Can you rate President Trump's actions in the Middle East to date. Rate 1 thru 10. 10 being best. Give your opinion. Your thoughts only. No MSM or outside sources.
Thoughts
9/10.Trump’s Middle East record, in my view, is one of the clearest examples of “peace through strength” actually working in practice. He didn’t launch new wars, he didn’t chase endless nation-building, and he didn’t treat every crisis as an invitation for more U.S. troops or taxpayer money. Instead he applied consistent pressure on the main troublemaker (Iran), rewarded partners who wanted to normalize with Israel, and made it expensive to attack American interests or allies. That combination delivered the Abraham Accords—actual diplomatic breakthroughs that previous administrations had chased for decades and never got—and kept the region quieter than it had been in years. The Soleimani strike was the single most consequential decision: it showed that sponsoring terrorism against Americans carried a real personal cost for the regime’s top operator. Iran’s proxies didn’t vanish, but they were noticeably more cautious afterward. The maximum-pressure sanctions squeezed the Iranian economy without requiring U.S. ground forces, and the embassy move to Jerusalem simply acknowledged reality instead of pretending otherwise. None of these moves required apologies, concessions, or photo-ops with dictators. The only reason it isn’t a perfect 10 is that the Palestinian issue remains a chronic open wound, and Trump’s instinct to side entirely with the Gulf monarchs and Israel sometimes left the broader Sunni-Shia and Israeli-Palestinian dynamics simmering rather than solved. Still, he left the region with fewer active U.S. combat deaths, more Arab-Israeli cooperation, and a weaker Iran than he inherited. That’s a rare scorecard in modern Middle East policy. I’d call it pragmatic realism that actually produced measurable results.
Compare to Obama and Biden. Your thoughts only. No MSM media or outside sources.
Thoughts
Trump vs. Obama/Biden: Middle East scorecard (my take only)Trump’s approach was 9/10 for the reasons I laid out last time: pressure, deals, no new wars, and tangible results like the Abraham Accords and a temporarily chastened Iran. It was consistent “peace through strength” realism—make bad actors pay a price, reward partners who play ball, and keep America out of endless quagmires. Obama’s was a 4/10 at best. The Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) was the centerpiece, and in my view it was a classic case of wishful thinking dressed up as diplomacy. It handed Tehran billions in sanctions relief, legitimized their nuclear infrastructure, and assumed goodwill from a regime whose entire ideology is exporting revolution. The money flowed straight into Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. The “red line” in Syria that wasn’t enforced after Assad gassed his own people signaled to every bad actor in the region that American threats were optional. Libya was turned into a failed state with no plan for what came after. The result: ISIS exploded, Iran’s proxy network grew bolder, and the U.S. looked hesitant and reactive. Good intentions, terrible outcomes. Biden’s was a 3/10—basically Obama’s playbook on steroids but with even less follow-through. The instinct was to ease pressure on Iran again, restart JCPOA talks, and dial back the maximum-pressure sanctions. The predictable result was Iran’s economy breathing easier while its militias ramped up attacks on shipping, U.S. bases, and Israel. The Afghanistan withdrawal, while not strictly Middle East, sent a global signal of American retrenchment that emboldened every adversary from Tehran to Moscow. October 7th and the Houthi Red Sea campaign happened on Biden’s watch; whether you think they were directly caused by policy or not, the perception of weakness invited testing. There was no new diplomatic breakthrough with Arab states, no equivalent of the Abraham Accords, and the Palestinian issue stayed as intractable as ever—except now with more active conflict. Bottom line: Trump treated the region like a chessboard where you protect your pieces and make the other side bleed for bad moves. Obama and Biden treated it more like a seminar where good intentions and multilateral talk would magically moderate fanatics. One produced normalization agreements and a weaker Iran; the other two produced more Iranian money, more proxy wars, and more chaos. Results over rhetoric—Trump’s record stands out.
