for conflicts that persist. His eagerness to accept recognition he has not earned reflects his consistent approach to self-aggrandizement across foreign policy matters.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/tv/trump-bizarrely-claims-credit-for-ending-1-4-of-a-war-in-falsehood-riddled-rant-on-fox-news/)

Trump Rages For 2 Solid Minutes On Nobel Peace Prize

President Trump spent two minutes ranting about not receiving a Nobel Peace Prize during a Friday photo opportunity with oil executives, then claimed he does not care about the award. Unprompted, Trump mentioned an upcoming meeting with Nobel Peace Prize recipient María Corina Machado and suggested she might be “involved in some aspect” of Venezuelan governance, contradicting his recent public criticism of her.

Trump alleged that Norway is “embarrassed” by the Nobel committee’s decision and claimed he has settled eight major wars, some spanning decades, without nuclear weapons. He stated that he settled wars including India-Pakistan tensions, asserting that “nobody else settled wars” and that he deserved the prize more than any person in history.

Trump contrasted his record with former President Barack Obama’s 1-prize, claiming Obama “had no idea why” he received it, “didn’t do anything,” and was “a bad president.” Trump stated Obama received the award “almost immediately upon attaining office,” implying the selection was unwarranted. He insisted that war prevention should automatically qualify recipients for Nobel recognition.

Trump concluded his tirade by stating “I don’t care about that,” pivoting to claims that he has “saved tens of millions of lives” and citing Pakistan’s Prime Minister for publicly crediting him with preventing 10 million deaths in a potential India-Pakistan conflict. His statements contradicted his evident preoccupation with the award, which he has repeatedly lobbied for through unsubstantiated claims about ending wars.

Trump’s assertions about settling multiple major wars have been repeatedly debunked. His pattern of publicly expressing indifference to the Nobel Prize while simultaneously delivering extended grievances about being denied it demonstrates a disconnect between stated and actual priorities.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-rages-for-two-solid-minutes-on-nobel-prize-then-says-but-i-dont-care-about-that/)

Trump takes credit for India-Pakistan ceasefire

Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that the United States had brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan on May 10, 2025, claiming the nuclear-armed neighbors agreed to a “full and immediate” halt to fighting. This announcement contradicted Vice President JD Vance’s statement just days earlier that the conflict was “fundamentally, none of our business.” The ceasefire followed a terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 people, subsequent Indian airstrikes, and Pakistani claims of shooting down five Indian jets—assertions Indian officials denied but which CNN evidence suggested were partially accurate.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that he and Vance had pressured both India and Pakistan’s political and military leadership to agree to the ceasefire before escalation worsened. The announcement came just hours after India struck Pakistani military bases, prompting a Pakistani retaliation with rockets, artillery, and drone strikes across Indian territory. India downplayed the US role in negotiations, insisting the neighbors had worked “directly” together on the truce, while Pakistan credited American involvement—conflicting accounts that underscore disagreement over who deserves credit for the deal.

Trump framed the ceasefire as a diplomatic victory comparable to deals he hoped to broker in other conflicts, particularly the Ukraine-Russia war ongoing for nearly three and a half years. The intense India-Pakistan fighting lasted only three and a half days before the ceasefire, allowing Trump to claim rapid success in foreign policy mediation. However, neither India nor Pakistan had strategic incentive to continue the escalating conflict, meaning Trump’s administration was “pushing on an open door” rather than achieving a breakthrough requiring diplomatic skill.

Violations of the ceasefire emerged within hours, with reports of explosions in Indian-administered Kashmir and allegations of ongoing cross-border attacks. The immediate truce violations demonstrate the fragility of the agreement and its susceptibility to collapse under continued tensions. Trump’s claims of ending the war contradicted his own indecision and lack of concrete information on the matter, as reflected in his characterization of the situation as merely “settled” rather than resolved.

The ceasefire agreement fails to address the fundamental dispute over Kashmir’s status—a Muslim-majority region claimed by both India and Pakistan with an active separatist movement—meaning the underlying grievance driving decades of conflict remains entirely unresolved. Without resolution of Kashmir’s political status, the current ceasefire represents a temporary pause rather than lasting peace, and confrontation over the territory is likely to resurface with renewed intensity.

(Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/05/10/india/analysis-us-role-india-pakistan-ceasefire-latam-intl)