Come early March 2025, the White House—once again Trump’s turf—was in a frenzy to flex some presidential muscle. After years of Biden’s failed attempts at calming the chaos in the Middle East, Trump figured it was time to strike. The Houthis, who’d practically locked down the Red Sea with a naval chokehold, were tailor-made villains: militarily manageable, politically photogenic.
Enter Operation Rough Rider—a no-nonsense, smash-and-dash campaign personally greenlit by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The mission? Break the Houthis’ back in a month. The White House wanted a “quick win” war: precision strikes, zero American coffins, CNN and Fox News lighting up with footage of blown-up rebel depots, and most importantly—safe shipping lanes back under U.S. control.
But the CIA waved a red flag early: the Houthis weren’t just scrappy insurgents—they were die-hard ideologues, riding high on Tehran’s backing. Trump wasn’t fazed. National Security Council insiders say he shrugged it off with a line straight from the Trumpian playbook: “It’s Libya 2011, but without Hillary. We go in, bomb the crap out of ’em, and leave. Simple.”
At first, Team Trump looked tight. Hegseth, CENTCOM chief Gen. Michael Kurilla, and new Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Cain were in sync. But that harmony cracked fast. The Houthis didn’t fold. They fought back—with the kind of ferocity no one saw coming.
A War by Mistake
From March 15 to April 15, U.S. warplanes dropped over 1,100 bombs on Houthi targets. CENTCOM claimed major “logistics degradation.” But on the ground? The Houthis kept shooting. They swatted down MQ-9 Reapers like flies. Their missiles kept flying toward commercial vessels. The USS Harry S. Truman itself took fire—twice.
Then came the “oops” moments. Two F/A-18s literally “slid off” the carrier deck due to crew screw-ups. One pilot later told NBC off the record: “Nobody knew what the hell we were doing there. Felt more like a grudge match than a war with a mission.”
Things spiraled. Gen. Kurilla pushed for escalation—boots on the ground, leveraging Saudi and Yemeni allies. Hegseth nodded but was also cutting backdoor deals. Then came the leak: The Intercept scored Signal app messages between top brass. Boom. Panic in the West Wing. That’s when someone muttered the now-infamous phrase: “This campaign has lost operational discipline.”
Cue Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy. He roped in Oman—the go-to backchannel for U.S.-Iran talks. A senior State Department official summed it up: “The Omanis dropped a smooth exit on the table: You stop the airstrikes, they stop firing. And if they don’t—well, that’s their PR problem, not yours.”
Inside Trump’s war room, cracks widened. Gen. Dan Cain sounded the alarm: “This mess is bleeding us dry while China’s eyeing Taiwan. We’re chasing ghosts in someone else’s backyard.” He found unlikely backup in DNI Tulsi Gabbard, who’d fast become a breakout power player in the Trumpverse.
Even Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who’d been on the fence, changed his tune after a Houthi rocket slammed into Israel’s Eilat port. “We’ve lost the narrative. If someone’s handing us a way out—we better take it.”
Losing, Trump Style
April 28 was the tipping point. A Super Hornet slipped off a carrier deck. Three crew members got banged up. Hours later, a U.S. missile hit a Houthi-run migrant center, killing over 40 civilians—including women and kids. Global uproar followed.
On May 4, another Houthi missile pierced Israeli missile defense and exploded near Ben Gurion Airport. Panic hit Tel Aviv. The Israelis wanted action. But America? Flat-out drained.
May 6 sealed it. Yet another F/A-18 took a nosedive into the drink. That day, Trump reportedly told aides: “Enough. We won. I’ll decide when and how to say it.”
And he did—on May 7, from the White House podium: “We hit them hard. They won’t mess with us again. We respect their bravery. And we’re done.”
Privately, the administration called it a “victory on cue”—a win crafted with spin, not strategy. Witkoff, insiders say, got a personal thank-you from Trump for “finding the door without looking weak.”
But less than two days later, the Houthis lit up social media: “America ran. Yemen stood tall. The empire is crumbling.”
Trump’s “we won” declaration was less a strategic masterstroke than a forced retreat in a press-conference package. It was vintage Trump: don’t win—look like you won.
Stateside, reactions split down predictable lines. Fox News rolled out the red carpet. MSNBC went ballistic. The Pentagon stayed silent. Congress? Another circus: Democrats called it “a disaster dressed as a success,” Republicans praised “adaptive leadership.”
In Yemen, people danced in the streets. In Iran, smiles all around. In Israel, anxiety. In Beijing? Cold, calculated silence—they were watching the world’s top military waste ammo it might need in a Taiwan showdown.
This war will go down in the books as a case study in losing the big game but spinning it for the cameras. And that, right there, is the Trump doctrine in a nutshell: don’t win—headline the win.
The Muscat Backchannel, Saudi Double-Dealing, and the War-as-Marketing Machine
When a group of U.S. officials quietly landed in Oman on April 28 under the banner of a “humanitarian mission,” no one in the press caught wind of what was actually unfolding behind closed doors in a guesthouse in Muscat. What played out there may go down as one of 2025’s strangest and most telling diplomatic episodes.
On one side of the room: Steve Witkoff, Trump’s handpicked Middle East fixer, a businessman-turned-envoy who’d elbowed out Foggy Bottom’s career diplomats. On the other: two negotiators from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, traveling on diplomatic passports, with direct authorization from the office of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Oman remains the region’s rare go-between—maintaining open channels with both Washington and Tehran. Back in 2019, Trump had already tried using the Muscat track to court Iran. Now, the pipeline was back in business. A Pentagon official summed it up bluntly: “We didn’t go there for peace. We went waving the white flag—to find a way out.”
Tehran’s message was simple and brutal: Stop the airstrikes, and the Houthis will hold their fire—at least when it comes to American targets. But Israeli targets? Fair game. And the U.S. was told to stay out of it. If it interfered, the deal was off.
Messy as hell, but from the White House’s perspective? Good enough. Officially, there were “no negotiations” with Iran. But by May 3, according to a leaked intel report, the CIA had already drafted a classified brief titled: “Houthi Commitments via Muscat Channel.”
The Saudi Factor: Playing Both Sides
Saudi Arabia’s role in Trump’s “peace with spin” strategy was textbook hedging. On one hand, Riyadh quietly backed the U.S. bombing campaign, hoping it’d bleed the Houthis dry. On the other? Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) wanted no part of an actual ground war.
At a critical moment, MbS shot down a U.S. proposal to form a joint coalition for ground operations against the Houthis. A U.S. intel source was blunt: “MbS wasn’t about to repeat his 2015 mistake. He told us straight—‘This is your war, not mine.’”
But the Saudis weren’t sitting idle. Instead, they launched their own info-op through friendly media. Networks like Al Arabiya and Al-Hadath aired “expert commentary” that framed the end of U.S. airstrikes not as a “victory,” but as a de-escalation—one that distanced Saudi Arabia from a failing U.S. mission while keeping the door open for further normalization with Iran.
Meanwhile, Qatar got busy too. Doha reactivated its intel link with the Houthis—an asset built quietly in 2021. According to German intel service BND, it was the Qataris who first tipped off Washington that the Houthis might accept a “limited rollback” if Oman mediated.
Victory as a Marketing Campaign
The whole “we won” narrative? It was cooked up by political consultants—not generals.
Trump’s campaign operation started scripting the ending as far back as mid-April, once it became clear the war was going nowhere. Narrative control was handed to Susie Wiles—Trump’s top messaging guru—who took over the optics game.
At her direction, Fox News began airing pre-packaged segments showcasing bombed-out Houthi facilities before the operation had even ended. Think tanks like the Heritage Foundation published glowing write-ups: “Trump does what Biden never dared.”
Vice President J.D. Vance went on a media blitz, calling Trump’s actions “strategic courage.” He drove the point home: “Trump defends America’s interests—but won’t spill American blood for allies too afraid to fight.” A not-so-subtle jab at Israel.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio doubled down on the “calculated restraint” spin: “America’s writing the rules again—without forcing them on anyone.”
And Tulsi Gabbard, now a quiet powerhouse in the intelligence community, played moral referee: “Hard power isn’t always the answer. Sometimes victory means knowing when to exit without burning the future.”
Peace or a Powder Keg on Pause?
On paper, it looks like a textbook win. The campaign ended, American troops never touched the ground, and the story got wrapped with a tidy “mission accomplished” bow.
But beneath the surface:
- The Houthis feel emboldened. They’ve shifted to hitting Israeli targets, with no fear of U.S. reprisal.
- Israel is furious. To them, Washington blinked—and Tehran noticed.
- The Saudis distanced themselves just in time, hedging between D.C. and Tehran.
- China’s watching every ammo dump the U.S. burns through—especially with Taiwan heating up.
But the real kicker is the precedent. Trump showed he’s willing to launch and abandon military operations at lightning speed—not for victory, but for narrative control.
It signals a shift in how America thinks about war: less strategy, more campaign strategy. And while Republicans tee up stump speeches about how “Trump brought peace without losing a war,” defense officials are quietly asking: If the next war’s with China—what then?
“A Loyal Ally?” — Israel’s Response to Trump’s ‘Victory’ Over the Houthis
May 5, 2025. A ballistic missile fired from the outskirts of Sana’a slips through Israel’s layered missile defense and detonates near Ben Gurion Airport. The blast hits a warehouse district—no casualties, but the media fallout? Explosive.
Tel Aviv is in a full-blown panic. This isn’t just a scare—it’s a statement. And the message aimed straight at Washington is chillingly clear:
You left. They came.
Capitol Hill in Panic, Jerusalem Seething
Inside the Israel-U.S. Meltdown After Trump’s “Victory” Declaration
The moment that Houthi missile slammed near Ben Gurion Airport, Tel Aviv flipped into crisis mode. Within hours, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened an emergency meeting of the National Security Council. According to sources cited by Haaretz, the outcome was swift and severe: Israel would suspend intelligence sharing with the U.S. on Yemen-related threats and pull its missile defense delegation from Washington. That team had been scheduled to hammer out a joint Red Sea missile shield strategy.
Then came the political firebomb. Behind closed doors, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant gave a blistering off-the-record briefing to Israeli journalists:
“The American administration walked away when we were at our most vulnerable. The Houthis aren’t defeated. They’re emboldened. Trump didn’t beat them—he legitimized them.”
Meanwhile, Israeli military intelligence (AMAN) sent a classified memo to the Pentagon warning that the Houthis were already using the so-called ceasefire window to beef up their long-range strike capability—including missiles laced with Iranian-made components.
In response, U.S. officials begged Tel Aviv to “dial down the rhetoric” and not blow up the precarious diplomatic framework negotiated through Muscat. But behind the scenes, the message from the Israelis was clear: You abandoned us.
Live TV Detonation
Things exploded publicly on May 9 when CNN hosted a prime-time roundtable and former Israeli UN Ambassador Danny Danon lit the fuse.
“Trump’s decision,” he declared bluntly, “was a gift-wrapped victory for Iran—delivered by the hands of American diplomacy.”
The segment detonated like a political IED—sending shockwaves even through the Republican ranks. Hawks like Sen. Lindsey Graham reportedly began pushing for a Congressional probe into the roles of Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
But the administration didn’t flinch. Internal memos obtained by Axios show the White House holding the line:
“Our alliance with Israel is vital—but it cannot dictate the tempo of operations that directly impact domestic presidential approval.”
That quote, pulled from a high-level National Security Council meeting, signaled a tectonic shift in America’s strategic posture: Trump would no longer act as Israel’s blank check if it meant losing control of the media narrative or his personal brand.
Unspoken Questions: Betrayal or Evolution?
For Israel, the rupture felt like an earthquake. Not since 1973 had the Jewish state seen Washington so publicly step away at a moment when Israel’s national security was on the line.
Hebrew-language outlets didn’t hold back—some calling it a “symbolic Suez,” referencing the 1956 crisis when President Eisenhower forced Israel to withdraw from Sinai. Only now, the roles were reversed: America had blinked first, leaving Israel holding the bag.
Israeli military brass isn’t waiting around. IAF Chief Tomer Bar has reportedly greenlit independent strike planning on Houthi positions—no U.S. involvement, no coordination. The operation, codenamed Haifa-3, would target Houthi air defenses and missile launchers with stealth F-35s under drone cover.
But even among D.C. warhawks, alarm bells are ringing. If Israel moves solo, retaliation is all but certain. Eilat, Dimona, maybe even Haifa could be hit in return. And when that happens? Washington won’t have a choice.
It’ll be dragged back in—not to win, but to settle the score. And this time, it’ll come with a tab.
The Global Message
Trump’s Yemen Exit Redefines Victory—and Sends Shockwaves Through U.S. Alliances
Trump’s decision to pull the plug on the Yemen campaign—brushing aside Israeli outrage in the process—was more than a foreign policy maneuver. It was a broadcast to the world’s capitals: The United States is no longer your security guarantor. It’s a self-interested operator, managing its own wins.
And the ripple effect was immediate:
– In Seoul, debates reignited over whether South Korea should fast-track its own nuclear weapons program.
– In Warsaw, defense officials began pushing for an accelerated European missile shield—designed explicitly without relying on the U.S.
– In Taipei, anxiety is peaking. One question hangs heavy in the air: If China fires missiles tomorrow, who’s going to “declare victory” without even entering the fight?
This isn’t Cold War doctrine. It’s Trump’s doctrine. And it’s spreading.
At a closed-door donor event at Mar-a-Lago on May 10, the former—and current—President reportedly summed up his approach with a grin:
“I wrapped up the Yemen thing—no boots, no mess. They’re still fighting? Let ’em. What matters is: we won. And nobody’s got the guts to say otherwise.”
And in that line lies the raw essence of the moment.
Victory, in this era, isn’t about crushing the enemy or planting flags.
It’s not measured in ground held or weapons destroyed.
It’s measured in headlines.
In talking points.
In who controls the closing scene.
And today—despite the battered carriers, downed drones, diplomatic fallout in Jerusalem, and champagne popping in Sana’a—only one voice is calling the end of this war.
Donald J. Trump.