Christine Drews Sieger
Former U.S. Lieutenant General Mark Hertling has criticized Donald Trump’s description of the conflict with Iran, arguing that his choice of words downplays the seriousness of the war.
Donald Trump’s comments about the conflict with Iran have prompted former U.S. Lieutenant General Mark Hertling to issue sharp criticism of the president.
The criticism is not aimed at the military actions themselves but at the term the president used to describe the conflict with Iran.
During a press briefing on Tuesday, Trump rejected the idea that the situation constituted a full-scale war. Instead, he downplayed the conflict, describing it as a military operation rather than a war.
According to RawStory, Trump’s choice of words was discussed during an interview on MS NOW. Hertling responded by comparing Trump’s language to Russia’s rhetoric during its invasion of Ukraine.
Choice of words sparks debate
“I think he called it a ‘special military operation,’ which sounds eerily familiar to what President Putin was calling the invasion of Ukraine,” Hertling said during the broadcast.
The former U.S. general also rejected Trump’s description of the conflict, according to RawStory.
Hertling argued that, based on standard military criteria, the conflict could only be described as a war. He warned that such rhetoric risks downplaying the seriousness of the conflict.
Points to recent developments
As part of his criticism, Hertling referred to recent events in the region, which he believes demonstrate that the conflict continues to evolve.
“But last night, we saw more ships being struck by Ukrainian drones—or, excuse me, Iranian drones. It’s just a mishmash of information that he’s passing off to the press,” he said.
The remarks came in the wake of Trump’s meetings in Turkey ahead of NATO negotiations, where the president’s comments about Iran became a significant focus of the subsequent media coverage, RawStory reports.
Trump’s remarks have repeatedly made headlines
Over the years, Donald Trump has become known for his unusually direct and often controversial language, which has repeatedly sparked public debate and prompted fact-checking.
In 2024, the independent U.S. organization PolitiFact published an analysis of its first 1,000 fact-checks of Trump. It concluded that around 76 percent of the statements it assessed were rated either “Mostly False,” “False,” or the most severe category, “Pants on Fire,” which is reserved for statements that are both false and highly misleading.
The analysis also found that Trump stands out significantly from other prominent American politicians examined by PolitiFact, both in the number of fact-checks conducted and in the proportion of statements judged to be inaccurate.
According to the organization, many of the most widely discussed cases have involved repeated claims about election fraud, the economy, immigration, and international affairs. These claims have often been repeated over extended periods, even after they were debunked.
Sources: RawStory, MS NOW, PolitiFact
