Trump humiliated as tiny crowd braves drizzle for his $75M military birthday flop

The turnout for the military parade celebrating Trump’s birthday has been described as ‘sparse’ by some, with many left mocking the President online

President Donald Trump’s Military parade in Washington DC, The USA army’s 250th anniversary that just happens to coincide with his 79th birthday . (Image: Humphrey Nemar )

President Donald Trump faced ridicule on social media when fewer people than expected appeared for his military birthday parade this past Saturday.

‌

Despite being a high-profile event on his birthday, the attendance was low, sparking online commentaries mocking the president especially given the event’s steep $75 million price tag.

Article continues below

Near the Washington Monument in D.C. the crowd looked sparse beneath a light drizzle during Trump’s highly-anticipated salute to the 250th anniversary of the US military.

Article continues below

President Donald Trump’s Military parade in Washington DC, The USA army’s 250th anniversary that just happens to coincide with his 79th birthday

Reddit users didn’t miss the opportunity to mock the turnout. “There were thousands more at our No Kings protest in Springfield MO today. LOL.,” scoffed a user.

Others criticized the production quality and cost. “The canned crowd sounds… the sponsors…the crappy mix engineer. Kind of hilarious, in waste of my tax money kind of way,” quipped another Redditor.

‌

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a policy expert, also chimed in, comparing the turnout unfavorably to other large Washington Mall events he’s attended.

Starting half an hour early because of rain, the parade’s schedule was further disrupted as the day went on with worsening weather affecting various planned elements like flyovers.

Despite the clear issues, President Trump couldn’t help but smile from his seat as a parade of troops and tanks rolled down Constitution Avenue. The spectacle is believed to have cost around $75 million, not including potential road damage caused by the heavy armored tanks.

‌

U.S. Bell UH-1 “Heuy” Iroquois helicopters perform a flyover during an event to honor the Army’s 250th anniversary, coinciding with President Donald Trump’s 79th birthday, Saturday, June 14, 2025, in Washington. (Image: AP )

However, the US Army stands ready to foot the bill for any damages, which could range anywhere from $3 to $16 million.

The parade showcased numerous US soldiers donned in historically accurate uniforms representing various wars the US has participated in, such as the Revolutionary War and World War II.

Article continues below

As the sun rises above Jerusalem this morning, Israelis will be waking to the news that America has joined their war and attacked Iran. It will be met with mixed feelings.

While the new day brings a comfort in US military support there will also be deep trepidation that this war has entered a dangerous and potentially uncontrollable phase.

Benjamin Netanyahu released a video statement praising the US president and saying peace comes through strength; Donald Trump addressed the American nation and warned Iran he would not hesitate to order further action if it retaliates.

What happens next is largely in Iran’s control. What they choose to do, will determine the future of this region.

The question is now not whether they will respond, but how?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player 1:45 Sirens are heard as Sky’s Alistair Bunkall reports from Jerusalem

Iran has faced a humiliating pounding from Israeli jets over nine days and now suffered massive attacks on their celebrated nuclear facilities by a country they call “The Great Satan”; there will be a feeling of national humiliation and anger, and the government will need to show its people it remains strong.

Developing a nuclear programme has taken many decades and comes at vast cost: billions and billions of dollars and heavy international sanctions. That all now lies in tatters. How does the government explain that to its people, many of whom have suffered at the expense of these grand ambitions and are opposed to the draconian leadership they live under?

Image: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. File pic: WANA/Reuters

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is often described as the world’s longest-serving dictator. He hasn’t survived by being reckless but even though the US strikes weren’t aimed at regime change, Khamanei’s future is now more precarious than ever.

The government rhetoric and state television channels will promise fire and victory, but the reality isn’t simple.

There will be voices close to the Supreme Leader, especially in the Revolutionary Guard, encouraging a strong response. The moderates will likely urge caution, wary of dragging the US into a wider, more sustained conflict that Iran couldn’t win.

Spreaker Spreaker , which may be using cookies and other technologies. To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies. You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once. You can change your settings at any time via the This content is provided by, which may be using cookies and other technologies. To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies. You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enablecookies or to allow those cookies just once. You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies. To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only. Enable Cookies Allow Cookies Once

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

It’s unclear how much more Iran can throw at Israel. Ballistic missiles have been fired at the country every day since the war began, but in decreasing numbers as Israel has systematically targeted launch sites and stockpiles.

Iran’s proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, are severely degraded and the Assad regime in Syria is no more. This was all supposed to be the first line of defence, a deterrence against an Israel attack. That shield has collapsed.

The Houthis remain defiant but their firepower is limited.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player 1:44 ‘US strikes won’t end Iran’s nuclear programme’

Read more:

What we know about Iran’s secretive ‘nuclear mountain’

Analysis: If Israel breaks Iran it will end up owning the chaos

The US attacks were against Iran’s nuclear sites, not senior Iranian officials. Strikes on US bases in the region would therefore be the most logical ‘like-for-like’ response.

If they choose to widen the conflict, Iran could now target oil facilities in the Gulf or try to close off the globally important Strait of Hormuz. Either of those options would have international consequences.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player 2:48 How could Iran retaliate to US strike?

Shia militia in Iraq could be hard to control if they decide to act unilaterally. Iraqi security forces have reportedly surrounded the US Embassy in Baghdad in anticipation of violence.

There is a possibility Iran could do something smaller and symbolic as a way of saving face, having the final word and giving the region an off-ramp. That will be the hope in Washington.

Follow The World Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday Tap to follow

But even in that best-case scenario, it will surely have to be something more than a token response; Iran is reeling, severely weakened internally and externally. If they escalate, they risk a severe US response that could be a death blow.

If they capitulate, the government faces major domestic dissent and reputational damage from which it might never recover.

For the Supreme Leader this morning, there are no good choices.

World / Donald Trump Is Hurtling America Into a Catastrophic Middle Eastern War The president is fickle, feckless, and easily swayed—which makes him an easy mark for militarists.

An excavator removes debris from a residential building that was destroyed in an attack by Israel in Tehran, on June 13, 2025. (Majid Saeedi / Getty Images)

In the both the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections, Donald Trump cynically but effectively adopted the mantle of the anti-war candidate, accusing his rivals of a dangerous commitment to a policy of regime-change wars that threatened to usher in a new era of wars—and perhaps World War III. In October 2024, he specifically rejected the idea of regime change in Iran, saying, “We can’t get totally involved in all that. We can’t run ourselves, let’s face it.” In his Inaugural address in January, Trump promised to be a “a peacemaker” who would “stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent, and totally unpredictable.” In a major foreign policy address in Saudi Arabia in May, Trump reiterated his oft-repeated critique of “Western interventionalists [sic]” and “neocons” who have tried to remake the Middle East in America’s image.

As I’ve repeatedly argued, while Trump’s words are a salutary rejection of the hubris of the bipartisan foreign policy elite, there’s little in Trump’s record to show that he knows how to redirect American foreign policy toward a more peaceful direction. Quite the reverse is true: Trump’s own limitations as a leader—his fickleness, lack of deep commitments, and desire to placate different factions in his political coalition—make him an easy prey to militarists who want to push for new conflicts. The current outbreak of hostilities against Iran initiated by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a clear case in point.

Trump gave the green light to Israel’s attack on Iran, which started on Friday. These attacks have led to open salivation by Netanyahu and leading congressional Republicans such as Ted Cruz at the prospect of regime change in Iran. They have derailed, as they were intended to do, Trump’s ongoing push for a nuclear deal with Iran. They also threaten to drag the United States into an escalating Middle Eastern war—something Trump has repeatedly promised to avoid.

Why did Trump give the go-ahead to a policy that clearly undermines his stated objective of being a peacemaker in the Middle East and securing a new nuclear deal with Iran? The truth is that Trump’s commitment to a noninterventionist foreign policy was always compromised by conflicting impulses. Trump wants to be seen as a dealmaker—but he also wants to be seen as a tough guy. While he has bested the neoconservative faction to become the Republican standard-bearer, foreign-policy hawks remain a powerful constituency within the GOP and Trump himself is deeply indebted to pro-Israel hawks such as Miriam Adelson, who reportedly donated more than $100 million to the Trump campaign. During his first term, Trump repeatedly sidelined his own stated anti-interventionist positions to embrace hawkish advisers who advocated open competition with China, withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal signed by Barack Obama, keeping troops in Syria, greater military spending, and arming Ukraine against Russia.

Trump has a weak character, easily swayed by pressure from powerful forces. This can be seen in his flip-flopping policies on trade (where dips in the stock market have led to rapid policy shifts) as well as the Russia/Ukraine war. Trump’s fickleness has led to the growing popularity of the phrase TACO (“Trump Always Chickens Out”).

In a characteristic bit of misdirection, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, who is a pro-Israel hawk, used the TACO smear to argue that Trump would be too soft on Iran. On June 2, Schumer warned that “TACO Trump” might be “folding” to Iran by making side deals. This was the exact opposite of what actually was happening. Precisely because the pro-Israel lobby is so powerful—and because Trump likes to take the path of least resistance—he was an easy mark for Netanyahu’s hawkish persuasion.

Netanyahu seems to have made the case to Trump that an Israeli bombing campaign would create an incentive for Iran to sign a nuclear deal. But this argument is belied by Netanyahu’s own appetite for regime change in Iran, as well as threats by Israeli politicians that they will “burn” Tehran and “turn it into Beirut.” Further, the bombing will only make Iran more resistant to negotiations and indeed seems to be making the idea of acquiring nuclear weapons more popular in Iran. The fact that Israel killed a leading Iranian arms negotiator, Ali Shamkhani, further makes clear that this war is designed to sabotage negotiations—not aid them.

Curtis Mills, executive director of The American Conservative, persuasively portrays Israel’s war as a successful undermining of Trump’s foreign policy agenda:

Just remains astonishing Israel assassinated Iran’s lead nuclear negotiator / adviser / consigliere to Khamenei. Trump posted videos of this man twice in recent weeks, with him underscoring Iran’s desire for a deal. Which is and was a key Trump admin goal. An utter humiliation—by an ally—of a presidential initiative. Credibility-eroding and could sunder Trump’s ability to effectively secure deals on immigration and trade around the world, and also handle Russia. One gets how this is Netanyahu first. America first?

Trita Parsi, vice president of the Quincy Institute, notes that Netanyahu is not satisfied with getting the green light for attacking Iran. While Israel made an impressive early strike, Iran is regrouping and has launched a counterattack. What was sold as a quick and easy war now threatens to become a quagmire, especially since Israel does not have the military means on its own of stopping or significantly slowing down Iran’s nuclear policy. Which is why Netanyahu is now returning to his long-held goal of getting the United States to fight Iran on behalf of Israel.

As Parsi writes:

Unsurprisingly, Israeli officials and their allies in Washington—including groups like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies—have begun lobbying President Trump to bring the U.S. into the war and to join them in offensive strikes. For Trump, this must be a serious letdown. Aware of his reluctance to launch another Middle East war, the Netanyahu government had recalibrated its approach when it pressed Trump earlier in January: rather than urging the U.S. to strike Iran directly, it sought a green light for Israel to act. Through an intense lobbying campaign, Israel appears to have secured at least tacit approval from Trump for this campaign. Just 24 hours into its war of choice with Iran, Israel was already back in Washington, knocking on Trump’s door with new demands. What began as “Give us the green light and Israel will bomb Iran for America” quickly shifted to “Hurry up, America, and bomb Iran for Israel!”

So far, Trump has resisted Netanyahu’s more outrageous demands, such as killing Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. While his position as a negotiator has been undermined, he could still turn off the spigot of arms to Israel and end the catastrophic rush to a regional war. But, alas, there’s little in Trump’s record to indicate he has the strength of character to do this. In the end, TACO Trump always chickens out—especially when he is being pressured by the militarists who dominate Washington, DC, and Israel.

JERUSALEM/DUBAI/WASHINGTON – Israel launched a huge wave of airstrikes across Iran on Friday, blasting Iran’s huge underground nuclear site, wiping out its entire top echelon of military commanders and killing nuclear scientists in the biggest ever direct attack between the foes.

Iran said “the gates of hell will open” in retaliation, while Israel said the strikes were only the start of its campaign. US President Donald Trump said it was not too late for Iran to halt the Israeli attacks by reaching a deal to curb its nuclear programme.

As evening fell on Friday, Iranian media reported a number of explosions in what appeared to be a second wave of strikes.

“Moments ago, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s very survival,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said early on Friday in a televised address that invoked the failure of the world to prevent the Holocaust in World War Two.

Israel’s operation “will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat,” he said. “Generations from now, history will record our generation stood its ground, acted in time and secured our common future.”

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Israel had “unleashed its wicked and bloody” hand, and would suffer “a bitter fate”.

In a phone interview with Reuters, Trump said it was not clear if Iran’s nuclear programme had survived, but it was not too late for Iran to make a deal to halt the Israeli assault.

He said nuclear talks between Tehran and the United States, scheduled for Sunday, were still on the agenda though he was not sure if they would take place.

“I tried to save Iran humiliation and death,” Trump said.

Earlier, he posted on Truth Social: “Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left.”

DECAPITATION

Two regional sources said at least 20 Iranian military commanders were killed, a stunning decapitation reminiscent of Israeli attacks that swiftly wiped out the leadership of Lebanon’s once-feared Hezbollah militia last year.

Among the generals killed on Friday were the armed forces chief of staff, Major General Mohammad Bagheri, and the Revolutionary Guards chief, Hossein Salami.

Major General Mohammad Pakpour, swiftly promoted to replace Salami as Guards commander, vowed retaliation in a letter to the Supreme Leader read out on state television: “The gates of hell will open to the child-killing regime.”

Twenty people Reuters spoke to inside Iran described an atmosphere of fear and anger, with some people rushing to change money and others seeking a way out of the country to safety.

“People on my street rushed out of their homes in panic, we were all terrified,” said Marziyeh, 39, who was awakened by a huge blast in Natanz, a city that houses the huge underground facility where Iran purifies the uranium that Israel said could be used to make a nuclear bomb.

While some Iranians quietly hoped the attack would lead to changes in Iran’s hardline clerical leadership, others vowed to rally behind the authorities.

“I will fight and die for our right to a nuclear programme. Israel and its ally America cannot take it away from us with these attacks,” said Ali, a member of the pro-government Basij militia in Qom.

Iranian media showed images of destroyed apartment blocks, and said nearly 80 civilians were killed in attacks that targeted nuclear scientists in their beds and wounded more than 300 people.

Iran’s ability to retaliate with weapons fired by its regional proxies has been degraded over the past year, with the downfall of its ally Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the decimation of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.

‘COWARDLY’

Israel said that Iran had launched around 100 drones towards Israeli territory in retaliation on Friday, but Iran denied this and there were no reports of any drones reaching Israeli targets.

The United Nations Security Council was due to meet on Friday at Tehran’s request. Iran said in a letter to the Council that it would respond decisively and proportionally to Israel’s “unlawful” and “cowardly” acts.

The price of crude leapt on fears of wider retaliatory attacks across a major oil-producing region, although there were no reports that oil production or storage was damaged. OPEC said the escalation did not justify any immediate changes to oil supply.

An Israeli security source said Mossad commandos had been operating deep inside the Islamic Republic before the attack, and the Israeli spy agency and military had mounted a series of covert operations against Iran’s strategic missile array.

Israel also established an attack-drone base near Tehran, the source added. The military said it had bombarded Iran’s air defences, destroying “dozens of radars and surface-to-air missile launchers”.

Israeli officials said it may be some time before the extent is clear of damage to the underground nuclear site at Natanz, where Iran has refined uranium to levels Western countries have long said are suitable for a bomb rather than civilian use.

Iran has long insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes only. The UN nuclear watchdog concluded this week that it was in violation of its obligations under the global non-proliferation treaty.

Tehran had been engaged in talks with the Trump administration on a deal to curb its nuclear programme to replace one that Trump abandoned in 2018. Tehran had rejected the last US offer.

What does it take for the British government to express genuine outrage over the conduct of Israel? The extermination of tens of thousands of civilians, many of them children, did not cross that particular threshold. What Donald Trump flippantly summarised as “a civilisation has been wiped out in Gaza” did not qualify either: to be specific, the obliteration of almost all civilian infrastructure, such as homes, hospitals, schools, libraries, mosques and universities. Deliberate starvation; repeated forced displacements; the butchery of medics, aid workers, journalists; overwhelming evidence of industrialised torture and sexual violence – none of this merited much more than our foreign secretary issuing a tweet or, at best, penning a letter to “urge” Israel’s government to do something he knows it will not do.

So what has finally driven David Lammy to direct real, righteous anger towards Israel – to describe its actions as “unacceptable, counterproductive and deeply concerning”? Two Labour MPs, Yuan Yang and Abtisam Mohamed, being denied entry to Israel and deported.

My objection is not to Yang and Mohamed, subjected to this diplomatic humiliation because they were en route to visit the illegally occupied West Bank, where a UN special rapporteur has warned of mass ethnic cleansing by Israel. It was their past criticisms of Israel’s violations of international law that led to their removal, after all. Israel’s authorities knew they would speak the truth about what they would witness, rather than regurgitate propaganda: the authorities claim Yang and Mohamed sought to “document Israeli security forces and spread anti-Israel hatred”. (But really, they needn’t worry: Starmer’s goons blacklist Labour MPs who speak out about Israel’s crimes quicker than Lammy’s speechwriter can think up meaningless platitudes.)

A shellshocked parliamentary Labour party decided that this time Israel needed to face the consequences: namely, a few dozen MPs posing in a photoshoot alongside Yang and Mohamed, all staring down the barrel of a camera looking very stern indeed. Tel Aviv’s rulers haven’t quaked so much since Lammy last sent a disappointed missive on headed paper.

The two deported MPs have every right to feel aggrieved. Yet it is not an attack on them to point out that they are now being showered with more heartfelt emotion by their insipid colleagues than has been offered up for all the Palestinian women, men and children slaughtered in 18 months of genocidal depravity.

“This is no way to treat British parliamentarians,” cries Wes Streeting, the health secretary who was nearly unseated by the then 23-year-old British-Palestinian wunderkind Leanne Mohamad at the last election, not least because of his failure to take a stand against genocide. Streeting’s colleagues suffered embarrassment and inconvenience; as new reports underline, Palestinian detainees held without charge and trial – including children – have been beaten with batons, subjected to electric shocks, denied access to medical care, sprayed with tear gas in cells, menaced by dogs, deprived of food and water, had their toenails removed, been dunked in chemicals, set on fire and sexually abused. In Westminster, there is not even a fraction of the uproar at this barbarism, but then the victims do not have the grand imprimatur of “British parliamentarians” – they are mere Palestinians.

In truth, the unpleasant treatment of Yang and Mohamed could have been worth it if it achieved what thousands of Palestinian children being burned alive and crushed under rubble has not: forcing the UK government to cease its complicity in some of the worst crimes of our age. Alas, it will not.

Remember the three British aid workers slaughtered by the Israeli state in Gaza almost exactly a year ago? Don’t feel embarrassed if not, given how swiftly the World Central Kitchen attack was memory-holed by British politicians and media outlets alike. Six western aid workers and their Palestinian colleague set off in a convoy of vehicles clearly marked with huge WCK logos. They had coordinated their movements with the Israel Defense Forces on a pre-approved route. The Israeli army then methodically attacked the vehicles one by one in direct, targeted strikes, killing all seven aid workers. British politicians even let Israel get away with massacring our own citizens – do you really think the Israeli authorities are going to blink at whisking two backbenchers back to Heathrow Terminal 4?

No amount of photoshoots featuring Labour MPs with hammed up indignation on their faces will erase the central fact. This government is helping to facilitate genocide. Under legal pressure, it has suspended fewer than 9% of arms export licences to Israel, and continues to send crucial components for F-35 jets to rain death and destruction on Gaza’s traumatised survivors – something Mohamed has commendably criticised. As research by Action on Armed Violence has uncovered, the Royal Air Force has conducted well over 500 surveillance flights above Gaza since December 2023, with no public explanation.

Despite incontestable evidence of Israeli war crimes, the British government refuses to describe them as such – with Lammy’s fleeting objective description of Israel’s total siege on Gaza as violating international law swiftly disowned and walked back. No action is therefore taken, whether imposing sanctions on the Israeli state or preventing British nationals from serving in its military. Indeed, a group of lawyers, including the distinguished barrister Michael Mansfield, has submitted a legal complaint to the Metropolitan police alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity against 10 such British people.

Yang and Mohamed wanted to report the truth. Too many Labour MPs, however, are affronted because they believe their collective status as Very Important People has been besmirched. That’s why these two wronged parliamentarians no doubt can’t walk around the House of Commons right now without their frowning colleagues plaintively asking: “Are you OK?”

Israel isn’t actually being finally denounced as a rogue state, here. It’s being subjected to an impromptu rendition of our political masters’ favourite anthem – “Do you know who we are?” – before yet more F-35 components are dispatched to Israel so that toddlers can be incinerated in their tents. And the thing is, politicians more offended by their wounded self-importance than by genocide think they’ll get away with it. It’s our job to make sure they don’t.