'Never seen before': President Donald Trump warns Iran any attack on US assets will result in 'full strength' response
US President Donald Trump has issued a stern warning about the dire consequences that would result if Iran attacks the United States.
In a post on Truth Social, President Trump said that any attack on US assets will be met with "the full strength" of the military.
The warning comes after Israel and Iran exchanged a fresh wave of rocket fire over the weekend.
Israel launched operation "Rising Lion" early on Friday, targeting key Iranian nuclear and military sites and reportedly killing dozens of people, including top army commanders and atomic scientists.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the attacks as a "decisive moment" in the nation's history, but Iran has hit back by launching dozens of rockets and drones at Israel.
The United States has helped shoot down some of the missiles headed towards Israel, but President Trump has declared that Iran will be met with a "never seen before" response if they target the US.
"The U.S. had nothing to do with the attack on Iran, tonight," the President said on Truth Social.
"If we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the U.S. Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before."
However the US President also claimed a deal between Iran and Israel "can easily get done".
"We can easily get a deal done between Iran and Israel, and end this bloody conflict!!!" he said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said Israel's attacks were aimed at sabotaging nuclear talks with the US that were to resume in Muscat, Oman on Sunday, and which have now been stalled.
He said Israel's attacks had the support of the U.S. and that Iran was acting only in self-defence.
This comes as the death toll rises in the Middle East with at least 10 people dying and 200 injured in Israel following a barrage of missiles launched by Iran.
Israeli family Raja Khateeb, his wife, and their three daughters were all reportedly among those killed in the Iranian strike on the town of Tamra, near Haifa.
While Iran said Israel struck two oil refineries near Tehran overnight, striking the headquarters of Iran's Ministry of Defence.
On Saturday, Britain stepped in by deploying more jets to the region after Iran threatened the US and the United Kingdom if they were to come to Israel's defence.
British Labour MP Rachel Reeves told Sky News the UK was deploying assets to protect themselves and potentially "support our allies".
She added that in the past the UK has "helped protect Israel" from "incoming strikes".
"I'm not going to comment on what might happen in the future, but so far, we haven't been involved, and we're sending in assets to both protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump fantasises about being king and he doesn't care which rules he breaks to become one
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has been testing his power. He has ignored court orders, fired civil servants, limited journalist access to the White House because they refused to change their editorial stances and he has accepted a 747 from a Gulf autocrat. But the past few weeks have felt like something in the wind is shifting as Trump lashes out. Ever since his high-profile break-up with Elon Musk, he has been on a tear to test his own power. The protests in Los Angeles have been largely peaceful: any violence and looting has been well within the militarised capabilities of the LAPD. And yet, Trump federalised the National Guard above the wishes of a state governor and a city mayor, something that hadn't been done since LBJ used the same power to protect civil rights protesters in the 1960s as schools in Alabama were desegregated. This weekend's military parade feels like it's from the same place as Trump looks to project a kind of machismo in a display that would feel more suited to the streets of Moscow than Washington. He has called for the 'liberation' of Los Angeles in language that smacks of the rhetoric of the Bush family's adventurism around the Middle East to liberate countries from any government mildly critical of the United States. America, for all of its nationalism and patriotism, has never been fond of these kinds of military parades, certainly not since the end of World War II. Tanks rolling through the streets on the president's birthday do not seem to follow in the country whose existence is tied to the overthrow of an all-powerful king. The army that was notionally being celebrated was founded explicitly to prevent any one person from having too much power over the nation. And that is the kind of power that Trump is exploring. When he posted a graphic in February of himself in a crown, the caption reading 'long live the king', he was engaging in a fantasy he's long had, living in his gilded Oval Office and the rich trappings of the fanciful old monarchies. He paraded troops through a sparse crowd in DC, a powerful juxtaposition of the US soldiers deployed to harass lawful protesters in Los Angeles. He is unafraid to use the military for his own gain. Just last week, he stood in front of a stand of soldiers at Fort Bragg, selected for their political beliefs and physical appearance, and used them as a prop in his political theatre, defying long-held conventions and rules against the military being involved in partisan politics. No uniformed member of the US military can participate in anything political, something long cherished in the US. But Trump sees the military only as a projection of the kind of strength that his brand of politics admires, and he's willing to break the rules to claim that mantle. Trump is testing the limits of his power. He is defying court orders that block him from deporting legal residents, and his administration does so anyway. He is silencing protesters with shows of overwhelming force. A US senator has been kicked out and handcuffed for trying to ask questions of the people in charge of the immigration crackdowns that are tearing through American society.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The taboo question: At what point does America become unworthy as our ally?
Last week, a man named Alex Padilla attended a press conference held by US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. He attempted to ask questions. Federal agents pushed him out of the room. In the hallway, now on his knees, he fell to the floor, where he was handcuffed. Padilla, as you may have read, is a US senator. In Australia, meanwhile, the debate around our security arrangements with America was renewed after it emerged that the Trump administration was conducting a review of AUKUS. Quickly, the debate narrowed to the usual three pragmatic questions: How does this position us in relation to China? Will we ever get any submarines? And is America still a reliable ally? Good questions all. A question of quite a different sort, meanwhile, was contemplated by Australian Nobel laureate Brian Schmidt, who told The Australian Financial Review: The question I keep asking myself is what should I be doing? Schmidt was explaining his decision to sign an open letter addressing the 'resurgence of fascism' around the world. The letter was signed by hundreds of intellectual figures, including 30 Nobel Prize winners. 'True to the old fascist script,' they wrote, 'under the guise of an unlimited popular mandate, [authoritarian leaders] undermine national and international rule of law, targeting the independence of the judiciary, the press, institutions of culture, higher education, and science; even attempting to destroy essential data and scientific information.' The letter did not specify particular nations but there has been a debate for some years now about whether Trumpism is a form of fascism. Historian Robert Paxton, an expert in the era in which fascism became a dominant force, and who had resisted using the label, wrote in 2021 that he had changed his view. After the attack on the US Capitol, he realised: 'The turn to violence was so explicit and so overt and so intentional, that you had to change what you said about it.' The debate is important in part because, as author Daniel Trilling recently wrote, recognising a movement as fascist 'enables us to spot its destructive potential before it fully discloses itself'. We don't need to resolve that debate to see the thread of violence that runs through Donald Trump's actions. Padilla's treatment is in one sense the most minor: it lacks the threatening atmospherics of Trump sending in marines and the National Guard to California, or the nastiness of immigration agents forcibly taking people. But it is the totality of events that is sinister, which is to render anyone opposing Trump a problem: protesters against the system are treated as enemies; so are those working within the system. AUKUS, with its pros and cons, commands many column inches in this country; periodically it becomes the central topic of political debate, as it did last week. Similarly, there is much discussion of Trump's authoritarianism; and sometimes it flares up, as last week. Strangely, though, the two are rarely brought together. Instead, they tend to be treated as two separate issues, siloed from each other. It seems almost taboo to ask the simple question: at what point does America become the type of country we no longer want to ally with?
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Trump fantasises about being king and he doesn't care which rules he breaks to become one
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has been testing his power. He has ignored court orders, fired civil servants, limited journalist access to the White House because they refused to change their editorial stances and he has accepted a 747 from a Gulf autocrat. But the past few weeks have felt like something in the wind is shifting as Trump lashes out. Ever since his high-profile break-up with Elon Musk, he has been on a tear to test his own power. The protests in Los Angeles have been largely peaceful: any violence and looting has been well within the militarised capabilities of the LAPD. And yet, Trump federalised the National Guard above the wishes of a state governor and a city mayor, something that hadn't been done since LBJ used the same power to protect civil rights protesters in the 1960s as schools in Alabama were desegregated. This weekend's military parade feels like it's from the same place as Trump looks to project a kind of machismo in a display that would feel more suited to the streets of Moscow than Washington. He has called for the 'liberation' of Los Angeles in language that smacks of the rhetoric of the Bush family's adventurism around the Middle East to liberate countries from any government mildly critical of the United States. America, for all of its nationalism and patriotism, has never been fond of these kinds of military parades, certainly not since the end of World War II. Tanks rolling through the streets on the president's birthday do not seem to follow in the country whose existence is tied to the overthrow of an all-powerful king. The army that was notionally being celebrated was founded explicitly to prevent any one person from having too much power over the nation. And that is the kind of power that Trump is exploring. When he posted a graphic in February of himself in a crown, the caption reading 'long live the king', he was engaging in a fantasy he's long had, living in his gilded Oval Office and the rich trappings of the fanciful old monarchies. He paraded troops through a sparse crowd in DC, a powerful juxtaposition of the US soldiers deployed to harass lawful protesters in Los Angeles. He is unafraid to use the military for his own gain. Just last week, he stood in front of a stand of soldiers at Fort Bragg, selected for their political beliefs and physical appearance, and used them as a prop in his political theatre, defying long-held conventions and rules against the military being involved in partisan politics. No uniformed member of the US military can participate in anything political, something long cherished in the US. But Trump sees the military only as a projection of the kind of strength that his brand of politics admires, and he's willing to break the rules to claim that mantle. Trump is testing the limits of his power. He is defying court orders that block him from deporting legal residents, and his administration does so anyway. He is silencing protesters with shows of overwhelming force. A US senator has been kicked out and handcuffed for trying to ask questions of the people in charge of the immigration crackdowns that are tearing through American society.
