Trump Demands Iran’s ‘Unconditional Surrender’ as War Tensions Surge

In a dramatic escalation, former President Donald Trump invoked Cold War rhetoric and saber-rattling threats, hinting at U.S. military involvement in Israel’s conflict with Iran, NYT reports.

His remarks, including a veiled threat to assassinate Iran’s supreme leader and a claim of “total control of the skies,” have fueled fears of a broader Middle East war — one that could pull Washington into a new, high-stakes conflict.

On the Ground: Sirens, Strikes, and Escalation

In the early hours of the morning, air raid sirens blared across several regions of Israel, sending civilians scrambling for shelter as the Israeli military reported active Iranian missile launches. The skies lit up with the trails of intercepted projectiles, while Israel’s Iron Dome defense system sprang into action.

Almost simultaneously, in an unprecedented move, the Israeli military issued a public evacuation advisory, not for its own citizens, but for an industrial district in Tehran, Iran’s capital. 

The warning, circulated on social media in Farsi and English, marked a rare moment of psychological warfare and open provocation, hinting at imminent strikes deep within Iranian territory.

Shifting Position: From Caution to Conflagration

For months, former President Donald Trump positioned himself as a reluctant hawk. Despite mounting pressure from Israeli officials, he repeatedly urged restraint, emphasizing the need for a diplomatic resolution over a direct confrontation with Iran. His aides, in off-the-record briefings, described Trump as wary of "another endless war."

But this week's developments suggest a dramatic pivot. Trump’s recent alignment with Israeli military action — referring to their offensive maneuvers as “our control of the skies” — signals a startling break from his earlier posture. The change has prompted questions about whether Trump is now positioning himself not just as a supporter of Israel’s war effort, but as a potential architect of a wider regional conflict.

Analysts are warning that the rhetorical bridge from “we support” to “we strike” is perilously short — and may already be crumbling under the weight of missiles, miscalculations, and mutual threats.