US strikes on Iran triggered by Israel’s plan to launch attack, Rubio says | US foreign policy

Israel’s determination to attack Iran and the certainty that U.S. troops will be targeted in response has forced the Trump administration to launch preemptive strikes, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a new statement about Washington’s surprise entry into the conflict.

The rationale drew divided criticism from senior members of Congress, who received the first briefing by the Trump administration on Monday evening since ordering the air campaign to begin over the weekend.

Rubio; CIA director John Ratcliffe; and chiefs of staff, chairman Dan Caine; He spoke to lawmakers behind closed doors at the Capitol ahead of an expected vote in the House this week on a war powers resolution that presents an unexpected opportunity to force Trump to end hostilities against Iran.

“It was very clear that if Iran was attacked by anyone — the United States, Israel or anyone else — they would respond and they would respond against the United States,” Rubio told reporters at the Capitol.

“We knew there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew it would precipitate an attack on American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would face more casualties.”

J.D. Vance said in an interview on Fox News Monday night that the U.S. goal is to make sure “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

“The president wants to make clear to Iranians and the world that he will not rest until he achieves the very important goal of ensuring that Iran does not have nuclear weapons,” the vice president said.

Vance has been the most opposed member of Donald Trump’s administration to military interventions and has spoken less than Rubio about U.S. actions in Iran.

Since the start of the conflict, the United States and Israel have launched waves of air strikes on Iran, and Tehran has retaliated with drone and missile strikes on countries close to the United States in the Middle East.

The airstrike killed many of Iran’s top military and political leaders, including religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. While the US military acknowledged the deaths of six soldiers, the Iranian Red Crescent Society said more than 500 people were killed in the country.

Reactions to the administration’s announcement of going to war were divided along party lines; Republicans rushed to defend Trump’s gambit, while Democrats decried what they saw as an unnecessary conflict with unclear goals.

“This is Trump’s war. This is an election war. He has no strategy, there is no end game,” Senate Democratic minority leader Chuck Schumer said before entering the briefing.

As Schumer walked out, he said lawmakers present asked “a lot of questions” but found officials’ answers “completely and utterly inadequate.” “In fact, at least in my opinion, this briefing raised many more questions than it answered.”

Mark Warner, the Democratic vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said he was concerned about the possible consequences of allowing the United States to essentially force Israel into a new war.

“There was no immediate threat to the United States from Iran. There was a threat to Israel. If we equate a threat to Israel with an imminent threat to the United States, then we are in uncharted territory,” Warner said.

On Monday night, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News that Iran was building new underground facilities that would “immunize their ballistic missile program and their atomic bomb program within months.”

“If precautions are not taken now, no steps can be taken in the future,” he said.

Iran denies claims it is seeking nuclear weapons.

In recent interviews with news outlets, Trump has outlined several goals in the war, including destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and navy, preventing the country from developing nuclear weapons and cutting off Tehran’s support for proxy forces elsewhere in the Middle East.

But Rubio told reporters only two goals: destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capacity and navy. After the classified briefing, Warner said he wasn’t sure what Trump’s final move was.

“I think the president should go before Congress, the American people, and decide what the real goal is out of these four or five goals that have been laid out.” The Virginia senator said.

“What is the goal? What is our exit plan? What obligation do we have to the Iranian people now if they rise up in response to the call to take to the streets? And what is the immediate threat to the U.S. interest in causing this conflict?”

Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives and a close ally of Trump, defended the president’s course of action, saying he ordered a “defensive operation.”

“Israel was determined to act in its own defense here, with or without American support. Why? Because Israel was facing what it saw as an existential threat,” Johnson said.

He said the aim of the war was not to “enter the regime and overthrow it,” but he still applauded the death of the Ayatollah.

“This has happened, and in my estimation, this is a great improvement for freedom-loving people around the world,” Johnson told reporters alongside the Republican chairmen of the House intelligence and appropriations committee; the existence of the latter is an indication that lawmakers may soon be asked to approve additional defense funding required by the war.

Trump ordered an attack on Iran without permission from Congress; But Rubio said a group of lawmakers known as the Gang of Eight, made up of Democratic and Republican leaders in each chamber as well as top lawmakers on the bipartisan House and Senate intelligence committees, were briefed before the attack began.

The House is expected to consider a war powers resolution later this week that, if passed, would force Trump to end hostilities against Iran. It faces a high bar for passage. Republicans control both houses of Congress and rarely surpass Trump in significant numbers.

Even if Congress approves the resolution, Trump can veto it, and Congress can only override it with a two-thirds majority vote.

Previous war powers resolutions introduced in this Congress were rejected, and Johnson said he was confident the latest resolution would not pass the House.

“The idea of ​​taking away the ability and authority of our commander-in-chief, the president, and finishing this job is a scary prospect for me. It’s dangerous,” Johnson said. “I’m definitely hopeful and believe we have the votes to eliminate this.”