Two friends claimed Trump has quelled 7 or 8 wars already and thus deserves the peace prize.

From what I read he's lying.

He may have quelled the Hamas/Israel war, which is tentative.

He certainly didn't quell the Ukraine / Russia, war especially on day one.

https://bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3599gx4qo

How many wars has President Trump really ended?
20 August 2025

Jake Horton & Nick Beake BBC Verify

Also, Trump hasn't quelled the domestic war on "the enemy within".

BTW, Trump's desire for the Peace Prize is about his legacy and because Obama got the prize. IOW, his ego is jealous.

=========================================================

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/...d-israel-nobel-prize

Oct 10, 2025

Here are the "8 wars" Trump says he deserves a Nobel Prize for ending


=========================================================

https://www.google.com/search?...Duzzc&csuir=1&atvm=2

Here are the "8 wars" trump says he deserves a Nobel Prize for ending:

During his second term, Donald Trump has claimed to have ended "8 wars" and suggested he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his diplomatic efforts. However, his level of involvement and the nature of the conflicts are disputed, and independent fact-checkers question the accuracy of his claims.

The eight conflicts he has cited as examples of his peace-making are:

Israel and Hamas: Citing a ceasefire deal struck in October 2025, Trump claimed this was his eighth ended war. While his administration helped broker the deal, it came after a two-year conflict, and it is unclear whether a lasting peace will be achieved.

Israel and Iran: Trump's claim refers to a ceasefire reached in June 2025 following a period of hostilities initiated by Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Pakistan and India: A four-day period of cross-border aerial conflict occurred in May 2025. The Pakistani government credits Trump for a ceasefire, but India denies he played a role.

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): In June 2025, a ceasefire was brokered between the two countries, which Trump claims credit for. The deal is considered fragile, but is holding for now.

Thailand and Cambodia: A border clash lasted for five days in July 2025. While Trump's diplomatic calls were involved in the eventual ceasefire, the deal also involved mediation by the Malaysian prime minister and Chinese officials.

Armenia and Azerbaijan: Trump oversaw a peace agreement between the two countries at the White House in August 2025.

Serbia and Kosovo: In his first term, Trump oversaw a 2020 deal between these two countries. While tensions remain, there has not been a full-blown war since.

Egypt and Ethiopia: Though relations have been tense over a hydroelectric dam, Egypt and Ethiopia were not engaged in an active war when Trump made his claim.

The controversy surrounding his claims:

Overstated achievements: Some of the conflicts were short-lived, while others, like the situation between Egypt and Ethiopia, were tensions rather than active wars.

Disputed credit: In several cases, multiple mediators or external factors contributed to the de-escalation, and Trump's exact role is debated by the involved parties.

Comparison to Obama: Trump's pursuit of the prize is frequently framed in opposition to former President Barack Obama's 2009 win, which Trump has long criticized.

================================================================

Trump's war on "the enemy within":

As President, Donald Trump has used the term "enemy within" to describe domestic groups and political opponents, suggesting the use of federal and military force against them. Critics argue this rhetoric is authoritarian and a dangerous escalation of political language.

Trump's rhetoric and actions on the "enemy within"

October 2025 speech to military leaders: Trump told top U.S. military commanders that he would use the military to fight "the enemy within," specifically citing Democratic-run cities as training grounds for federal forces. He stated that undocumented immigrants were among these enemies, claiming the country was under "invasion from within". Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also gave a speech focusing on a new military direction under a "Department of War," signaling a shift toward domestic security.

Political opponent designation: In October 2024, during his campaign, Trump repeatedly referred to his political rivals, including Vice President Kamala Harris, as "the enemy from within". He told Fox News he believed the "enemy from within" was a greater threat to the U.S. than foreign adversaries like Russia or China.

Targeting of critics and dissenters:
NSPM-7: In September 2025, Trump issued National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7), "Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence". Critics, including the ACLU, allege this is being used to target political opponents, including nonprofit and activist groups.

Targeted prosecutions: Since his second term began, Trump has used the Justice Department to intensify his campaign against perceived enemies, with some of his former critics facing indictment.

Revoking security clearances: In January 2025, the Trump administration took swift action to enact retribution against political rivals and former officials by revoking security clearances.

Legal and constitutional challenges:

Posse Comitatus Act: Trump's plan to deploy the military within the U.S. has been widely criticized by legal scholars, who note it would violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the use of federal military forces for domestic law enforcement.

Judicial resistance: Federal judges have pushed back against the Trump administration's arguments, with one judge describing the effort as an attempt to "creat[e] a national police force with the president as its chief".

Historical context:

Echoes of McCarthyism: Some historians and commentators compare Trump's use of "enemy within" rhetoric to Senator Joseph McCarthy's claims in the 1950s that communists had infiltrated the U.S. government.

Authoritarian tactics: Other critics view Trump's language and actions as following an "authoritarian playbook," pointing to his threats against rivals and the use of state power for political vengeance.

=====================================================================

https://www.google.com/search?...j5SUQ&csuir=1&atvm=2

Trump's secret domestic terrorist list:

Recent reporting indicates that the Trump administration has been developing classified lists of groups and individuals considered domestic terrorists, drawing criticism from elected officials and civil liberties groups. The effort follows an executive order and a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7) issued in late September 2025.

Executive Order and National Security Memorandum:

On September 22, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order purporting to designate "Antifa" as a "domestic terrorist organization". This was followed on September 25 by NSPM-7, titled "Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence".

Key provisions of NSPM-7 include:
Broad criteria: It defines domestic terrorism using vague and broad labels that critics say could include constitutionally protected speech and beliefs. These labels include "anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity," as well as "extremism on migration, race, and gender".

Creation of lists: The memorandum directs the attorney general to recommend groups and entities for designation as domestic terrorist organizations. It also authorizes law enforcement and intelligence agencies to create secret lists of these groups.

Targeting of donors: The memo has prompted concerns that individuals and organizations that provide financial support to left-leaning groups could be investigated.

Controversy and criticism:

The administration's actions have drawn significant concern and pushback:

Due process concerns: Unlike the process for designating foreign terrorist organizations, no legal or judicial review process exists for domestic designations. Critics argue that the secret lists, undefined significance, and lack of oversight violate due process rights and set a dangerous precedent.

First Amendment issues: Civil liberties organizations, including the ACLU, argue that the broad criteria for defining domestic terrorism risk criminalizing First Amendment-protected beliefs, associations, and speech based on ideology rather than criminal conduct.

** Congressional alarm:** Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin raised concerns in Congress, calling the secret list "unprecedented" and comparing it to an "authoritarian playbook".

Lack of legal authority: Legal experts note that the president lacks the statutory or constitutional authority to legally designate domestic groups as "terrorist organizations," and the designation carries no legal effect.

Disputed intelligence: Some administration claims have been questioned by the intelligence community. For instance, intelligence assessments contradicted the administration's assertion that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was controlled by the Maduro government.

WHO IS THE REAL ENEMY WITHIN?

https://www.google.com/search?...gHRg&sclient=gws-wiz

AI Overview

In October 2025, the Pentagon implemented new rules that significantly restrict press access and prompted dozens of reporters from major news outlets to surrender their credentials in protest. The controversial policy requires journalists to agree to strict new limitations and threatens to revoke credentials for those who seek or publish unauthorized information, even if unclassified.

New rules and restrictions
The changes, implemented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, impose several new limitations on reporters, including:

Soliciting unauthorized information: The revised policy states that soliciting "sensitive" information from Defense Department personnel that has not been approved for release "may weigh in the consideration of whether you pose a security or safety risk".

Punishment for publication: Journalists who publish information that has not been authorized for public release can have their press passes revoked.

Escorted access: Reporters are now banned from much of the Pentagon without an official escort, even in previously accessible unclassified areas.

Relocation of workspaces: The press corps is being moved from their permanent, dedicated workspaces to an undisclosed location within the building.

Badge requirement: Hegseth stated that "press must wear visible badge" and "press no longer roams free".

News media reaction and response

The new rules have been widely rejected by major news organizations across the political spectrum, who view them as an attack on the First Amendment and journalistic independence.

Major walkout: In mid-October 2025, dozens of reporters collectively turned in their Pentagon access badges and vacated their offices.

Refusal to sign: Prominent outlets that have refused to sign the new policy include:

Broadcast networks: All five major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, and PBS)

National newspapers: The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post

Wire services: The Associated Press and Reuters

Other outlets: CNN, The Atlantic, NPR, The Guardian, and Politico

Outlet that signed: At least one outlet, the conservative cable network One America News (OAN), has agreed to the new terms.

Media statements: News organizations and press associations have condemned the policy, stating it is designed to intimidate sources and stifle a free press.

Administration's justification:

In defending the new regulations, the Pentagon cites security concerns, though critics argue the changes are intended to impede scrutiny of the administration.

"Common-sense guidelines": Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell referred to the new policy as "common-sense guidelines to protect sensitive information".

Protecting national security: The Pentagon maintains that the policy is necessary for "the national security of this country" and protects classified information.

Credential is a "privilege": Secretary Hegseth stated that "Pentagon access is a privilege, not a right".

7 of them were probably fights among Whitehouse staff.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Two friends claimed Trump has quelled 7 or 8 wars already and thus deserves the peace prize.

From what I read he's lying.

He may have quelled the Hamas/Israel war, which is tentative.

He certainly didn't quell the Ukraine / Russia, war especially on day one.

https://bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3599gx4qo

How many wars has President Trump really ended?
20 August 2025

Jake Horton & Nick Beake BBC Verify

Lying? trump?!? You must be joking.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
7 of them were probably fights among Whitehouse staff.

Female staff.....

Was this before or after “fixing” the economy.