Antony Blinken pushes back against Trump comments suggesting he supported Iran attack
Source: The Hill
03/26/26 11:10 PM ET
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken rejected President Trump’s characterization this week that the Biden administration official had wanted to launch military operations on Iran during his time in the White House. “I’ve heard that today Blinken made a statement that he should have done it,” Trump said during a speech to Republican members of Congress on Wednesday evening.
“Thanks a lot, Blinken, I appreciate it,” the president continued. “Blinken is Biden’s guy, I guess. Who the hell knows who he is. He’s his guy. But he came out with the statement that they should have done it, they made a mistake.”. Blinken denied making this statement in a lengthy thread on the social platform X on Thursday, pointing to clips of his past comments to the press on U.S.-Iran relations during his time serving under former President Biden.
The Trump administration launched joint strikes with Israel on Iran at the end of February after failed nuclear negotiations. President Trump was attempting to form a new deal after he dissolved an existing agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), during his first administration.
“What would have happened if President Trump had just left the JCPOA in place?” Blinken asked in an X post. “When the JCPOA expired, it could be extended or renegotiated, as with most arms control agreements,” he continued. “If Iran refused, the U.S. would still retain the military option, with a lot more information about Iran’s program, because of the most intrusive inspections ever.”
Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5803627-blinken-denies-trump-iran-claims/
Link to tweet
@ABlinken
(3/10) In short: President Trump made a terrible decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal (“JCPOA”) in 2017 and replace it with nothing. The Obama Administration put Iran’s nuclear program in a box, President Trump let it out.
0:37 / 2:46
5:43 PM · Mar 26, 2026
Antony Blinken
@ABlinken
(4/10) What would have happened if President Trump had just left the JCPOA in place? When the JCPOA expired, it could be extended or renegotiated, as with most arms control agreements. If Iran refused, the U.S. would still retain the military option, with a lot more information about Iran’s program, because of the most intrusive inspections ever.
Unrolled thread - https://twitter-thread.com/t/2037284391089516729
@ABlinken
15h
10 tweets
Tweet
(1/10) @Donald J. Trump cited me as supporting his attack on Iran and expressing regret we didn’t do it during the Biden Administration. Except I didn’t.
Acyn
Acyn
@Acyn
Mar 25
View on Twitter
Trump: I've heard that today Blinken made a statement that he should have done it. Thanks a lot, I appreciate it. Blinken is Biden’s guy I guess. Who the hell knows who he is. But he came out with the statement that they should have done it, they made a mistake
(2/10) For what I did say, see the clips below.
(3/10) In short: President Trump made a terrible decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal (“JCPOA”) in 2017 and replace it with nothing. The Obama Administration put Iran’s nuclear program in a box, President Trump let it out.
(4/10) What would have happened if President Trump had just left the JCPOA in place? When the JCPOA expired, it could be extended or renegotiated, as with most arms control agreements. If Iran refused, the U.S. would still retain the military option, with a lot more information about Iran’s program, because of the most intrusive inspections ever.
(5/10) Now, we have to be able to hold multiple ideas in our heads at the same time. Once our armed forces are engaged in conflict we should all be pulling for their safety and success. Is it a good thing the Ayatollah who inflicted so much suffering on the Iranian people (and wrought so much violence around the world, including on Americans) is gone, Iran’s missile arsenal is diminished, and its nuclear program “re-obliterated” (since apparently it wasn’t “obliterated” in June)? Yes. But to what ends, at what cost, and for how long?
(6/10) So far, we’ve traded an 86-year-old Ayatollah Khamenei for a 56-year-old Ayatollah Khamenei, empowered hardliners, and sidelined pragmatists. The regime could fall in five days or five years. And to be replaced by what?
(7/10) Iran apparently retains at least 5-10 bombs worth of uranium enriched to 60% and probably some hundreds of centrifuges to further enrich it to weapons grade. It can rebuild missiles over time and drones more quickly.
(8/10) The failure to anticipate and prepare for Iran weaponizing the Strait of Hormuz puts us literally at the bottom of the barrel. Markets (oil, LNG, stocks, bonds, fertilizer, helium) and munitions (offensive and defensive) will dictate when President Trump feels compelled to declare victory and walk away, but with Iran controlling the Strait. Maybe a negotiation can fix that, but with what concessions to Iran? Or we can double down, at huge risk.
(9/10) Meanwhile, 13 American servicemembers have lost their lives and hundreds more have been wounded. The Iranian people are still under the fist of a highly repressive regime. Iran and Russia are getting an oil bonanza. America is more isolated than ever from our closest allies and partners. And billions more U.S. taxpayer dollars are being spent on another war in the Middle East (with an additional $200 billion requested from the Pentagon to fund this war). Not to mention the failure to make the case to the American people for why this was necessary, in their interest, or worth risking American lives for.
(10/10) So no, I would not have done it. For the record.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Once again. Every fucking day with this mf'er. 
He's trying to toss his mistakes and failures onto Joe Biden and Barack Obama, with NO EVIDENCE whatsoever except his say-so. I'm happy to see that Antony Blinken has a quick answer, but it seems the media (The Hill) barely acknowledges him. They're too busy quoting the lies and innuendos by Chump.
