Joe Kent, a former National Counterterrorism Center director, is publicly pushing President Trump to pull U.S. troops out of the Middle East, praising the president’s recent decision to call off strikes and arguing military presence only invites a dangerous escalation. Kent says withdrawal plus smart diplomacy and targeted sanctions relief could reopen the Strait of Hormuz without dragging America into a long war. Trump’s public posts back the pause and promise a deal that would include reopening Hormuz and ending Iran’s nuclear threat, while Tehran publicly pushes back. The debate over force versus restraint is heating up again as officials and media trade competing claims.
Joe Kent, who resigned from the National Counterterrorism Center earlier this year over the Iran conflict, has kept up his calls for a U.S. military exit from the region. He argues the president made the right decision by calling off strikes and that keeping troops in place only increases the chance of a catastrophic escalation. Kent insists the Strait of Hormuz cannot be secured by force without sparking a prolonged war, and that reality should shape policy. He frames withdrawal not as retreat but as avoiding an unwinnable, bloody cycle.
“President Trump again called off strikes on Iran—this is a good decision. It is clear that he wants out of this war, for all the obvious reasons. It is also clear that Iran will not simply return the SOH [Strait of Hormuz] to how it was before the war. We need to accept that we can’t use military force to open the SOH (we’ve tried that) without a catastrophic escalation into a bloody, years-long war,” Kent .
https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/2083919214973181978
“Now is the time for President Trump to pull our troops out of the region. He can declare victory (reiterate the previously stated goal—no nukes—was met) & quietly use the carrot of sanctions relief to open the SOH once our troops are out of harm’s way. If we stay, we risk accelerating an escalation/retaliation cycle we can’t control,” he added. Kent presses for a straightforward, risk-averse plan that pairs withdrawal with leverage rather than more boots on the ground. His pitch is simple: remove the trigger for wider war while keeping diplomatic tools ready.
EX-COUNTERTERRORISM OFFICIAL JOE KENT CONTINUES CALLING FOR US MILITARY WITHDRAWAL FROM MIDDLE EAST
Kent’s stance reflects a broader conservative appetite for reducing America’s direct combat footprint overseas while protecting core security interests. He argues that the mission—preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon—can be declared met publicly and enforced through sanctions, monitoring, and diplomatic pressure. That approach appeals to voters tired of open-ended commitments and costly deployments. For Republicans who favor tough consequences without endless nation building, Kent’s argument lands clean.
President Trump signaled the pause publicly, writing that the U.S. would hold off on attacks while negotiators work to finalize terms that include opening the Hormuz Strait and ending Iran’s nuclear threat. “The U.S.A. is locked and loaded and ready to go against the Islamic Republic of Iran, at levels of Military Terror, Strength, and Power not seen since World War II. Despite this, we have just been asked by Iran, and other Middle Eastern Countries, to hold off any attack in that the perimeters of a deal has been agreed to. This would include the Immediate, Complete, and Total OPENING OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT, and an end to Iran’s nuclear threat,” Trump wrote.
“Based on this request, I have agreed, for the future benefit of the WORLD and, likewise, the survival of a successful and prosperous Iran, to cancel the attack, subject to being able to rapidly make a DEAL. The Country of Israel joins me in this commitment. Get to work, everybody, and get it DONE. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” he added. That mixture of pressure and willingness to strike a deal is classic Trump directness, signaling readiness for force paired with a clear incentive to negotiate. Supporters see it as calibrated leverage.
Iran’s media pushed back, with Tehran characterizing the president’s claims as “simply a new lie,” a label that reflects Tehran’s instinct to deny concessions or requests even when they might exist. Those denials make the situation murkier and feed the debate over whether a negotiated opening of Hormuz is genuine or a public relations ploy. For Republicans, Tehran’s reflexive denials reinforce the case for keeping leverage while avoiding ground troops that could get America stuck in another long fight.
While speaking to the press aboard Air Force One on Sunday, Trump, referring to negotiations, said, “It begins tomorrow afternoon.”
The bottom line from Kent and like-minded conservatives is insistence on a policy that reduces risk and preserves U.S. strength. Pulling troops back, keeping sanctions in place, and using the threat of force sparingly is presented as the clear pragmatic path. The back-and-forth with Tehran will continue, and the president’s next moves will be watched closely by both hawks and restraint-minded Republicans.
Darnell Thompkins is a Canadian-born American and conservative opinion writer who brings a unique perspective to political and cultural discussions. Passionate about traditional values and individual freedoms, Darnell’s commentary reflects his commitment to fostering meaningful dialogue. When he’s not writing, he enjoys watching hockey and celebrating the sport that connects his Canadian roots with his American journey.