US President Donald Trump has sparked widespread backlash after suggesting that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles or San Diego, describing the potential loss of a major American city as a “very small price to pay” in the broader context of the war with Iran.
Trump made the remarks Monday, October 5, during a campaign rally in Grand Island, Nebraska, while discussing the economic impact of the conflict, including higher fuel prices.
“It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump told supporters. He then added, “They can take out a city. Let ’em take out Los Angeles, let ’em take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”
Trump went on to say that the conflict would be over “very soon,” without providing further details about what he meant by the reference to the two California cities.
The comments quickly drew criticism from California officials. Governor Gavin Newsom accused Trump of being “deranged and dangerous,” while Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the remarks could compromise the city’s safety. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria also rejected the suggestion that his city could be treated as collateral damage.
The White House, however, has rejected the interpretation that Trump was calling for or accepting an Iranian attack on American cities.
White House Communications Director Steven Cheung said Trump was referring to the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran could pose to US cities and arguing that the ongoing war was intended to prevent Tehran from acquiring that capability. Cheung said Trump was “clearly stating” that American cities would have been threatened if Iran had obtained a nuclear weapon.
The clarification has not ended the controversy, with critics arguing that Trump’s actual wording appeared to suggest that the destruction of Los Angeles or San Diego would be an acceptable cost of the war.
The remarks come as Trump campaigns ahead of the November 3 US midterm elections and faces political pressure over the economic consequences of the conflict, particularly elevated energy prices.
The dispute therefore centers not only on the words Trump used at the rally but also on how those words should be understood in the context of his argument that the war is necessary to prevent a broader threat from Iran.
For now, the White House maintains that Trump was describing a threat the administration says it is working to prevent, rather than advocating an Iranian attack on Los Angeles or San Diego.
Discover more from Scoop Hub
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
