Donald Trump says he is approaching a major decision over Iran.
And this time, his language could hardly have been more extreme.
In a conversation with Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, the president laid out three possible paths for dealing with Tehran: reach a deal, continue squeezing Iran economically — or dramatically escalate the war.
Then came the line that immediately grabbed attention.
“My question is, if and when do I blow the entire nation up?” Trump said, according to Yingst.
“They better behave.”
Yingst relayed the conversation Sunday on Fox & Friends Weekend, saying Trump described himself as being in a “deciding mode.”
The president also said “very big things” could happen in the “not-so-distant future.”
According to Yingst, Trump characterized the choices before him as “wiping Iran out, letting them rot economically or making a deal.”
The remarks do not mean Trump has ordered a new large-scale attack.
But they represent some of his sharpest public rhetoric yet as the Iran conflict approaches seven months.
And they closely follow another striking warning.
Just three days earlier, Trump told Axios that he faced a “big decision” over whether to restart major attacks on Iran.
“Do I want to go in and annihilate them [the Iranian regime] or do I not?” he said.
“Anything could happen with me.”
Those earlier remarks were more specifically directed at Iran’s regime.
The newer Fox comments were broader, with Trump referring to “the entire nation.”
That distinction matters.
Iran is home to more than 90 million people, most of whom have no role in military or government decision-making.
Trump did not provide details about what military action he was actually considering, and rhetoric about destroying an entire nation should not be treated as a literal operational plan without further evidence.
Still, the comments come at a particularly volatile moment.
The United States and Israel have been at war with Iran for roughly seven months, following major strikes earlier this year that Washington and Jerusalem said were aimed at preventing Tehran from advancing its nuclear capabilities.
Since then, the conflict has evolved into a complicated regional confrontation involving naval operations, sanctions, attacks on American forces and instability across vital energy routes.
Trump has recently avoided another massive round of strikes while increasing economic pressure.
Axios reported that the administration has maintained a naval blockade, strengthened sanctions and kept a large U.S. military force in the Middle East capable of returning to full-scale combat.
That holding pattern may be reaching its limit.
U.S. officials told Axios that the military cannot indefinitely maintain its current posture without a clearer endgame.
Trump, meanwhile, is preparing to meet Gulf leaders during the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
The talks are expected to include representatives from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman.
Their views could be crucial.
Earlier this summer, Saudi Arabia and Qatar reportedly urged Trump not to launch another major offensive because of fears Iran would retaliate against energy infrastructure across the Gulf.
That risk is no longer theoretical.
Regional tensions escalated again over the weekend after Iran-backed Houthi forces launched a missile attack toward Riyadh and threatened additional strikes against Saudi targets.
The developments triggered fresh security warnings for Americans traveling in the region.
At the same time, diplomacy has not completely disappeared.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is expected in New York for the U.N. General Assembly after the Trump administration approved visas for senior members of the Iranian delegation.
Yingst said he asked Trump whether he would meet Pezeshkian.
Trump responded that he would “probably” be open to it.
That means Washington is simultaneously signaling two dramatically different possibilities.
One is direct diplomacy.
The other is renewed large-scale military action.
Trump himself appears to be emphasizing both.
Iran has also issued its own threats.
Iranian military officials have warned that any renewed U.S. attack could trigger strikes against American bases and interests across the region.
Neither side’s rhetoric guarantees escalation.
But the consequences of miscalculation could be enormous.
The war has already disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and driven up the cost of moving oil out of the Persian Gulf.
Reuters reported Monday that alternative tanker arrangements have helped restore some exports, but at extremely high transportation costs — in some cases exceeding $30 per barrel.
Another major round of attacks could further affect oil prices, regional security and U.S. forces stationed throughout the Middle East.
For now, Trump has not announced a timetable.
When Fox asked how soon his “not-so-distant future” might arrive, Yingst said the president did not provide one.
That leaves an extraordinary range of possibilities open.
A meeting in New York.
More economic pressure.
Another round of military strikes.
Or some combination of all three.
What is clear is that Trump wants Iran to believe the military option remains very much alive.
“I’m in a deciding mode,” he told Yingst.
And after months of uneasy stalemate, the president is now publicly talking about a choice whose consequences could extend far beyond Washington and Tehran.
