The assertion that Donald Trump has brought an end to multiple wars, often cited as six or seven, is a claim that requires careful examination within the broader context of international relations and US foreign policy. While the Trump administration did initiate withdrawals of troops from certain regions and pursued diplomatic pathways aimed at de-escalation, the nature of these actions and their outcomes is complex. For instance, efforts were made to reduce US military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and new peace accords, such as the Abraham Accords in the Middle East, were brokered. However, critics argue that “stopping a war” is a definitive term that might not fully capture the nuanced reality of shifting troop deployments, ongoing conflicts, or the redefinition of military engagements rather than their outright cessation. The long-standing conflicts often involve multiple actors and deep-seated issues, making a complete and unilateral end challenging to achieve from the perspective of a single US administration. Assessments vary on whether these actions truly constituted the cessation of hostilities or merely a change in the US’s direct involvement or strategic approach.
On a separate but equally significant domestic front, questions have frequently arisen regarding the US president’s authority to unilaterally eliminate or significantly alter the system of postal voting across America. Throughout his tenure, Donald Trump expressed strong skepticism about the security and integrity of mail-in ballots, often suggesting widespread fraud and advocating for in-person voting. However, the legal and operational framework for elections in the United States is largely decentralized and governed by individual states, not the federal government. States establish their own voting rules, including provisions for absentee and mail-in ballots, with many states having long-standing practices of universal mail-in voting or widespread absentee options. The power to “get rid of” postal voting nationwide would require a sweeping federal legislative act, an amendment to the Constitution, or a series of coordinated actions by individual states, none of which can be dictated by a presidential executive order alone. Any attempt by a president to bypass state authority or existing federal laws on voting would face significant legal challenges and likely be deemed unconstitutional, underscoring the limits of presidential power in the realm of electoral administration.
