

In his Monday appearance on Fox News' "Hannity," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the latest U.S.-Israeli military operation against Iran and denied the dominant interpretation of Secretary of State Marco Rubio's and House Speaker Mike Johnson's recent remarks about the genesis of the attacks.
Compelled to act?
The Trump administration attempted on Monday to address the mounting confusion about the justification and objectives for the Iran strikes.
'We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces.'
As part of this broader effort, Rubio told reporters on Capitol Hill, "Why now? The first is it was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States."
"The assessment that was made that if we stood and waited for that attack to come first before we hit them, we would suffer much higher casualties," said Rubio.
"We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action, we knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties and perhaps even higher [than] those killed," continued the secretary. "And then we would all be here answering questions about why we knew that and didn’t act."
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), a member of the Gang of Eight who was briefed ahead of the resumption of strikes against Iran on Feb. 28, echoed Rubio, suggesting to reporters that the strikes were a "defensive measure."
"Israel was determined to act in their own defense here with or without American support," said Johnson, suggesting further that Iran posed an "existential threat" to Israel, and its missile production was outstripping "our allies in the region."
RELATED: Iranian state TV hijacked with Trump, Netanyahu message urging citizens to 'seize control'
Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images
"Because Israel was determined to act with or without the U.S., our commander in chief and the administration and the officials I just named had a very difficult decision to make," continued Johnson. "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 exquisite intelligence that we had that if Israel fired upon Iran and took action against Iran to take out the missiles, then they would have immediately retaliated against U.S. personnel and assets."
The suggestion that probable blowback from an ally's planned preemptive attack on another country forced America's involvement in a deadly conflict prompted outrage and debate — even on the right.
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh, for instance, said in response to Rubio's statement, "So he's flat out telling us that we're in a war with Iran because Israel forced our hand. This is basically the worst possible thing he could have said."
RELATED: Poll: GOP voters' lukewarm support for Iran strikes significantly lower than past conflicts
Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images
On the flip side, National Review editor Philip Klein suggested that critics had misconstrued Rubio's meaning.
Klein noted that later in Rubio's press conference, the secretary of state said that the U.S. was not forced to strike because of an impending Israeli action and that "this operation needed to happen because Iran in about a year or a year and a half would cross the line of immunity, meaning they would have so many short-range missiles, so many drones, that no one could do anything about it because they could hold the whole world hostage."
'Nobody drags Donald Trump into anything.'
Democrats such as Sen. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and former Biden White House Domestic Policy Council Director Neera Tanden made hay of Rubio's and/or Johnson's remarks as did Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who stated, "Mr. Rubio admitted what we all knew: U.S. has entered a war of choice on behalf of Israel. There was never any so-called Iranian 'threat.' Shedding of both American and Iranian blood is thus on Israel Firsters."
The outrage over the suggestion that America's hand was forced not by an enemy but by a friend appears to have prompted a response from President Donald Trump, who noted on Monday evening,
The Radical Left Democrats, a Party that has completely lost its way, are complaining bitterly about the very necessary and important attack, by the United States and Israel, on Iran. What most people understand is that they are only complaining BECAUSE I DID IT and, if I didn’t do it, they would be screaming — Why didn’t “TRUMP” attack Iran, he should do it, IMMEDIATELY?Trump then urged his followers to watch Netanyahu's interview on Fox News, where Hannity asked the Israeli prime minister about the forced-to-act claim.
"There are people that say, 'Well, the prime minister of Israel dragged Donald Trump into it,'" said Hannity. "As somebody that's been friends with him over 30 years, nobody drags Donald Trump into anything, number one, but I want to get your reaction to that."
Netanyahu laughed, then said, "Well, you're right. I mean that's — that's ridiculous. Donald Trump is the strongest leader in the world. He does what he thinks is right for America. He does also what he thinks is right for future generations, and frankly, we're partners in that effort."
The Israeli leader suggested that it was necessary to strike because Iran "started building new sites, new places, underground bunkers that would make their ballistic missile program and their atomic bomb programs immune within months. If no action was taken now, no action could be taken in the future."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
.png)
2 hours ago
3













English (US)