| |
Officials: Israel Plans Led US Into War03/03 06:11
The Trump administration and its allies in Congress presented a shifting new
justification Monday for the U.S. attack on Iran, with House Speaker Mike
Johnson suggesting that the White House believed Israel was determined to act
on its own, leaving the president with a "very difficult decision."
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Trump administration and its allies in Congress
presented a shifting new justification Monday for the U.S. attack on Iran, with
House Speaker Mike Johnson suggesting that the White House believed Israel was
determined to act on its own, leaving the president with a "very difficult
decision."
The Republican was speaking late Monday after a classified briefing at the
Capitol, the first for congressional leaders since the start of the war, a
joint U.S.-Israel military campaign that killed Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei and has quickly spiraled into a widening Middle East conflict.
Hundreds have died, including at least six U.S. military service personnel.
Johnson said the attack on Iran was a "defensive operation" because Israel
was ready to act against Iran, "with or without American support." He said
President Donald Trump and his team determined that Iran would immediately
retaliate against U.S. personnel and assets.
"The commander in chief has said this is going to be an operation that is
short in duration," Johnson said. "We certainly hope that's true."
The remarkable shift in the Trump administration's stated rationale comes as
the hostilities deepen and widen across the region. The president himself
estimated the war could drag on for weeks. The administration plans to seek
supplemental funds from Congress to support the military effort, lawmakers
said, in stark contrast to the president's America First campaign not to
entangle the U.S. in actions abroad.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the "hardest hits are yet to come" as
the U.S. is determined to continue attacking Iran for as long as it takes with
an "even more punishing" next phase in the war.
Rubio described what was essentially a potentially ripple effect that he
said posed an "imminent threat" to the U.S.
"We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action," he said. "And we
knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those
attacks, we would suffer higher casualties."
Rubio said that while the U.S. would like to see the Iranian people rise up
and be rid of the regime, "that's not the objective," he said. "The objective
of this mission is to make sure they don't have these weapons that can threaten
us and our allies in the region."
Trump's shifting rationale sparks detractors
Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other administration officials
delivered the classified briefing as Congress weighs a war powers resolution
that would restrain Trump's ability to keep waging war without approval from
the House and Senate.
Trump himself, speaking at the White House, laid out four objectives for the
war, saying U.S. forces are out to destroy Iran's missile capabilities, wipe
out its naval capacity, stop the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon and
ensure "that the Iranian regime cannot continue to arm, fund and direct
terrorist armies outside of their borders."
"This was our last, best chance to strike -- what we're doing right now --
and eliminate the intolerable threats posed by this sick and sinister regime,"
Trump said.
Trump met repeatedly with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as they
sought to curb Iran's nuclear program, including last month at the White House.
Hegseth earlier Monday vowed this is not an "endless war," even as he warned
more U.S. casualties are likely in the weeks ahead.
But Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said:
"There was no imminent threat to the United States of America by the Iranians.
There was a threat to Israel."
Warner said he has now heard four or five stated reasons for the attack. He
demanded that Trump "come before Congress, and for that matter, the American
people," to make his case for war -- and the exit plan.
Several Democrats delivered blistering speeches against the war. "Are we now
such an enfeebled nation that Israel decides when we go to war?" said Sen. Jeff
Merkley of Oregon, voice rising.
War powers as a check on presidential power
The moment is a defining one for Congress, which alone has the authority
under the U.S. Constitution to declare war, and for the Republican president,
who has consistently seized power during his second term with his own executive
reach.
Trump took the nation to war at a particularly vulnerable time, as the
Department of Homeland Security is operating without routine funds because of a
standoff with Democrats over their demands to restrain his immigration
enforcement operations. The potential wartime costs in terms of lives lost and
dollars spent are dividing the parties, and potentially Americans themselves.
Unlike the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003, which included long debates in
Congress in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, or the more recent
U.S. military strikes on Venezuela that proved to be limited, the joint
U.S.-Israel military attack on Iran, called Operation Epic Fury, is well
underway, with no foreseeable end in sight.
"It's worrisome," Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed
Services Committee, told The Associated Press.
Smith said of Trump: "He is not trying to making his case to the Congress or
the American people. He unilaterally decided to do this."
In fact, Congress has declared war just five times in the nation's history,
most recently in 1941, to enter World War II a day after the Pearl Harbor
attack. Over time, presidents of both major political parties have accumulated
vast authority to engage in what are often more limited U.S. military strikes.
Johnson said tying Trump's hands right now would be "frightening" as he
works to defeat the war powers resolution.
Even if Congress is able to pass the measure this week, the House and the
Senate would be unlikely to tally the two-thirds majority needed to overcome a
presidential veto.
Next steps for Iranian people uncertain
As the Trump administration encourages the Iranian people to rise up and
choose new leaders, there did not appear to be widespread U.S. support for any
effort at democracy- or nation-building.
"We would love to see this regime be replaced," Rubio said. "If there's
something we can do to help them down the road, we'd obviously be open to it.
But that's not the objective."
A top Trump ally, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he never bought into the
you-break-it-you-own-it concept in wartime.
"If there's a threat to America, deal with it," he said over the weekend.
"That doesn't mean you own everything that follows."
|
|
