Trump's Comparison of Iran Strikes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki Called Out for One Thing: 'Didn't Iran Bomb Israel After?'
President Donald Trump seemingly compared his strikes on Iranian nuclear sites to the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. However, users were quick to try to poke holes in Trump's argument.
The president referred to the devastating bombings on Japan while responding to a question about the U.S. use of bunker-buster bombs on Iran over the weekend during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Wednesday.
"That hit ended the war. I don't want to use an example of Hiroshima. I don't want to use an example of Nagasaki, but that was essentially the same thing. That ended that war, this ended that with the war. If we didn't take that out, they'd be fighting right now," Trump declared.
Trump appearing to compare his damage to Iran's nuclear facilities to two nuclear bombs that killed an estimated 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 74,000 in Nagasaki, according to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons , led to shock online.
As dozens of users noted the general disparity in the destruction caused by the bombings, several also noted that the fighting continued after Trump's orders.
"Iran bombed Israel after this bombing," one user said . Another asked , "Didn't Iran bomb Israel after that?"
"Good, because both of those examples are wrong. Iran bombed our bases since your 'total annihilation,'" one user quipped .
While users appeared to question the effectiveness of Trump's strikes, Japan did not officially announce its surrender in WWII until August 15, 1945, six days after the bombing of Nagasaki.
However, Iran did not surrender to Israel or the U.S., as a ceasefire was agreed upon two days after the U.S. bombings. Although Iran and Israel agreed to the ceasefire proposed by the Trump administration, both countries have since accused each other of breaking the deal.
"Donnie, it's like two days, let's see how long it is before they are back at fighting each other," one user jeered . Another declared , "It did nothing."
The level of destruction caused by Trump's bombings has been debated. While the president previously declared that the strikes completely "obliterated" Iran's nuclear sites, a report by CNN cited sources saying that a Pentagon report indicated that the sites were only damaged, not destroyed.
Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence services reportedly disagree with the results of that report, as their initial evaluation allegedly concluded more damage than the Pentagon's report. Derrick Rose may not get enough playing time in case he ends up joining the Phoenix Suns. Getty Images | Gregory Shamus
Originally published on Latin Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
an hour ago
- Int'l Business Times
Hegseth Downplays His Department's 'Leaked' Assessment of US Strike on Iran: 'It Was Low Confidence'
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth downplayed the Pentagon's assessment claiming that the U.S. strikes in Iran did not result in significant damage on Wednesday. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth downplayed the Pentagon's assessment of the U.S. strike on Iran over the weekend, after the report claiming that the strikes did not result in significant damage was "leaked" to CNN. Hegseth accompanied President Donald Trump to the NATO Summit Wednesday, where they were asked by reporters about the validity of the report. "The 30,000 pounds of explosives and capability of those munitions — it was devastation underneath Fordow. And the amount of munitions, six per location — any assessment that tells you it was something otherwise is speculating with other motives," Hegseth said. Details about the report created by the Defense Intelligence Agency, an agency of Hegseth's Pentagon, was revealed to CNN Tuesday. Multiple anonymous sources told the outlet that the sites struck by the U.S. on Saturday were damaged, but not "obliterated" as Trump had previously declared. As one source said, the report allegedly indicated that the strikes had only set Iran's nuclear capabilities back "months." "We know that because when you actually look at the report — by the way it was a top secret report — it was preliminary, it was low confidence. You make assessments based on what you know—," Hegseth said before Trump jumped in. "And it said it could be very devastating, very serious," the president said. "Moderate to severe, and we believe far more likely, severe and obliterated. So this is a political motive," Hegseth continued. The defense secretary announced the FBI would be assisting in a "leak investigation" to determine how the report was shared with the press. Various Trump administration officials condemned the report and its implications following its initial publication Tuesday night. 🚨FAKE NEWS CNN STRIKES AGAIN:This alleged "assessment" is flat-out wrong and was classified as "top secret" but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean… — Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) June 24, 2025 "This alleged 'assessment' is flat-out wrong and was classified as 'top secret' but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X . Secretary of State Marco Rubio also pushed back against the report in an interview with Politico Wednesday morning, insisting that Iran suffered "significant, very significant, substantial damage" to multiple components of their work. Originally published on Latin Times © Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Int'l Business Times
an hour ago
- Int'l Business Times
MAGA Influencer Turns on Trump, Calling Him a 'Chronic Disappointment': 'I Feel Embarrassed I Told People to Vote for Him'
Candace Owens, a prominent MAGA influencer, criticized President Donald Trump in a recent interview, calling him a "chronic disappointment" over his decision to enter the Israel-Iran war. Owens, a conservative commentator who gained popularity on YouTube by championing Trump during his first term, said she was invited on "Piers Morgan Uncensored" to discuss the growing divide within the MAGA movement. Owens argued the movement was rooted in non-interventionism and claimed Trump's decision to bomb Iran directly contradicted that principle. "He's been a chronic disappointment, and I feel embarrassed that I told people to go vote for him because this wasn't going to happen, and it is happening," Owens said. Owens stated Trump bombed Iran last week at the behest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the president's subservience to Israel is to blame for the MAGA split. "The reason that America wants a regime change in Iran is because Bibi Netanyahu is demanding it, and that answers the question as to why there is a split in the MAGA movement," Owens stated. "What we are seeing right now is the infiltration of Israel-first people; the neocons, people who have always wanted never-ending wars and the people who have recognized that following Israel's foreign policy initiatives has led to America being on the decline." "That's where I stand," Owens continued, adding that there was "no imminent threat to the United States" before the Trump administration dropped bunker-busting bombs on three of Iran's nuclear facilities. Elsewhere, Owens championed a regime change in Israel since "Iran's regime is not negatively impacting America on a day-to-day basis." When asked how she felt about aligning with New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), Owens stood by her stance. "The MAGA movement has always been a movement that explicitly did not want to keep involving our sons and daughters in the Middle East, so we have not changed that position. If AOC was always antiwar then she should have thrown on a red hat in 2020 and 2015 and joined the MAGA movement. That would have been fantastic," Owens stated. Originally published on Latin Times
DW
2 hours ago
- DW
Iran: Is the cost of closing the Strait of Hormuz too high? – DW – 06/25/2025
Iran has struck back, but the Strait of Hormuz remains open. Why hasn't Tehran carried out its threat?China and Iran's neighbors may have affecte the decision? For a few days, the world held its breath. It seems the conflict between Israel, the US and Iran is not going to escalate any further, at least for now. Iran opted to save face by launching an attack on a US military base in Qatar, which the stock market interpreted as a de-escalatory gesture. This retaliatory strike by Tehran was "loud enough for headlines, quiet enough not to shake the oil market's foundations," Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management commented to Reuters. Immediately after the strike on Monday evening, the oil price fell again sharply. And yet Iran holds a powerful trump card. It could do immense damage to the global economy by blockading the Strait of Hormuz. But would this really be to its advantage — or would it be more of an own goal? The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) says that "Iran's economy is relatively diversified compared with many other Middle Eastern countries." However, the goods produced by the country's industry are primarily sold on the domestic market. The export of oil and petroleum products is therefore an important source of income for the government. These constitute more than 17% of the country's total exports, with natural gas at 12%. According to the EIA, Iran was the fourth-largest producer of crude oil among the OPEC countries in 2023, and in 2022 it was the world's third-largest producer of dry gas (natural gas that is at least 85% methane, containing only negligible quantities of condensable gases such as hydrogen). Although it has been subject to sanctions for many years, this has not prevented the Iranian regime from exporting oil. China in particular has benefited: In 2023, it took almost 90% of the oil exported by Iran. In March 2024, the Financial Times quoted Javad Owji, Iran's Minister of Petroleum at the time, saying that Iran's oil exports "generated more than 35 billion dollars" in 2023. According to the World Bank, between April and December 2023 the oil sector represented more than 8% of Iran's GDP. And based on estimates from the data analysis company Vortexa, it is believed to have exported even more the following year. Iran would therefore damage itself if it blocked the Strait of Hormuz. Not only would its own oil revenue be affected, it would also upset its trading partner China, which profits from buying the oil at low cost. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The London-based TV station Iran International estimates that Tehran sells its oil at a 20% discount on the world market price, because its buyers risk getting into trouble on account of the US sanctions. The broadcaster explained that Chinese refineries are the biggest buyers of Iran's illegal consignments of oil. Intermediaries mix it with deliveries from other countries, and the oil is then declared in China as having been imported from Singapore or other countries of origin. According to Rystad Energy, an independent energy research company based in Norway, China imports a total of almost 11 million barrels of crude oil per day, around 10% of which comes from Iran. A blockade would also have caused trouble for Iran's neighbors. Kuwait, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates also transport their oil through the passage. In a post on Linkedin, the economist Justin Alexander, a Gulf region analyst, commented that if Tehran were to close the strait, this would "undermine remaining alliances" it still has with countries in the region. Whether Iran could actually maintain a blockade is also doubtful. Homayoun Falakshahi from the analytics firm Kpler told German TV that he believed a blockade would provoke a swift and forceful military response from both the US and European countries, and that Iran would only have been able to close the strait for a day or two. Furthermore, if Iran's economic situation were to deteriorate even further, it would go down very badly with the Iranian people. Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, professor of economics at Virginia Tech in the US, told DW that the standard of living in Iran had already dropped to the level of 20 years ago as a result of sanctions. These apply not only to the oil industry, but also to international payment transactions with Iran, which drives up inflation. This has been rising steeply since the beginning of the year, to more than 38.7% in May 2025 compared with May 2024. The combination of sanctions and the low exchange rate is making daily life ever more expensive for people in Iran.
