Arutz Sheva / Israel National News, by Elad Benari, on Iran, 12 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Trump warns he could strike Iran again with no hesitation

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findingsSee it marked on israelnationalnews.com

US President Donald Trump said Thursday that he remains prepared to order additional military strikes against Iran, warning that renewed combat operations could begin immediately if circumstances warrant. In an interview with Salem News Channel , Trump was asked whether he would hesitate to use military force . "No. No hesitation. We're doing very well with it right now. We're taking out more oil now than we did before the, if you call it a war, before the war started.

We're taking out more oil," he stated. Trump defended the results of the American military campaign, arguing that the United States had achieved its objectives without suffering recent military casualties. "And you know, the thing about the war. We've been fighting, you know, pretty, at a pretty rapid clip for three weeks, not seven months, for three weeks. Nobody's been killed in the last five months. You know, in Russia, they're losing 25,000 people a month between Russia and Ukraine, mostly soldiers.

We haven't lost a soldier in five months and we control the Gulf...but the answer is if I saw things going the other way, I would, I would do that. And it's, it's possible I would do it right now," added Trump. The President also claimed that Iran's government was facing severe economic and internal difficulties, dismissing Tehran's public declarations of strength. "Their regime is collapsing. And their press is much different than the fact...

You know, they'll always make these harsh statements about, we are doing well, we will fight back, we will... They are not doing well, they have 301% inflation, their economy is gone, they're not paying their soldiers," he continued. Asked specifically whether he might resume military operations to destroy Iran's remaining industrial infrastructure and the Pickaxe Mountain facility, Trump replied, "It could happen." The interview also addressed Trump's relationship with Israel.

Asked whether he continued to regard himself as the most pro-Israel president in American history, Trump answered, "Well, I am". He subsequently claimed that his popularity in Israel exceeded that of the country's political leaders. "In Israel, I'm at 99%. I'm the most popular person. When this is over, I can go to Israel and become the prime minister. I'm very much Israel influent." Trump's remarks came hours after he announced a significant change in Vice President JD Vance's responsibilities, directing him to concentrate on domestic matters rather than continuing efforts to negotiate an agreement with Tehran.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump instructed Vance to focus exclusively on investigating allegations of corruption and criminal activity in American cities and states governed by Democrats. The President also signaled that he no longer considered negotiations with Iran necessary. "We don't need a deal with Iran. Those days have long since passed," Trump declared. He cited Washington's control over Iranian financial resources and the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz as evidence of the United States' strong position.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article reports Trump declaring that 'those days have long since passed' for a deal, but never says that until days earlier he had repeatedly said a deal remained possible and that renewed strikes were unlikely. This outlet itself reported that view two days before. Without it, a reader takes the no-deal stance and the strike threat as a settled position, not an abrupt reversal after the midterm losses.

How we know

"We've got their money, Hundreds of Billions of Dollars, and we've got their Strait!" he wrote. The announcement followed a report published Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal indicating that Vance was considering direct negotiations with a senior Iranian security official as part of efforts to end the conflict. Vance had sent a letter in October to Mohsen Rezaei, the hard-line secretary of Iran's highest security body, requesting a meeting.

Rezaei subsequently acknowledged receiving the letter but said he had not responded. Although Washington and Tehran continued exchanging messages through intermediaries and regional allies, no date had been established for a direct meeting. Vance has also publicly linked the Republican Party's substantial losses in the recent midterm elections to the war with Iran, distinguishing himself from other senior administration officials who have defended the military campaign.

Trump acknowledged the vice president's assessment but maintained that, given the same circumstances, he would make the decision to launch the war again.

Read the original article on israelnationalnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

Arutz Sheva reports Trump's threat to strike Iran again and his dismissal of a deal, and mostly attributes his claims to him. In its own narration it calls Iran's government 'the Iranian regime'. It also leaves out that only days earlier Trump had said a deal remained possible and renewed strikes were probably unnecessary, which the outlet itself had reported.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “against the Iranian regime again”

    Why this matters
    The outlet paraphrases the interviewer's question in its own narration and calls Iran's government "the Iranian regime".
    The impression it gives
    That 'regime' is the neutral, factual name for Iran's government, and that the question itself used it.
    The context
    The question as reported elsewhere asked about using military force "against Iran". 'Regime' is Trump's word in S14 and belongs in quotation marks, not in the outlet's narration.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  2. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article reports Trump declaring that 'those days have long since passed' for a deal, but never says that until days earlier he had repeatedly said a deal remained possible and that renewed strikes were unlikely. This outlet itself reported that view two days before. Without it, a reader takes the no-deal stance and the strike threat as a settled position, not an abrupt reversal after the midterm losses.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News

  1. 12 NovReport: US warns Israel of imminent possibility of renewed Iran fighting0.0
  2. 12 NovIran sets conditions for US, issues warning3.0
  3. 12 NovMiddle East expert to Arutz Sheva: If Trump won't strike, Israel must act alone3.0
  4. 12 NovReport: Vance weighing direct meeting with senior Iranian official0.0
  5. 11 NovUS CENTCOM: Nearly 150 ships turned away as naval blockade of Iran continues3.0

Everything we scored from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News