Trump’s war rhetoric is coarse. It’s also heard differently, depending on the audience

In one of his latest missives on social media, President Trump complained about not getting enough credit for “totally destroying the Iranian terrorist regime, militarily, economically and otherwise.”

“We have unprecedented firepower, unlimited munitions, and plenty of time,” he wrote of a war that has crippled global oil supplies, sharply increased gas prices, cost U.S. taxpayers billions, killed and injured thousands, and has so far defied Trump’s “short-term” timetable.

“Look what’s happening to these deranged bastards today,” Trump added. “They have been killing innocent people all over the world for 47 years, and now, as the 47th President of the United States of America, I am killing them. What a great honor to do so!”

Repeatedly in recent days, Trump and other senior officials in his administration — notably Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — have projected confidence and power in Iran in a crude, triumphant tone unprecedented for wartime U.S. presidents and their cabinet members, according to experts on presidential rhetoric and propaganda.

They have always described the war in terms of how hard the United States is hitting Iran, rather than why it should do it. They talked about destroying Iran’s navy and air force, wiping out their leadership, and making the United States “more respected” in the world than it has ever been, including showing no mercy.

“This was never supposed to be a fair fight, and it’s not a fair fight. We’re hitting them while they’re down, which is exactly how it should be,” Hegseth said.

Missing is the solemnity of past wartime leaders in the face of dead American soldiers, a recalcitrant enemy and a precarious tactical position, replaced by a message of American ruthlessness – of contempt for Iran rather than concern for its civilians or focus on the American ideals around which American presidents have long tried to rally the world, especially in times of war.

“At a time when people can see the effects of war when they fill up their gas tank and there are American casualties, the triumphalist tone is just not something a president usually adopts,” said Robert C. Rowland, a professor of rhetoric at the University of Kansas and author of the book “The Rhetoric of Donald Trump: Nationalist Populism and American Democracy.”

“Many presidents would not take that tone for personal moral reasons,” Rowland said, “but they also know that it can backfire when things are not going well.”

James J. Kimble, a professor of communications and historian of propaganda at Seton Hall University, said U.S. presidents have “by and large” adopted a respectful tone during wartime, with a few exceptions. President Truman, justifying dropping atomic bombs on Japan, wrote that “when you deal with a beast, you must treat him like a beast,” while the United States produced World War II posters designed to “demonize and dehumanize the German enemy,” he noted.

Yet Trump’s message — including his “expressed joy at the deaths of foreign fighters” — was “much cruder,” Kimble said.

“It goes beyond the idea of ​​defeating the enemy on the battlefield, and extends more towards a kind of defeat as a humiliation – an intentional humiliation,” he said. “This is schoolyard bullying, as well as physical violence.”

Asked about Trump’s rhetoric, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said Trump “will always be proud to recognize the incredible accomplishments of our brave service members.”

“Under the decisive leadership of President Trump, America’s heroic warfighters are meeting or exceeding all of their objectives in Operation Epic Fury,” she said. “The mainstream media wants us to apologize for highlighting the incredible success of the U.S. military, but the White House will continue to showcase the many examples of Iranian ballistic missiles, production facilities and dreams of having a nuclear weapon being destroyed in real time.”

Trump has built his political career around brutal rhetoric, and his messages on Iran have drawn applause from his supporters. Polls have shown that public opinion is sharply divided on the war – enjoying far less public support than in previous wars, but broad support from Republicans.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the media of ignoring “clear” goals the president and others have set for the war effort, including wiping out Iran’s missile systems, preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon and stopping what Trump “feels” is an imminent attack on the United States.

However, Trump and Hegseth have themselves strayed from this framework with their brash rhetoric and focus on the assassination of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other Iranian leaders.

Trump has dismissed reports that the United States bombed an Iranian school full of children by suggesting Iran might be responsible, despite U.S. intelligence findings that it was a U.S. attack.

Hegseth added to concerns about reckless U.S. bombing by expressing disdain for the rules of war designed to limit civilian casualties, calling them “stupid rules of engagement.”

“Our warfighters have maximum authorities granted personally by the president and yours truly,” Hegseth said. “Our rules of engagement are bold, precise and designed to unleash American power, not fetter it. »

The White House also launched a wave of war propaganda on social media, often adopting the same irreverent and bullish tone, experts noted.

One video interspersed movie clips of superheroes and soldiers with real-life footage of Iranian targets being blown up, under the words “JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY.” The clip drew condemnation, including from actor Ben Stiller, who objected to the inclusion of footage from his film “Tropic Thunder,” saying, “War is not a movie.”

Hegseth’s bravado was also caricatured on “Saturday Night Live,” which opened two weeks in a row with a satirical portrait of him as angry, stupid and excited by the violence of war.

All this happened against a backdrop of Islamophobic remarks from members of Congress on inside the doors.

To be sure, Iranian leaders have expressed the same contempt toward the United States for years. Khamenei, killed early in the war, was known for stoking anti-American sentiment, addressing crowds amid chants of “death to America.”

However, American presidents traditionally express themselves with more reserve. They have criticized America’s enemies, but often by drawing a contrast between them, the United States, and the values ​​the United States claims to uphold globally. They expressed confidence in past U.S. missions, but were careful not to strike a celebratory or triumphant tone — especially at the start of a war, in the midst of intense fighting, when U.S. troops are still dying.

That’s not the case for Trump, who said Wednesday: “You never like to say too early that you won. We won. We won… In the first hour, it was over.”

He also said, “Over the past 11 days, our military has virtually destroyed Iran” and “they have nothing.”

On Thursday, six American soldiers were killed in the crash of a refueling plane in Iraq. On Friday, the U.S. military announced it would send 2,500 Marines and an additional U.S. warship to the conflict.

Kimble said there are several ways to look at Trump’s warlike rhetoric. The first is “through the lens of PSYOPS, or psychological operations” – or intentional messages aimed at discouraging the enemy, much like the United States dropping leaflets during World War II telling foreign fighters they must surrender or die. From this point of view, Trump is directly addressing the Iranians, trying to make them “perceive victory as impossible.”

Another solution is to view Trump and Hegseth as projecting a tough image toward their MAGA base, their Democratic rivals, and any other countries they might be preparing to challenge, such as Cuba.

Rowland said Trump “always has to be the big dog in the room” and his war messages should be seen in that context.

“A lot of the rhetoric is performative cruelty,” Rowland said. “It’s more about making him appear dominant than arguing that the war was good for the United States and the region, for the West and the world.”