Israel Determined to Strike Iran With or Without US Support, Trump Administration Warned Lawmakers

U.S. Speaker Describes Iran Strikes as Defensive Measure, Cites Israeli Determination

Speaker Mike Johnson revealed that Israel was “determined to act with or without” U.S. support in recent strikes against Iran, following a classified congressional briefing on Monday evening. The Louisiana Republican told reporters that Israel viewed Iran’s capabilities as an existential threat, a perspective that significantly influenced American decision-making.

“Israel was determined to act in their own defense here, with or without American support,” Johnson explained, noting that U.S. officials carefully weighed potential risks to American forces and regional assets before joining the operation.

“They had to evaluate the threats to the U.S., to our troops, to our installations, to our assets in the region and beyond. And they determined, because of the intelligence that we had, that a coordinated response was necessary,” the Speaker said.

Johnson defended the administration’s decision, asserting that if the U.S. had not acted, congressional oversight committees would have demanded answers about why intelligence suggesting an existential threat wasn’t acted upon. “I am convinced that they did the right thing,” he stated.

Senator Marco Rubio reinforced this position, describing the president’s decision as “very wise” given the circumstances. “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces,” Rubio told reporters. “And we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”

However, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a senior member of the Intelligence Committee, disputed characterizations of an imminent threat to the United States. “There was no imminent threat to the United States of America by the Iranians. It was a threat to Israel,” Warner said. He expressed concern that treating threats to Israel as equivalent to imminent threats to the U.S. ventures into “uncharted territory,” adding that the stated goals for the operation have changed “4 or 5 times.”

The differing interpretations highlighted partisan divisions in how lawmakers assessed the threat level. Representative Brian Mast, Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, illustrated this divide: “For me as a soldier, if I see an enemy machine gun nest, that to me, given that it’s an enemy machine gun nest, is an imminent threat. To Democrats, unless that machine gun is burning up its barrels firing at you, it’s not yet an imminent threat.”

Rubio emphasized that the operation focused on degrading Iran’s ballistic missile and naval capabilities, not regime change, though he did not comment on whether future strikes might target nuclear facilities.

The joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign, dubbed Operation Epic Fury, began on February 26 and has reportedly resulted in 49 Iranian leadership casualties, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Six U.S. service members have been killed in Iranian counterattacks.

According to General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the operation’s initial phase struck more than 1,000 targets in the first 24 hours. American B-2 bombers flew 37-hour round-trip missions from the continental United States to hit underground facilities with specialized penetrating munitions.

The escalation marks a significant intensification of Middle East tensions, with potential regional and global implications. As fires were reported at Iran’s Bandar Abbas naval headquarters and maritime traffic stalled in the strategically crucial Strait of Hormuz, concerns about wider conflict and energy market disruptions have grown.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker expressed support for the strikes, stating there was “more than adequate justification for our American and Israeli actions,” though he declined to elaborate on classified details shared during the briefing.