The only reason is because we are politically smart enough not to call them "wars" any more. He's personally responsible for the wholesale slaughter of people in Yemen - something Biden said he'd put an end to.
'lghh did not say Trump was involved in starting the war in Yemen. And yet he is still responsible for a lot that has happened in Yemen, both through directly through U.S. actions and indirectly through U.S. support of Saudi operations.
The Saudi military is using American bombs dropped by American planes flown by pilots trained by Americans and serviced by American mechanics. U.S. Congress has attempted to reduce American involvement by blocking arms deals and invoking the War Powers Resolution, but Trump has bypassed or vetoed those attempts. He's a big fan of selling arms to the Saudis because he has said those sales create "over a million jobs" in America.
> limited comparison of officially declared US actions supports the understanding that US military strikes in Yemen increased precipitously in the first year of the Trump presidency
> The Trump administration informed congressional committees that it will go ahead with 22 military sales to the Saudis, United Arab Emirates and Jordan, infuriating lawmakers by circumventing a long-standing precedent for congressional review of major weapons sales.
> Members of Congress had been blocking sales of offensive military equipment to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for months, angry about the huge civilian toll from their air campaign in Yemen
it isn't really politics though. the term war has legal meaning that will invoke actions and rulings from treatied allies and the UN. if you call it a war, the world gets involved, if you call it a strategic campaign, every gets the option to turn. their heads and not get involved if they so choose
More importantly, since we’re talking about the United States, the President can’t actually start wars. Congress declares war. So mincing words about whether the President has technically started a “war” is vacuous. No President ever has.
Given that context it’s easy to understand that people using the term War in the modern day to discuss the actions of a US President are not referring to the technical meaning of the term.
This. The 2008 collapse converted large populations of young, rural and urban middle-class people into wage slaves, while both the Bush and Obama administrations printed money to prop up the financial institutions whose behavior caused the collapse. This propped up the stock market nicely, which kept retireees happy, but inflated away any assets and wage growth younger people might have seen.
The real trick, though, was the MSM and social media using bubbles and doubletalk to convince those angry un-/under-employed urban and rural folks that they should blame each other.
From that, you got the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street and (the angry seeds of) the alt-right and the populist left.
