How Trump and Vance Differed on Iran War—and Why the VP's Former Remarks Are Recirculating

ADD TIME ON GOOGLE

Tiago Ventura

by

Tiago Ventura

Open follow modal

Personalized Content

Tiago Ventura

Tiago Ventura

Follow this author to personalize your feed and get instant alerts.

FollowGo to your personalized feed

WHY FOLLOW?

Update your preferences in Account Settings

Close

Mar 10, 2026 4:06 PM CUT

U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance attend a ceremony in New York City on Sept. 11, 2024.

U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance attend a ceremony in New York City on Sept. 11, 2024.Adam Gray–Getty Images

Tiago Ventura

by

Tiago Ventura

Open follow modal

Personalized Content

Tiago Ventura

Tiago Ventura

Follow this author to personalize your feed and get instant alerts.

FollowGo to your personalized feed

WHY FOLLOW?

Update your preferences in Account Settings

Close

Mar 10, 2026 4:06 PM CUT

President Donald Trump said he and Vice President J.D. Vance were “philosophically, a little bit different” in their initial viewpoints on the Iran war.

“I think he was maybe less enthusiastic about going [to war], but he was quite enthusiastic. I felt it was something we had to do,” the President told reporters Monday.

Despite any differences, Trump denied there were disagreements between himself and Vance over the military action, saying they “get along very well on this.” 

The President went on to emphasize an argument he’s made before, saying if the U.S. hadn’t launched military strikes on Iran, it would have instead been on the receiving end. “If we didn’t do it, they would have done it to us,” he claimed. “If they hit us first, that would have been a very bad thing.”

Vance was absent from the press briefing Monday, instead attending the dignified transfer of Sgt. Benjamin Pennington, a U.S. service member killed during the Iran war.

The Vice President, who served in the U.S. Marine Corps, has addressed the current conflict in other forums, previously defending the military action in Iran during a March 3 interview.

“I think the President has been extremely clear on our objectives—that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” he said. “The President of the United States knows what we’re able to do. He knows that we have much greater capacity to inflict damage on the Iranian nuclear program and various missiles that threaten our troops.”

He also rejected comparisons to the war in Iraq, where he was deployed as a military journalist in 2005, claiming that the U.S. was in that country with “no clear mission, no clear definition.” But this time, Vance argued, “the President has clearly defined what he wants to accomplish.”

Vance’s remarks stand in stark contrast to his previous strong criticism of America becoming involved in wars abroad. Several of those former remarks are now circulating in light of the Trump’s Administration’s current actions.

Here’s what to know: 

Vance strongly denounced American intervention abroad

At a Michigan rally in 2024, Vance criticized U.S. involvement in international conflict and accused then-Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, of sending the youth of America away. 

“When people like Kamala Harris send our sons and daughters, our young people, to fight in stupid wars, it is the young generation that carries the burden of that,” he said. “We gotta stop sending our young people to faraway lands. We are not the policemen of the world. We need to use our young people here at home… and not send them all over the world.”

Advertisement

Vance offered further anti-interventionist sentiments in the weeks leading up to the presidential election.

"If you're worried about the world spinning out of control, if you're worried about a military draft, if you're worried about God forbid a world war, the best way to prevent it is to vote for Donald Trump," he said at a Pennsylvania campaign event that September.

“Our interest, I think, very much is in not going to war with Iran,” he said during a podcast a few weeks later, arguing that such a move would be a “huge distraction of resources” and “massively expensive.”

Months earlier, in early 2023, Vance authored an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal titled “Trump’s Best Foreign Policy? Not Starting Any Wars.”

Championing Trump’s proposed America first policies, Vance said his “entire adult lifetime has been shaped by Presidents who threw America into unwise wars and failed to win them.” He declared his support for Trump, saying: “I know he won’t recklessly send Americans to fight overseas.”

Advertisement

Fast forward to this year, shortly before the U.S. and Israel launched initial strikes against Iran on Feb. 28, Vance indicated a similar reluctance to American involvement in foreign wars.

Amid the negotiations between U.S. and Iranian officials over Iran’s nuclear capabilities, the Vice President told the Washington Post that he still viewed himself as a “skeptic of foreign military interventions.” 

But he emphasized what would happen next relied upon Iran.
“I think we all prefer the diplomatic option,” he said. “But it really depends on what the Iranians do and what they say.”

Vance faces scrutiny as former remarks recirculate

Following the strikes, some formerly prominent members of the MAGA movement questioned why Vance appeared to be less vocal about the military operation than Trump and other senior members of the Administration.

“I want to know where the hell is J.D. Vance, where is he? Where is [Director of National Intelligence] Tulsi Gabbard? Because if they stand by and are silent, they're turning back on the same words they said,” claimed former Representative and one-time Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Advertisement

Trump ran in 2024 on a campaign that swore to avoid dragging the U.S. into foreign wars, instead focusing on home prosperity. Earlier this year, the White House referred to him as the “President of Peace,” but that title has since come under scrutiny from Greene and others, who argue the Trump Administration has abandoned its America first focus. 

Meanwhile, as the military operation continues, the Administration has offered, what appear to be, differing rationales for the initial strikes, prompting further confusion and demands from Congress for answers.

Read More: From Iran to Venezuela, Here Are the Countries Trump Has Ordered Strikes On in His Second Term

Trump signals war with Iran may end soon—even as he vows not to relent

Advertisement

Where Americans stand on the Iran war, according to polls

Several polls indicate that the majority of Americans disapprove of the U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran.

Only 27% of Americans approved, while 43% disapproved, according to a poll by Reuters/Ipsos published on March 1. A Washington Post survey conducted that same day depicted similar results, finding that Americans oppose Trump ordering airstrikes on Iran by 52% to 39%. 9% said they were unsure.

Showcasing uncertainty among the public as to why the U.S. launched its operation, a CBS survey published on March 3 found that over 60% of nearly 1,400 American adults approached did not think the Trump Administration had provided a clear explanation of the U.S.' goals regarding its military action against Iran.