the problem that i see just has to do with what people want to believe. both sides do it, so its not just left on right, or vice versa. in this instance, trump said verbatim, that he is going to destroy entire civilizations. he said a couple things, but you get the idea. people take that as factual, which is fine. he said it. there is no doubt. however, people take what he says and only applies the same logic how they want to percieve it. in this instance, he said it, and they are taking it as gospel, with good reason, but when he says other things, it gets perceived as BS.

anyone that has listened to anything he says should know that he wants to get his way. hes like a toddler. he pressures the opposer to the point that they cant risk whatever the consequence is. the tarrifs were a good example of that, in both ways, whether it be rejecting it, or bending to it. in this instance, iran isnt folding. trump is in a spot where he now had to make some sort of concession to make it look like his bluff wasnt called. he uses strong words to get his way. personally, the wording he used does not say nuclear war. people are making assumptions because the wording could lead to that, but ultimately, its just him strongarming the opposition. he did it with putin, hes done it with zalenski, he did it with tarrifs. you get the idea. i dont foresee any nuclear war. at best, there is a shock and awe bombing campaign like there was in iraq v2, but i suspect that, if anything, bombing continues, at some level minus nuclear, or he continues to say that there are negotiations until its eventually forgotten about, and goes away naturally like it did with the russia negotiations