Press TV, on Iran, 27 October 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

Trump peddles fresh falsehoods, claims Iran ‘started the war’ as US aggression drags on

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

US President Donald Trump has again resorted to while defending Washington’s ongoing war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, claiming Tehran initiated the war and dismissing an earlier ceasefire as a “waste of time.”

Speaking at a campaign rally in Corinth, Mississippi, on Monday, ahead of the November midterms, Trump echoed the talking points of hardline Republicans by asserting: “We didn’t start the war with Iran. Iran started the war with us.”

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

Press TV does not report the reasons Trump gave at the same rally for saying Iran started the war: Iran's hostility since 1979 and his charge that Iran had been killing Americans for years. Without them, a reader believes the claim rested only on the 28 February events that the article then rebuts.

How we know

, declaring that “they’d hit San Diego, they’d hit Los Angeles, they’d hit our cities too,” and argued that the military offensive “should’ve been done a long time ago.”

Trump's remarks stand in stark contradiction to the established record. On February 28, the United States and launched the “Operation Epic Fury,” a coordinated assault that assassinated Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, senior military commanders, and hundreds of civilians, including schoolchildren in Minab.

The aggression followed months of escalating threats and came amid stalled diplomatic efforts, consistent with the pattern of the earlier 12-day US-Israeli war in June 2025.

Iran responded immediately and decisively with Operation True Promise 4. In successive waves of precision missile and drone strikes, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and allied resistance forces targeted US military installations across West Asia, including bases in Qatar, Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.

These retaliatory operations , exposing the vulnerability of the US military footprint in the region and forcing a recalculation in Washington.

A ceasefire was secured in early April after nearly 40 days of intense fighting, and in the face of sustained resistance. Far from a “waste of time,” -- unconditional surrender, elimination of Iran’s defensive missile capabilities, and control over the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump’s own administration has repeatedly shifted its stated justifications for the war, from preventing a nuclear weapons program (despite Iran’s longstanding fatwa and the absence of evidence of a military nuclear effort) to claims of imminent attack, regime change, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran had restricted only to vessels linked to the aggressors.

Trump’s missile claims are equally baseless. Iran’s ballistic missile inventory, while advanced and regionally capable, consists primarily of systems with ranges of roughly 1,000–2,000 kilometers. These weapons have proven effective against US bases and Israeli targets in West Asia. They do not include intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the continental United States.

Independent assessments and US intelligence have consistently confirmed that Iran does not have the missiles to strike cities such as Los Angeles or San Diego. rather than reflect military reality.

The economic consequences Trump now seeks to downplay stem directly from the US-initiated war of aggression and the resulting disruption in the Persian Gulf. Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that any naval blockade or further attacks on civilian and energy infrastructure will be met with proportional and stronger responses.

President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi have emphasized that diplomacy remains possible only on the basis of mutual respect and an end to aggression, while warning that renewed strikes will not alter Iran’s positions.

Trump’s latest comments also highlight a deeper hypocrisy. He campaigned as a president who would avoid new wars, yet authorized a major military offensive that has neither achieved its shifting goals nor ended.

His repeated declarations of victory earlier in the year have been contradicted by Iran’s continued ability to conduct retaliatory operations and the persistence of the conflict more than seven months after it began.

As midterm elections approach, such rhetoric appears aimed at deflecting domestic criticism over rising costs and the lack of a clear exit strategy rather than presenting an accurate account of events.

Read the original article on presstv.ir (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

Press TV states Iran's account of the war's battlefield results and the ceasefire terms as its own fact, and it calls the US-Israeli assault "unprovoked" in its own voice. It paraphrases Trump's missile remarks as a claim of present capability, when other coverage of the same rally reports him warning of an eventual threat, and it then rebuts that stronger version. It also assigns Trump motives in its own narration and uses loaded words such as "the Israeli regime" and "brazen falsehoods".

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “unprovoked so-called”

    Why this matters
    Press TV calls the 28 February assault "unprovoked" in its own narration, with no one attached to the word.
    The impression it gives
    That it is settled fact that nothing provoked the assault.
    The context
    Who provoked the war is the very point in dispute in this story. Trump argues Iran's missile and nuclear programmes and decades of hostility left no choice. The article can report that the US and Israel struck first on 28 February without giving its own verdict on provocation.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “inflicted significant damage on American radar systems, tanker aircraft, command facilities, and naval assets”

    Why this matters
    Press TV gives Iran's account of damage to US forces as plain fact. It names no source and gives no US response.
    The impression it gives
    That this damage is independently established.
    The context
    No source is given for the damage assessment, and no US account is set against it.

    Show it in the article

    “largely on Iranian terms”

    Why this matters
    Press TV states in its own voice that the April ceasefire was agreed on Iran's terms.
    The impression it gives
    That Iran dictated the ceasefire, as a matter of record.
    The context
    This is Iran's reading of the ceasefire. The article cites no terms, document or source. Trump's own account was that the ceasefire delayed necessary action.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “the pause reflected the failure of the initial US-Israeli maximalist objectives”

    Why this matters
    Press TV states its own reading of what the ceasefire meant as fact, and lists war aims it attributes to the US and Israel without sourcing them.
    The impression it gives
    That the US and Israel are on record seeking unconditional surrender and control of Hormuz, and that the ceasefire proves those aims failed.
    The context
    The article quotes no US or Israeli statement of these objectives. The conclusion is the outlet's argument, not reported fact.

    Show it in the article

  2. Misstates what the speaker said

    Serious

    “He further claimed the Islamic Republic had developed missiles capable of striking American cities”

    Why this matters
    Press TV paraphrases Trump as claiming Iran already has missiles that can hit US cities. It then spends S14 to S18 rebutting that version.
    The impression it gives
    That Trump said Iran can strike Los Angeles and San Diego today.
    The context
    Other coverage of the same rally reports Trump saying Iran's missile development could eventually threaten US cities. He gave Europe as the current reach. The quoted words "they'd hit San Diego" are conditional and fit that account.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Trump said Iran now has a missile that reached Europe and warned that its missile development could eventually threaten US cities, saying "they'd hit San Diego, they'd hit Los Angeles".

  3. Asserts a leader's motive

    Minor

    “Trump's assertion appears designed to manufacture fear and justify continued aggression”

    Why this matters
    Press TV tells the reader, in its own narration, what Trump's missile remark was designed to do.
    The impression it gives
    That Trump's purpose was to frighten people into backing the war.
    The context
    No source is given for this motive. It is the outlet's inference, softened only by "appears".

    Show it in the article

  4. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the Israeli regime”

    Why this matters
    Press TV calls the Israeli government "the Israeli regime" in its own narration.
    The impression it gives
    That the government's illegitimacy is a neutral description.
    The context
    The phrase carries a verdict. "The Israeli government" says the same thing without it.

    Show it in the article

    “brazen falsehoods”

    Why this matters
    Press TV adds "brazen" to its own charge of falsehood in the opening line, before it reports what Trump said.
    The impression it gives
    That Trump knowingly and shamelessly lied, as a matter of fact.
    The context
    The body disputes Trump's claims, but nothing in it shows what Trump knew or intended.

    Show it in the article

  5. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    Press TV does not report the reasons Trump gave at the same rally for saying Iran started the war: Iran's hostility since 1979 and his charge that Iran had been killing Americans for years. Without them, a reader believes the claim rested only on the 28 February events that the article then rebuts.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Press TV

  1. 27 OctIran6.0
  2. 27 OctIran0.0
  3. 27 OctIran3.0
  4. 27 OctIran7.3
  5. 27 OctNo talks with US before Iran’s conditions are met: Senior lawmaker6.0

Everything we scored from Press TV

See how 9 outlets covered this story