Trump comment about L.A and San Diego.

[letteredhub]

About President Trump controversial comments at one of his campaign rally trip to California.
Is a country's President suppose to make certain jokingly security risk concerns statements about any state in a country he rules as the President? Because his comment has really spark up so many opinions on different social platforms and it would be useful we discuss about it in the forum too.

The statement: Iran can attack Los Angeles or San Diego if it keeps the rest of America safe, is something that IMO shouldn't be. Although I believe that Iran may not do such but why would the number one citizen make such heavy statement even it's a joke, should it be coming from him?

The LA mayor Karen Bass has spoken tough on X against Trump comments, saying it can compromise the state security.

https://x.com/MayorOfLA/status/2107315868493557945

[Oluwa-btc]

About President Trump controversial comments at one of his campaign rally trip to California.
Is a country's President suppose to make certain jokingly security risk concerns statements about any state in a country he rules as the President? Because his comment has really spark up so many opinions on different social platforms and it would be useful we discuss about it in the forum too.

The statement: Iran can attack Los Angeles or San Diego if it keeps the rest of America safe, is something that IMO shouldn't be. Although I believe that Iran may not do such but why would the number one citizen make such heavy statement even it's a joke, should it be coming from him?

The LA mayor Karen Bass has spoken tough on X against Trump comments, saying it can compromise the state security.

https://x.com/MayorOfLA/status/2107315868493557945

Personally, I don't fvck with Donald Trump but I don't think that was what he meant.  Could it be comprehension issues or something?! But what I thought he said was that, he doesn't want Iranians in possession of a nuclear weapon and that if they do, they can take out both  Los Angeles and San Diego. That was what I heard when I watched the video clip trending online.

At the same time, I could still remain wrong, but that was what I thought I heard from that video clip. But if that was he meant, no better way for him to have announced himself a traitor to the American people. Yet again, his running mouth has failed him and we can all see he is not fit for office. A complete moron.

That said, Iranians do not possess Nuclear weapons and the only one with such nuclear capabilities that can hit both Los Angeles and San Diego has got to be isreali regime. Not even Iranian long range ballistic missiles can hit them. It could also be that Donald Trump has plans to attack this states personally.

[o48o]

Personally, I don't fvck with Donald Trump but I don't think that was what he meant.  Could it be comprehension issues or something?! But what I thought he said was that, he doesn't want Iranians in possession of a nuclear weapon and that if they do, they can take out both  Los Angeles and San Diego. That was what I heard when I watched the video clip trending online.

At the same time, I could still remain wrong, but that was what I thought I heard from that video clip. But if that was he meant, no better way for him to have announced himself a traitor to the American people. Yet again, his running mouth has failed him and we can all see he is not fit for office. A complete moron.

That said, Iranians do not possess Nuclear weapons and the only one with such nuclear capabilities that can hit both Los Angeles and San Diego has got to be isreali regime. Not even Iranian long range ballistic missiles can hit them. It could also be that Donald Trump has plans to attack this states personally.

If i put my tinfoil hat on, i am worrying that he wants to bomb those cities, or some other blue state himself and blame Iran for it. That would basically give him free hands to quit democracy in US all together.

It would totally fit his agenda and person, as most of his and maga's conspiracies and accusations have been confessions anyway. That idea totally out there, i know, but the world we live in now, it wouldn't even surprise me.

[legiteum]

Personally, I don't fvck with Donald Trump but I don't think that was what he meant.  Could it be comprehension issues or something?! But what I thought he said was that, he doesn't want Iranians in possession of a nuclear weapon and that if they do, they can take out both  Los Angeles and San Diego. That was what I heard when I watched the video clip trending online.

Nope, that's not what he said and it's not how people--including members of his own party--are interpreting it.

He clearly said that it would be okay if the Iranians annihilated LA and San Diego (and presumably a lot of other cities that are majority Democrat) if that was what was necessary to defeat Iran.

Of course, if you take this at face value, it's absolute gibberish and makes no sense. Hence the only meaning it actually had was Trump's thought process around the war, and his willingness to sacrifice millions of American lives in order to "win" the war he started with Iran.

There's a reason why Republicans who are up for reelection right now are desperately trying to contradict what Trump said here: because the sentiment is clear.

Of course they can't run away from this remark since they aren't allowed to say they don't support the Iran war--and Democrats are destroying them on this issue because they were against the Iran war from the beginning.

That said, Iranians do not possess Nuclear weapons and the only one with such nuclear capabilities that can hit both Los Angeles and San Diego has got to be isreali regime. Not even Iranian long range ballistic missiles can hit them. It could also be that Donald Trump has plans to attack this states personally.

Yes, Iran doesn't have the materials, let alone the delivery vehicle to hit anywhere near the USA, let alone the west coast where LA and San Diego are.

Most voters remember that the "nuclear" thing was just something Trump invented after he started the war. Just six months before Trump promised Americans that Iran's nuclear capabilities have been "completely annihilated", and most Americans were probably happy with Trump doing what presidents before him did on occasion, which was a little bit of targeted bombing of their nuclear facilities every couple of years.

This is a political mess for Trump and the Republicans as it should be. We've spent billions of dollars, depleted our critical weapons supplies, and US soldiers have lost their lives, all for an absolutely idiotic war that has actually strengthened the enemy. This cannot be passed off by Republicans as, "a few mean tweets". This is real money and real death and real inconvenience at every single gas pump in the USA, every single week, for almost every American.

[letteredhub]

Personally, I don't fvck with Donald Trump but I don't think that was what he meant.  Could it be comprehension issues or something?! But what I thought he said was that, he doesn't want Iranians in possession of a nuclear weapon and that if they do, they can take out both  Los Angeles and San Diego. That was what I heard when I watched the video clip trending online.

Nope, that's not what he said and it's not how people--including members of his own party--are interpreting it.

He clearly said that it would be okay if the Iranians annihilated LA and San Diego (and presumably a lot of other cities that are majority Democrat) if that was what was necessary to defeat Iran.

Of course, if you take this at face value, it's absolute gibberish and makes no sense. Hence the only meaning it actually had was Trump's thought process around the war, and his willingness to sacrifice millions of American lives in order to "win" the war he started with Iran.

There's a reason why Republicans who are up for reelection right now are desperately trying to contradict what Trump said here: because the sentiment is clear.

Of course they can't run away from this remark since they aren't allowed to say they don't support the Iran war--and Democrats are destroying them on this issue because they were against the Iran war from the beginning.

I am starting to wonder what Benjamin Netanyahu has on Donald Trump that he wish he sacrifices American citizens to make sure he  gets rid of Iran, what was supposed to be an lsreali war but Trump takes it on his shoulders with Americans tax payers funds.

Politicians are always desperate and would want to say just anything to win themselves back to political position. I wasn't surprised either seeing what the Republicans politicians are trying interpret Trump words, words which are obvious and need no interpretation to be understood. The first time the MAGA phrase was spoken it wasn't about Israel it was about America and Americans but here is Trump twisting the narrative and some persons ain't seeing it that way.

[TheButterZone]

Is this the exact quote?

"Remember, with the war, it's just artificial. It's a little bit high. It's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. That's—this is a very small price to pay."

That sounds like he's poking at those who want to let Iran run amok & Trump not to be at war with Iran rather than letting Iran have been who shot first (in a counterfactual present day with no US military action against Iran), and with nukes. That these people would rather LA & San Diego be the exponentially worse Twin Towers or Pearl Harbor (or Hiroshima & Nagasaki if the US nuked Japan without already being at total war), take your pick, before they would drop their anti-"Republican"-led-war stance (again).

[philipma1957]

Is this the exact quote?

"Remember, with the war, it's just artificial. It's a little bit high. It's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. That's—this is a very small price to pay."

That sounds like he's poking at those who want to let Iran run amok & Trump not to be at war with Iran rather than letting Iran have been who shot first (in a counterfactual present day with no US military action against Iran), and with nukes. That these people would rather LA & San Diego be the exponentially worse Twin Towers or Pearl Harbor (or Hiroshima & Nagasaki if the US nuked Japan without already being at total war), take your pick, before they would drop their anti-"Republican"-led-war stance (again).

You are correct. He has always been a sloppy talker SINCE I grew up In New York City I have watched him mouth off for over 50 years.

He is my translation : If iran had nukes they could take out both San Diego and Los Angeles.  We would then be justified in dropping how ever many nukes as possible to eliminate them and the rest  of the USA would be safe.

Any other translation of the statement is wrong.

Frankly my issue is not Iran having nukes.
IT is the following.
The Capsian sea is attached to Russia and to Iran.

So a ship from Russia can sail to Iran and give them nukes any time the want to.

The Capsian Sea is not open to the world.
The only way to stop Russia from shipping nukes to Iran is sink every ship and sub. In the Capsian sea.

This would cause WWIII.

The second option to stop Iran from having nukes to nuke Iran and kill every single Iranian in Iran.

Which would also start WWIII


Therefore Trump is insane to say he wants to stop Iran from having a nuke.

Or he is a genius at confusing people with a fake nuke story when he simply wants to force oil companies to invest in Venezuela .

If he can dick around with the fake Iran bullshit long enough money will flow to Venezuela to redevelop the oil there.

Not a Trump fan used to be years ago in the 80s and 90s. But my best guess is this post is a very accurate guess at the true plan.

[TheButterZone]

Not a Trump fan used to be years ago in the 80s and 90s. But my best guess is this post is a very accurate guess at the true plan.

Not sure if you've seen the bounty for the full Trump Oprah interview but if you end up really listening to what he said in the limited clips & not so much looking for the alleged quote, it might be interesting to compare his rhetoric from decades ago, to everything since June 16 2015.

[legiteum]

I am starting to wonder what Benjamin Netanyahu has on Donald Trump that he wish he sacrifices American citizens to make sure he  gets rid of Iran, what was supposed to be an lsreali war but Trump takes it on his shoulders with Americans tax payers funds.

Every "inside" account of Trump says the same thing: he believes whatever the last person who talked to him told him. Netanyahu clearly tricked them into starting a war with Iran (this is what Rubio said happened the day after it started, although they obviously changed their story quickly and made up some other justifications which they bounced between for the next several months before finally settling on the "nuclear threat" thing).

Regardless, if you are looking at Trump specifically, I wouldn't over-analyze it: Netanyahu had his ear for long enough to convince him to do it, so he did it. Now he regrets it, but he also cannot get out of it. Trump himself has no ideology.

He is my translation : If iran had nukes they could take out both San Diego and Los Angeles.  We would then be justified in dropping how ever many nukes as possible to eliminate them and the rest  of the USA would be safe.

He said that Iran destroying two of the US's largest cities (who both happen to predominately support the other party) is a "small price to pay". That's an insane thing for a leader to say about his own country.

It's also ignorant: Iran would have to get a nuclear device working, then get delivery vehicles working, then get ballistic missile delivery vehicles working, then get ones that go all of the way to the OTHER side of the USA e.g. the west coast. There's no reality where this happens in the next 40 years: all Iran needs is a threat, and maybe a vehicle to deliver it to Israel and they will have achieved their strategic goal.

And yes, they could probably get a nuke any time they wanted from Russia if it made sense for Russia, and it's not hard to imagine a scenario where it would make sense. (In the short run, Putin's control of Trump actually changes his calculus so it's unclear he would risk this right now--but things could change for a variety of reasons, say if Russia needed more of Iran's drone tech).

[9ja Amaka]

Personally, I don't fvck with Donald Trump but I don't think that was what he meant.  Could it be comprehension issues or something?! But what I thought he said was that, he doesn't want Iranians in possession of a nuclear weapon and that if they do, they can take out both  Los Angeles and San Diego. That was what I heard when I watched the video clip trending online.

At the same time, I could still remain wrong, but that was what I thought I heard from that video clip. But if that was he meant, no better way for him to have announced himself a traitor to the American people. Yet again, his running mouth has failed him and we can all see he is not fit for office. A complete moron.

That said, Iranians do not possess Nuclear weapons and the only one with such nuclear capabilities that can hit both Los Angeles and San Diego has got to be isreali regime. Not even Iranian long range ballistic missiles can hit them. It could also be that Donald Trump has plans to attack this states personally.

That's far from what Donald Trump said in that video. Donald Trump meant a City in the United States. If attacked by the Irans wont cause panic if it means that the City is the bedrock where other cities in the state will be saved. The statement can be related to the phrase "take one for the team". Meaning, he is ready to risk two cities if it's going to save the rest of the United States. Military people also have this ideology, and that is a decision that will save many lives while ending the lives of a few.

[pooya87]

What the pedophile POTUS was told to do by the regime was to advertise one of the regime's policies which is Iranophobia in all of his speeches; but since he is pretty stupid he messed it up and said it in that way meaning their lives doesn't matter which is true in a sense too, these are just subjects of the regime that are only good to be milked out of their last pennies to fund their secret islands where they go to rape children.

The child-murderers in D.C. are confusing Iran with themselves obviously. They are the ones murdering civilians and bomb elementary schools committing terrorism.

If you think about it, there is no benefit in hitting LA or San Diego either! That sounds too random to me. (Did they vote against the pedophile perhaps?!) In any case from a military standpoint if some day Iran was forced to retaliate against the terrorist regime, the retaliation will be deletion of the headquarters and the strongholds of the US regime which means Washington DC and Virginia.
A couple of Rastakheez ICMBs would be enough to delete them for good.

FWIW I doubt it will get to that though. I personally believe that the corruption in the US regime (Epstein Class) has grown too much and the losses are amassed enough that will destroy the White House of Oppression from within and most probably by Americans who would overthrow the Epstein Regime in the coming years.

P.S. Go California Republic

[Agbamoni]

What the pedophile POTUS was told to do by the regime was to advertise one of the regime's policies which is Iranophobia in all of his speeches; but since he is pretty stupid he messed it up and said it in that way meaning their lives doesn't matter which is true in a sense too, these are just subjects of the regime that are only good to be milked out of their last pennies to fund their secret islands where they go to rape children.

He (POTUS) would rather see LA or San Diego destroyed than for anything to be done to the secret island where evils are done. If he can see 64,000 children killed and injured in Gaza, what do you think he will do to the slaves who voted him into power?

FWIW I doubt it will get to that though. I personally believe that the corruption in the US regime (Epstein Class) has grown too much and the losses are amassed enough that will destroy the White House of Oppression from within and most probably by Americans who would overthrow the Epstein Regime in the coming years.

P.S. Go California Republic

Eventually, they will bring about their condemnation and destruction if the crime in the White House continues.

[OgNasty]

I don’t think he meant it like that. His words are taken out of context. He wasn’t literally saying Iran should blow up American cities…

Speaking of Trump, I am considering changing the wrap on my Cybertruck and am looking into new wrap ideas. This one seems to be the best one I’ve found so far. Think of the content for social media…

[programmer3666]

Sometimes that man jsut voices out things carelessly without weighing the repercussions at all. Instead of focusing more on helping his party's local candidate to campaign whenever he has the crowd around him and helping them increase their chances at the polls this November, he is busy making more efforts to give them bad ratings. Making jokes about allowing a foreign nation to attack LA and San Diego. He always loves to put his party candidates in a defensive mode because, when many of them go for media interviews, they are constantly asked about what Trump says or didn't say and he always gives the media something negative to talk about.