Trump Issues Warnings Over Iran Military Actions
President Donald Trump expressed on Friday that the U.S. might consider another round of military strikes against Iran if an agreement isn’t reached, heightening his rhetoric as the U.S. applies increased economic pressure on the country.
At a campaign rally in Fort Myers, Florida, Trump alluded to a past military operation, saying, “We may do another little Epic Fury, or they’ll agree.”
He suggested that Iran should be smart and agree to negotiations, although he expressed doubt about their willingness, noting, “I think perhaps they’re not smart.”
This was not the first time Trump has hinted at military action; just a day earlier, he stated that U.S. forces had significantly weakened Iran and might escalate actions further.
On Friday, he asserted that the U.S. had control of the Strait of Hormuz, which facilitates oil shipments, while constraining Iran’s oil exports. “The question is, do we want to finish it off, or do we just want to let it wither? Because we’re getting everything we want,” he remarked.
In another comment, he suggested that the U.S. had the military capability to seize Iranian oil resources or even take the country itself, stating, “We could take the whole country. We could take all of the oil. And as you know, the Hormuz Strait is totally ours, and that’s the way we’ll keep it.”
These comments came as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent noted that U.S. economic efforts had drastically affected Iran’s oil exports, while energy shipments in the broader Persian Gulf region were recovering. Bessent highlighted that despite Iran’s attempts to disrupt energy shipments, oil exports from the region have surpassed levels seen before ongoing conflicts.
In another statement, he credited the administration’s Operation Economic Outcast with significantly depleting Iran’s oil exporting capabilities and restricting its resources. “We are ending it,” he asserted regarding the Iranian threat.
Trump’s comments reflected differing strategies regarding Iran, with some senior officials advocating for persistent economic pressure, while others, such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, urged for more severe military action. Reports emerged that the administration might contemplate a combination of both strategies, possibly launching strikes against various Iranian military capabilities after the November midterm elections.
The possibility of immediate military action arose when U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, hinted that strikes could occur as soon as this weekend. In an interview, he indicated, “Could there be a strike this weekend? Absolutely,” while reiterating that Trump remains open to negotiations.
When asked about Barrack’s anticipation of military action, Trump seemed to question the ambassador’s authority, saying, “That’s my ambassador to Turkey. He’s a pretty powerful man, I guess.” He added that he was unaware of any imminent plans.
While Trump did not dismiss the potential for future military action, he appeared to downplay the expected strike suggested by Barrack. Meanwhile, Iran has warned of retaliation should the U.S. resume its military campaign.
In reports, Iranian officials outlined plans to target undersea communications cables in the Persian Gulf in response to any attacks, asserting, “If Iran is attacked, there will be no more red lines.” They also claimed that Iran would present a grave threat to foreign troops if a ground invasion were attempted.
The tension between the two nations continues to escalate as the U.S. withdraws some personnel from several Middle Eastern countries. There has been a quiet adjustment in staffing levels at embassies across the region, including Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, the U.A.E., and Saudi Arabia, amid rising attacks from Iranian-backed forces.
Despite these rising tensions, the administration maintains that a diplomatic resolution is still within reach. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz clarified that the blockade would remain and emphasized that the U.S. pressure campaign was intensifying, noting that the decision on any future military actions ultimately rests with the president.
