Trump posted on his personal account saying the U.S. is striking Iranian targets, and if Iran dares to retaliate against this "fully justified attack," it will only face even stronger and larger counterattacks—yet none of these would constitute the biggest strike. "The real attack is building up; once it concludes, there will be very little left of Iran."
Without needing to analyze deeply, one can already sense that Trump is clearly hinting at the potential use of "nuclear weapons," warming up the ground for such a possibility.
Over the past six months of conflict, the outside world had held extreme skepticism toward claims that Trump might discuss using nuclear weapons. Now, those remarks have been brought squarely onto the table.
It is also essentially confirmed that Bessent’s "economic warfare" against Iran is destined to fail.
Just look at Iran's popularity during the SCO summit.
The adopted declaration explicitly states: "We firmly condemn any attack or threat of attack on peaceful nuclear facilities, as such acts violate international law."
Striking places like Khark Island, Bandar Abbas, or the so-called "bridges and power plants day" plan wouldn't come close to leaving Iran "with very little left." This phrasing only implies total annihilation.
The consequences and costs of using nuclear weapons would not be borne solely by Iran—Gulf nations would suffer equally, perhaps even facing catastrophic destruction.
Whether to resort to nuclear weapons depends entirely on whether Gulf Arab leaders can persuade Trump to abandon such plans.
From the resignation of senior U.S. Army officials to Israel’s emergency planning, these are not baseless rumors. All signs point collectively toward a major military escalation.
When the U.S. first used an atomic bomb, it led to the surrender of the opposing nation. This time, that may not happen.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875170321614924/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.