What an irony, President Donald Trump views Iran-war as “small potatoes.” Asserting that it is not a “big thing,” he said, “I call it a military conflict because it’s small potatoes for us. It’s not a big thing.” Trump said this during a White House exchange (Sept 4), when he was asked to comment on what Vice President JD Vance said the preceding day. Vance had said, “I wouldn’t call it a war.”  Now, does Trump really view the Iran-war as “small potatoes” or did he make this comment only to support what Vance had said?
Potatoes- whether small or big- can certainly not be ignored, particularly if their cost exceeds thirty billion dollars. Now, who would view actual potatoes as literally potatoes if they seemed to be so costly? Chances of their being viewed as “small things” may also be dismissed. Inflation- due to Iran-war – hasn’t spared price of potatoes even in USA. Considering the importance that even a dollar is given by an ordinary American, even a minor increase in its price is bound to have its impact. Perhaps, Trump wants the world, particularly the American voter to go primarily by what he says, that they needn’t worry about Iran-war as it’s not a big thing for him, similar to what small potatoes are for him.
But whether Trump is taken seriously or not, meaning of what he says cannot be literally dismissed into oblivion, as if Iran-war shouldn’t be actually even thought about. This is serious. How can the world not take Iran-war seriously, particularly when the economic life of one and all has been affected by it. The war has extended beyond six months, that is more than 240 days. From planting to ripening of potatoes, all is taken care of, generally, in less than half this time. 
And how does one explain loss of lives and destruction caused? Certainly, the same cannot be equated with “small potatoes” or can it be as expressed by Trump? He certainly would love it, if what he says is religiously believed in without any ifs, buts and numerous questions. But his second term in power appears to have been marked by his being over-obsessive about his own command over the world at large, so much so, that US-stand has ceased to have hold as well as relevance as that of the one and only superpower in the world. It is possible, his “success” in Venezuela made him a little too over-confident about the reach of his power without deliberating on that even this cannot exceed its limits. Unfortunately, this is what has been done. Surprisingly, he has apparently not chosen to compare Venezuela with “small potatoes.” But even if he does, chances of his words being taken seriously may be viewed as practical none. He has not refrained from comparing Venezuela with Iran. In his words, “We did Venezuela and we did this (Iran-war).”
Where Iran is concerned, paradoxically, it is difficult to accept that Trump really meant that Iran-war is like “small potatoes” for him. He probably chose to use these words, as mentioned earlier, in support of what Vance had said earlier. However, soon after comparing Iran-war with potatoes, he took to an entirely different level. This refers to his voicing his plan to target the suspected nuclear site in Iran. “We may hit Pickaxe very soon,” he said. Now, what does this suggest? Should Iran’s suspected nuclear strength also be equated with “small potatoes?” 
It is possible, Trump has tried to downplay the Iran-war by comparing it with “small potatoes.” However, this move loses its relevance in light of this week being marked by US and Iran having resumed attacks against each other. Earlier in the week, a US strike hit a wedding ceremony in Sirik, killing four people and injuring dozens. Iran has described this as “war-crime.” US military claimed to have struck three Iranian oil tankers (Sept 5), after missile attacks targeted its navy ships. 
Irrespective of whether Trump views these strikes as simply “small potatoes,” the fact that these are signs of continuation of the US-Israel war against Iran cannot be ignored. Prospects of this coming to a quick end may be viewed as extremely remote. Israel probably would not favor an end soon. Chances of it welcoming any ceasefire and/or agreement may also be viewed as strongly limited. Trump’s engagement in Iran appears to have given Israel the opportunity to continue its moves against Palestinians in West Bank and against Lebanon.
Engagement in Iran-war does not mark potatoes being at stake for Trump from any angle. Nevertheless, by comparing Iran-war with potatoes, Trump appears to have added a new word to his diplomatic and/or war rhetoric. But, describing the same as potato-talk, potato-diplomacy and/or potato-war may not do it full justice. Besides, the war is not just limited to exchanges but extends to diplomatic and economic levels, affecting practically the entire world. Chances of the rest of the world dismissing the war’s relevance as nothing more than potatoes may be viewed as practically none. Yes, some importance is likely to be given for a while to Trump’s indulgence in such potato-kind rhetoric!