Ynet News (English), on Iran, 9 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Rubio defends Trump's decision to go to war with Iran as US president prepares to meet Qatar's PM

Findings are available in the analysis below.1 finding

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that President Donald Trump launched the war against Iran even if it was not “necessarily popular” to safeguard the world from the country's nuclear ambitions. His statement comes as Trump plans to meet Qatar's prime minister on Monday as the key mediator pushes new proposals in talks with Iran. Rubio would not comment directly about the Republican wipeout in Tuesday’s elections, which delivered a resounding rebuke to Trump.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article presents the war as one Trump launched, and Rubio defends it as a response to Iran's nuclear programme. It never says the US launched the war together with Israel on 28 February. It also omits that Rubio earlier said the US went in when it did because an Israeli strike was coming. Without this a reader takes the war as a solely American decision justified by the nuclear threat.

How we know

The unpopularity of the Iran war and its impact on gasoline prices and other parts of the economy helped Democrats seize control of Congress. Asked about Vice President JD Vance’s social media post last week that largely blamed the war for the Republican losses, Rubio told reporters that Trump “identified a very real threat” in Iran and worked to stop the Islamic Republic from pursuing a nuclear weapon. “He addressed it even though oftentimes the right thing to do for the country — confronting difficult challenges for the security of our country — doing it isn’t necessarily popular, but necessary,” Rubio said in Florida before heading to a Group of 7 foreign ministers meeting in Paris.

America's top diplomat offered a robust defense of the more than eight-month-old war even as voters blamed Trump’s policies for the hit to their pocketbooks, including higher energy prices that stemmed from disruptions to shipments in the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway where one-fifth of the world's oil transited before the war. Rubio's comments also put him at odds with Vance amid speculation of both of their 2028 presidential ambitions.

Trump told reporters Sunday that Vance was right — other than that his vice president should have also insisted it was the correct choice to go to war. “I can tell you if I had it to do again, this historically — for history — will go down as one of the best things we ever did," Trump said. "Because if they ever had a nuclear weapon, they would blow up the world." ran has long maintained that its nuclear program is peaceful. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%.

With no clear administration strategy to wind down the conflict and the Middle East on edge over the possibility of a return to major hostilities, mediators are trying to revive talks between the sides. Rubio said, “I wouldn’t say we’re at the verge of a breakthrough.” He reiterated that Trump prefers a diplomatic solution, but “right now, it hasn’t been very productive because the Iranian demands are simply not just unacceptable, but in some cases outrageous and ridiculous and really not realistic.”

Trump is set to meet Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani at the White House on Monday, according to his official schedule. The Associated Press has reported that Iran was reviewing proposals presented by chief mediator Qatar aimed at addressing differences with the United States about Tehran’s nuclear program. But Iran was seen as unwilling to negotiate with the Trump administration over their atomic activities until the U.S. agrees to several core conditions that Tehran has been demanding be part of any ceasefire agreement, officials have said.

Those include ending the U.S. blockade on Iran’s ports, lifting sanctions, unfreezing its assets, issuing compensation for war damage and ending hostilities throughout the region, including Israeli operations in Lebanon. While Rubio said there was no diplomatic breakthrough at hand, Trump told CNN in a phone interview Sunday that as long as the U.S. sees progress in negotiations with Tehran and they sign a “strong agreement,” it’s “highly unlikely it’s going to be necessary” to resume strikes.

Trump said, however, that the U.S. had identified infrastructure targets, including 38 bridges, that it would strike if military action resumes. The U.S. military, meanwhile, still has carried out limited strikes on Iran, including against its air defenses, at least twice over the past week. It also fired on and disabled a commercial ship Saturday that the U.S. says was trying to breach its naval blockade on Iranian ports. Rubio acknowledged that the U.S. will take defensive actions if needed.

“If there’s a clear and present threat to shipping or to our forces in the region, we have a right to defend ourselves,” Rubio said.

Read the original article on ynetnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

Ynet runs an Associated Press report on Marco Rubio defending the US war on Iran after the Republican midterm losses. It attributes the nuclear justification to Rubio and Trump, gives Iran's position that its programme is peaceful, sources the uranium figure to the IAEA and names the US military as the actor of recent strikes. It never says Israel launched the war alongside the US on 28 February, a minor gap that leaves the war looking like a US decision alone.

  1. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article presents the war as one Trump launched, and Rubio defends it as a response to Iran's nuclear programme. It never says the US launched the war together with Israel on 28 February. It also omits that Rubio earlier said the US went in when it did because an Israeli strike was coming. Without this a reader takes the war as a solely American decision justified by the nuclear threat.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

What it gets right

  • “The U.S. military, meanwhile, still has carried out limited strikes on Iran, including against its air defenses”

    It names the US military as the actor of the strikes in the active voice instead of hiding who carried them out.

  • “that the U.S. says was trying to breach its naval blockade”

    It attributes the justification for firing on a commercial ship to the US and does not state it as fact.

  • “According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium”

    It sources the enrichment figure to the IAEA. The weapons claims stay with Rubio and Trump, and Iran's position that its programme is peaceful is also given.

How other outlets reported it

Our analysisTrump Told Voters Israel's Aid Would Stop. The Plan Is to Move It Into the Pentagon.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Ynet News (English)

  1. 8 NovTrump says renewed war 'highly unlikely,' but threatens Iranian infrastructure6.0
  2. 8 Nov‘They sent missiles, we sent a bill’: Tel Aviv suburb sues Iran for NIS 250 million over wartime damages3.0
  3. 7 NovBreakthrough ahead? US prepares to expand the blockade on Iran6.0
  4. 7 NovNew US strikes on Iran raise fears of wider war as Tehran issues stark warning3.0
  5. 6 NovUS warns Jerusalem embassy of Iranian plots to target American officials0.0

Everything we scored from Ynet News (English)