Arutz Sheva / Israel National News, on Iran, 27 October 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

Trump on Iran war: We had no choice, we didn’t start the war

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.4 findings

US President Donald Trump defended the American military campaign against Iran during an election rally in Mississippi on Monday, arguing that Tehran's expanding missile capabilities and nuclear ambitions left Washington with no alternative but to act. Addressing supporters, Trump acknowledged Iran's technological capabilities while emphasizing the damage inflicted on its military by American forces. "Iranians make great weapons. They are very smart people, but we beat the s--t out of them," the President stated, adding, "Iranians now have a missile that essentially reached Europe.

They weren’t supposed to. We said, 'Where the hell did they get that?'" "And they'd hit our cities. They’d hit San Diego. They’d hit Los Angeles. They'd hit our cities too. So somebody had to do it. It had to be done," Trump stated. “We didn’t start the war with Iran. ," he added.

Left out here: One side gets the space

Iran never speaks in the article. Iranian officials answered Trump's claims about the war, the ceasefire and renewed strikes, but the reader hears only Trump.

How we know

The President also criticized an earlier ceasefire with Iran, saying he had opposed the arrangement and believed it had delayed necessary action. "We did a little ceasefire, which I never liked very much. I considered it a waste of time. The ceasefire was just a waste of time, but you like to listen to professionals. We wanted to be nice, but it was just a waste of time as far as I'm concerned," he continued. Trump maintained that military intervention was necessary to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring nuclear weapons, even if the operation resulted in higher global energy prices.

He said "we really had no choice" and acknowledged that he had anticipated a potentially significant increase in oil prices as a consequence of the conflict. "I thought the price of oil was going to go much, much higher, and I was fully prepared to do it...it should've been a long time ago." The President also pointed to Iran's history of hostility toward the United States, dating back to the Islamic Revolution in 1979, and accused Tehran of responsibility for American deaths over the decades.

“They were killing our people for years," Trump said. The remarks came amid continued uncertainty over whether the United States would launch another round of military strikes against Iran, an option Trump has been considering in recent weeks. On Saturday, the President declined to disclose whether he was preparing to authorize additional attacks when questioned by reporters. Trump nevertheless confirmed that renewed military action remained under consideration, while indicating that a negotiated agreement with Tehran was also possible.

"Let me tell you, while we're thinking about doing it, and maybe tomorrow, do you really think I'm going to tell you? If I'm going to do it, and there's a possibility I will, there's also a possibility we'll have a nice, big, beautiful agreement. They want to make a deal. But the problem is, will they hold the deal?" On Sunday, Trump ruled out an American strike that day while speaking to reporters before departing for an election rally in Michigan.

“The answer is no. There will not be a strike today," he stated. Later, during an interview with FOX2 Detroit , Trump stressed that his priority was ensuring Iran never obtained nuclear weapons, rather than securing a rapid conclusion to the conflict. “You want to see problems? You want to see not only energy problems but death problems? Let them have a nuclear weapon because they will use it," Trump said. “And, I have to do that first."

He also signaled that he was willing to continue negotiations for as long as necessary to achieve an agreement that addressed . “I’m going to make a great deal. I’m a longterm person; I’m not a short term person," the President said.

Read the original article on israelnationalnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (4)

Arutz Sheva reports Trump's rally remarks on Iran mostly as clearly attributed quotes. It lets his claim that Iran started the war stand with nothing against it, and never tells the reader the war was a joint US-Israeli campaign that began in late February. It also leaves his missile claims unanswered and slips 'the Iranian nuclear threat' into its own narration, while no Iranian voice appears at all.

  1. Gives a contested claim the last word

    Serious

    “Iran started the war with us”

    Why this matters
    Arutz Sheva quotes Trump saying 'Iran started the war with us' and sets nothing against it, here or anywhere in the article.
    The impression it gives
    A reader comes away with Trump's account of how the war began as the only account offered, and may take it that Iran opened hostilities.
    The context
    Other coverage of the same remarks describes a US-Israeli campaign against Iran. The outlet's own earlier report dates the start of the war to the end of February. Iran's side disputes Trump's account directly. The article never mentions Israel's part or when and how the war began.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Trump claimed Iran had started the war, a claim Iran rejects. The war began at the end of February with a joint US-Israeli campaign against Iran.

  2. Gives a contested claim the last word

    Minor

    “Trump warned that Iran's missile development could eventually pose a direct threat to major American population centers, including cities on the West Coast.”

    Why this matters
    Arutz Sheva relays Trump's warning that Iranian missiles could hit San Diego and Los Angeles, then follows it with his own quotes and no assessment of Iran's actual missile range.
    The impression it gives
    A reader is left to think Iranian missiles reaching the US West Coast is a live prospect.
    The context
    Coverage of the same speech reports that Iran's missiles have ranges of roughly 1,000 to 2,000 kilometres. It also says assessments find Iran lacks missiles able to strike those cities. The article offers no range figure or response.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  3. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “the Iranian nuclear threat”

    Why this matters
    In its own narration Arutz Sheva calls Iran's nuclear programme 'the Iranian nuclear threat' rather than putting the phrase in Trump's mouth.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the existence of an Iranian nuclear weapons threat as settled fact.
    The context
    Whether Iran's programme is a weapons effort is contested. Iran's side points to the absence of evidence of a military nuclear programme. The article cites no IAEA finding either way.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  4. One side gets the space

    Minor

    What is missing

    Iran never speaks in the article. Iranian officials answered Trump's claims about the war, the ceasefire and renewed strikes, but the reader hears only Trump.

    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. 26 OctSaudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan hold high-level talks with Iran3.0
  2. 26 OctReport: Hezbollah rebuilding military capabilities with Iranian funding8.7
  3. 26 OctKatz: Israel never planned pre-election strike on Iran8.2
  4. 26 OctCENTCOM chief declares: Strait of Hormuz is free from Iranian mines3.0
  5. 26 OctTrump on Iran: I’m going to make a great deal3.0

Everything we scored from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News