Trump says if Iran attacks, ‘full strength' of US military will ‘come down'

WASHINGTON: Donald Trump warned Iran on Sunday that it would experience 'the full strength' of the US military if it attacks the United States, reiterating that Washington 'had nothing to do' with Israel's strikes on Tehran's nuclear and intelligence facilities.'The US had nothing to do with the attack on Iran, tonight. If we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the US Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before,' he saidHe added that 'we can easily get a deal done between Iran and Israel, and end this bloody conflict!!!'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Arab News

34 minutes ago

• Arab News

Israel vs. Iran: Why Riyadh is committed to de-escalation

As anyone who has followed the recent statements coming out of the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs will tell you, the Kingdom has made its stance regarding the recent regional tensions unequivocally clear: The current aggression against Iran is not only unacceptable, but also a dangerous provocation that threatens the stability of the entire Middle East. It is important for observers to note that Saudi Arabia today views Iran not as an adversary, but as a fellow Muslim nation facing a grave and unjustified assault. In condemning this attack as a blatant violation of international norms, Riyadh has voiced strong solidarity with the Iranian people, rejecting any breach of their sovereignty. This principled position reflects the Kingdom's long-standing belief in non-intervention and mutual respect among nations. What is particularly alarming is the apparent objective behind the timing of these hostilities: to derail sensitive negotiations between Tehran and Washington. Saudi Arabia sees this as a calculated move to sabotage dialogue that could de-escalate one of the region's most intractable challenges — the Iranian nuclear file. Since the landmark Beijing agreement in March 2023, Saudi-Iranian relations have, slowly but surely, entered a promising new chapter. While it is true that previous hostilities could not easily be forgotten, trust-building measures have been gradually taking root, with bilateral committees working across various domains to ensure differences do not escalate unchecked. This fragile progress — and the greater idea of a peaceful and prosperous Middle East — is precisely what stands to be lost if the drums of war drown out diplomatic momentum. Riyadh has also emphasized that regional stability hinges on stronger cooperation among Muslim nations. Under the umbrella of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the Kingdom believes in the potential for a united front that can foster peace and development, so long as intentions are sincere and not clouded by geopolitical ambitions. The current aggression is not only unacceptable, but also a dangerous provocation. Faisal J. Abbas | Editor-in-Chief In a flurry of diplomatic engagement, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has been on the phone with world leaders, all the way from Washington to London to the Far East, calling for collective action to halt what could possibly be a regional disaster. He has also spoken directly with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, underscoring Saudi Arabia's commitment to de-escalation and its willingness to mediate. This leadership extends beyond political gestures. On the ground, the Kingdom provided shelter, medical care, and transportation to over 70,000 Iranian pilgrims stranded in Saudi Arabia due to the conflict. Acting on the crown prince's directive, the Kingdom funded their stay and coordinated their safe return home — a humanitarian move reflecting the values Saudi Arabia consistently upholds. Meanwhile, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan has been tirelessly engaging with global counterparts, rallying support for a ceasefire and meeting directly with his Iranian counterpart to explore diplomatic solutions. Notably, Riyadh had urged Tehran — well before the outbreak of hostilities — to engage with Washington's final offer seriously, warning that the US stance on the nuclear issue should not be underestimated. Looking forward, should Iran face humanitarian challenges in the aftermath of this crisis, there is no doubt that the Kingdom will be among the first to offer aid. This is not merely altruism — it is a strategic and moral imperative rooted in the belief that the well-being of neighboring nations affects the collective fate of the region. Crucially, Saudi Arabia has drawn a firm line: No belligerent party will be permitted to use its airspace, land, or waters. Riyadh's neutrality is active, not passive — it is deliberate, disciplined, and unwavering in its commitment to de-escalation. Needless to say, the deliberate targeting of civilians, bombing of media outlets and hospitals, and threats to the Islamic Republic's Supreme Leader are condemnable and appalling; but by continuing to accept them we risk normalizing unacceptable war crimes. Hopefully, there will be some adults in decision-making rooms around the world who will agree that this escalation needs to stop before we reach the point of no return.

Leaders

43 minutes ago

• Leaders

Netanyahu Uses Iran Conflict to Stay in Office Forever: Former US President Clinton

Former US President Bill Clinton said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was using war against Iran as a way to stay in power for good, according to Arab News. 'Netanyahu has long wanted to fight Iran because that way he can stay in office forever and ever. I mean, he's been there most of the last 20 years,' Clinton stated during an appearance on 'The Daily Show'. Clinton also said he urged US President Donald Trump to 'defuse' the ongoing war between Israel and Iran and put an end to the 'outright constant killing of civilians.' In the same context, he mentioned that he did not believe that either Netanyahu or Trump want to create a full-scale regional war. Apart from this, he noted that it is significant for the US to protect its allies but at the same time he called for restraint. 'We have to convince our friends in the Middle East that we'll stand with them and try to protect them,' he stated. Moreover, he underscored that embarking on undeclared wars that primarily destroy civilians 'is not a very good solution.' Importantly, Clinton stated that the US has stayed out of direct intervention in the Israeli Iranian tensions. However, it has provided Israel with military equipment and helped it intercept missiles from Tehran. Related Topics: Iran-Israel Conflict Enters 2nd Week with Dim Prospects for Diplomacy Iraqi Cities Protest against Israel's War on Iran US Military Aircrafts Vanish from Qatar Base Amid Iran Tensions Short link : Post Views: 174 Related Stories

Al Arabiya

an hour ago

• Al Arabiya

GOP's Food Stamp Plan Is Found to Violate Senate Rules. It's the Latest Setback for Trump's Big Bill

In another blow to the Republicans' tax and spending cut bill, the Senate parliamentarian has advised that a proposal to shift some food stamp costs from the federal government to states–a centerpiece of GOP savings efforts–would violate the chamber's rules. While the parliamentarian's rulings are advisory, they are rarely, if ever, ignored. The Republican leadership was scrambling on Saturday, days before voting is expected to begin on President Donald Trump's package that he wants passed into law by the Fourth of July. The loss is expected to be costly to Republicans. They have been counting on some tens of billions of potential savings from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, to help offset the costs of the $4.5 trillion tax breaks plan. The parliamentarian let stand, for now, a provision that would impose new work requirements for older Americans up to age 65 to receive food stamp aid. 'We will keep fighting to protect families in need,' said Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, which handles the SNAP program. 'The parliamentarian has made clear that Senate Republicans cannot use their partisan budget to shift major nutrition assistance costs to the states, that would have inevitably led to major cuts,' she said. The parliamentarian's ruling is the latest in a series of setbacks as staff works through the weekend, often toward midnight, to assess the 1,000-page proposal. It all points to serious trouble ahead for the bill, which was approved by the House on a party-line vote last month over unified opposition from Democrats and is now undergoing revisions in the Senate. At its core, the goal of the multitrillion-dollar package is to extend tax cuts from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire if Congress fails to act. It also adds new ones, including no taxes on tips or overtime pay. To help offset the costs of lost tax revenue, the Republicans are proposing cutbacks to federal Medicaid, health care, and food programs–some $1 trillion. Additionally, the package boosts national security spending by about $350 billion, including to pay for Trump's mass deportations, which are running into protests nationwide. Trump has implored Republicans, who have the majority in Congress, to deliver on his top domestic priority, but the details of the package, with its hodge-podge of priorities, are drawing deeper scrutiny. All told, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the package, as approved by the House, would add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation's red ink over the decade and leave 10.9 million more people without health care coverage. Additionally, it would reduce or eliminate food stamps for more than 3 million people. The parliamentarian's office is tasked with scrutinizing the bill to ensure it complies with the so-called Byrd Rule, which is named after the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, and bars many policy matters in the budget reconciliation process now being used. Late Friday, the parliamentarian issued its latest findings. It determined that the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee's proposal to have the states pick up more of the tab for covering food stamps–what Republicans call a new cost-sharing arrangement–would be in violation of the Byrd Rule. Many lawmakers said the states would not be able to absorb the new requirement on food aid, which has long been provided by the federal government. They warned many would lose access to SNAP benefits, used by more than 40 million people. Initially, the CBO had estimated about $128 billion in savings under the House's proposal to shift SNAP food aid costs to the states. Cost estimates for the Senate's version, which made changes to the House approach, have not yet been made publicly available. The parliamentarian's office rulings leave GOP leaders with several options. They can revise the proposals to try to comply with Senate rules or strip them from the package altogether. They can also risk a challenge during floor voting, which would require the 60-vote threshold to overcome. That would be unlikely in the split chamber with Democrats opposing the overall package. The parliamentarian's latest advice also said the committee's provision to make certain immigrants ineligible for food stamps would violate the rule. It found several provisions from the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which is led by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to be in violation. They include one to provide $250 million to Coast Guard stations damaged by fire in 2025, namely one on South Padre Island in Texas. Still to come are some of the most important rulings from the parliamentarian. One will assess the GOP's approach that relies on current policy rather than current law as the baseline for determining whether the bill will add to the nation's deficits. Already, the parliamentarian delivered a serious setback Thursday, finding that the GOP plan to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was a core proposal coming from the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, would be in violation of the Byrd Rule. The parliamentarian has also advised of violations over provisions from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that would roll back Environmental Protection Agency emissions standards on certain vehicles and from the Senate Armed Services Committee to require the defense secretary to provide a plan on how the Pentagon intends to spend the tens of billions of new funds. The new work requirements in the package would require many of those receiving SNAP or Medicaid benefits to work 80 hours a month or engage in other community or educational services.