Brian Lehrer: A Daily Politics Podcast Why Trump said 'we don't have to be there' in Iran
Apr 2, 2026
Andy Kim, U.S. Senator from New Jersey and former Pentagon, State Department, and NSC staffer, reacts to Trump’s Iran speech. He critiques the speech’s purpose and credibility. He weighs military strikes versus diplomacy, discusses limits of force against missile and proxy threats, and contrasts war spending with domestic priorities.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Short Timeframe Claim Raises Credibility Questions
- Trump promised a short, intense campaign saying "We're going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks."
- Andy Kim and Brian Lehrer noted the specific timeframe and destructive rhetoric like "back to the Stone Ages" raised credibility and moral concerns.
Goals Keep Shifting Between Regime Change And Restraint
- Trump simultaneously disavowed regime change while earlier suggesting Iranians should "take over your government," showing shifting goals.
- Andy Kim pointed out shifting objectives undermine strategy and public trust.
Threat To Iran's Power Grid Risks Civilian Harm
- Trump threatened to hit Iran's electric grid "very hard and probably simultaneously," signaling targeting of civilian infrastructure.
- Brian Lehrer called out the humanitarian consequences of knocking out electricity nationwide.