President Trump vs. Nigerian Muslim Extremists

The titular conflict is a good example of how what's relayed in the mainstream media between the two hemispheres - or let's say between the First World and the Third World - isn't always an accurate or holistic understanding of what's happening on the ground.  A blunter way of putting it, from the outside looking in, is that the American public tends to take a defensive, politically-correct stance when choosing sides in emotionally-charged, consequential debates.  And this is despite the fact that they may only have a cursory understanding of the matter at hand, without knowing or particularly caring for facts outside of their immediate observation.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

No matter what part of the world you live in, people have opinions, and how we feel about certain subjects doesn't always agree.  But why it tends to matter more when it comes to Americans is due to the way they dominate the (international) media.  Furthermore, public opinion stateside can and sometimes does influence the actions of the all-powerful US military. 

IMPERIALISM NOT ALWAYS AS SIMPLE AS IT SEEMS

For the most part, the American public appeared to be against US President Donald Trump's decision to bomb Nigerian jihadists.  They immediately - and understandably - interpreted it as an act of imperial aggression or meddling in others' affairs.  These days, the American public isn't as uninformed as it used to be.  The internet is here, and we are more aware of the actions and motives the US government has historically operated by.

Back in my younger days, I was also a victim of that type of thinking, that all acts of American intervention are motivated by bullying and greed.  And sure, no one wants to, say, bomb another country without getting something out of it.

But I was fortunate enough to attend a really good school, one that attracted a lot of top-notch speakers.  So once, there was this older White guy who came to give a speech.  He was a retired, high-ranking member of the US government and furthermore someone involved in military affairs.  That was many years ago, so unfortunately I can't remember his name.  But there he was, at the podium, talking about one of those Middle Eastern conflicts the US military was involved in at the time, back during the 1990s.

Everyone in the audience was just nodding and going along with what he was saying.  But I, being young, Black and revolutionary-minded, wasn't having it.  I was going to ask the hard questions.  I was an anthropology major and therefore aware, even before the advent of the internet, that the US government often intervened for its own nefarious purposes.  So against the vibe of the room, I stood up and questioned dude, 'why did the US go and bomb that (Middle Eastern) country to begin with?'

The speaker's swift, agitated response was "because they asked us to!"  The "us", as inferred, would be common citizens of said country, who were being exploited or abused by the regime that was in place.  And the way he said it, "they" probably included the majority of the population.

Other members in the audience, including one of my friends, then proceeded to give me the evil eye, like I was out to intentionally stir things up.  After receiving that answer, as well as all of those cold stares, I decided to just remain silent.  First of all, the speaker knew way more about what was going on then I did.  Secondly, all things considered there was no logial reason for me not to believe he was telling the truth, that people in those wartorn countries actually long for help from Uncle Sam.

THE AMERICAN PUBLIC HATES TRUMP (AND CHRISTIANS?)

So what I first noticed when news dropped that Trump considering military intervention against "ISIS" - i.e. Islamic militants - in Nigeria, in the name of defending the country's Christians, is that the American media, such as Drudge Report, started highlighting opinions against the idea.  Part of this, I would presume, is due to the strong anti-Trump sentiment present in the mainstream.  Americans are more or less against any decision he makes.

There's also the popular 'leave people to handle their own affairs' argument when it comes to international politics, even while folks are out there getting killed.  That stance is sort of hypocritical coming from Americans, as they remain unable to grasp that their nation's prosperity is largely built on, most simply put, military intervention.

Also - dare I say it - there doesn't really appear to be a lot of sympathy for Christians out there.  And this is despite the USA being ideologically Christian at its foundations.

So actually being in Africa and having a number of Nigerian friends, I decided to ask some of them how they felt about the matter.   Almost unanimously, the response I got was that they welcomed Trump's military intervention against Boko Haram - the most infamous Islamic military group in Nigeria - and related organizations.

TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BOKO HARAM

I'm no expert on the history of Islamic militancy in Nigeria.  But my understanding of the situation, from the news besides interacting from Nigerians, is Boko Haram in fact being a violent, fundamentalist Islamic group, one that regularly makes international headlines due to its terrorist actions.

Even though the news focuses more on the religious aspect, that kinda beef in Nigeria seems to be more territorial.  The worst beefs, i.e. wars, are always over land.

Meanwhile, Nigeria is unfortunately a country with a bloody modern history related to such conflicts.  Furthermore, those in the know would contend that Boko Haram is able to survive and thrive due to some level of its acceptance by the Nigerian government.

I recently befriended a member of the Nigerian army member who was previously tasked with fighting Boko Haram.  And I can tell you from his account that yes, shit is definitely real.  Put otherwise, it doesn't appear that Boko Haram is going away anytime soon, not through the sole efforts of the Nigerian and neighboring governments.

Religious zealots tend to be violent people in general.  So with some of these ultra-aggressive Muslims, I don't think it's so much about keeping the Quran.  Most practitioners of Islam don't seem interested in hurting people or forcing others to adhere to their beliefs.  But Islam does appear to be more tolerant of violent zealotry in general.

IMPERIALISM GUISED AS HUMANITARIANISM?

If a conqueror's goal is material or monetary, it's not like they're just going to come out and say it.  There rather has to be some loftier reason presented to the public - an aspiration more universal and acceptable, that transcends physical gain. 

So we have critics of Trump's threats against Nigeria arguing that, if the U.S. does intervene, it will undoubtedly use the opportunity to stretch its foothold in Nigeria.  That has been America's modus operandi.  In a perfect world, superman defends the weak to no benefit of his own.  In the real world, if an army decides to raid a territory for whatever reason, they want to walk away with some type of spoil or gain.

But contending that the US should not get involved simply because of its history of imperialism is not a fair argument, especially towards people whose survival may depend on such intervention.  That's something that I began to understand from that aforementioned speaker.

AMERICANS AGAINST TRUMP INTERVENING IN NIGERIA

So radical-minded Americans, which is pretty much the mainstream these days, would believe that Trump doesn't really care about Nigeria, that he's rather using this opportunity to buttress American interests.  So then you have a celebrity like Nicki Minaj supporting his position - and subsequently getting dissed for it.  And it appears that some major media outlets are actualy in tune with her opponents.

But while all of this is going on in the land of vanity, there are undoubtedly people Nigeria praying that the US military actually does show up.  Their own government can't stop the violence.

As for Americans opposing Trump's idea, their thinking is more or less hypocritical when it comes to law enforcement.  As a resident of the Third World, you're not likely to have access to ubiquitous, immediate presence of law enforcement.  You have Americans who, if they see a stranger in their yard, instantly go and call the police.  Meanwhile you have people in another part of the world being massacred, no one able to effectively come to their defense, and it's like 'let them handle their own business'.  The same type of Americans you see protesting against the government, if someone breaks into their home will likey call the police, i.e. government employees, to come to their defense.

I know this isn't a perfect argument that I'm making.  I know that there's also Christians in Nigeria catching Muslim bodies.  And ideally, no one wants another country, especially one with a methodology like the United States, threatening military action in the name of settling domestic disputes.

But the fact of the matter is that many Nigerians have been longing for a Western leader like Trump to get invovled.  Even sometimes when I personally read the news pertaining to what's happening in Nigeria, I just want to killing, kidnappings and disorder to stop, regardless of who puts it to an end to it.

TRUMP BOMBS NIGERIA

Trump did proceed to bomb Nigeria, on Christmas Day, 2025.  And the Donald being who he is, he followed up by bragging about it on social media.

A US missile being launched against "ISIS" in Nigeria on 25 December 2025.

According to inside reports, no one was killed in the missile attack.  But maybe the jihadists did get the message.  I don't recall reading of any Nigerian massacres transpiring since , though undoubtedly issues persist.  If nothing else, the US let Boko Haram and others know that they could be touched at any time.

A scene from the Nigerian village of Jabo, which fell victim to the US strike.

In the aftermath of the bombing, it doesn't appear that the US is trying to extend its neocolonial presence in Nigeria.  But let's just say in general that, in the grand scheme of things, it illustrated AFRICOM's intimidating reach within the Motherland.

Meanwhile, Trump more notably continues to intervene in Venezuela.  That particular scenario appears very much like American imperialism.  Or it goes to show that, even if Trump is geniunely interested in defending Nigerian Christians, in other parts of the world the US military is also being used for commercial purposes.

CONCLUSION

I don't want to end this post by speaking for or against President Trump, because putting the focus on him detracts from the main argument.  The mainstream American media is in many ways out of touch with reality.  It is more ideological than it is practical.  And the way they deal with Trump, as outlandish as he may be sometimes, has become more like an attack on the messenger rather than the message.