US-ISRAEL WAR: I acted based on advisers’ conviction, Trump opens up in blame sharing
Trump also noted that Rubio played a significant role in the discussions leading up to the strike.
“I thought that they were going to attack us. I thought they would. If we didn’t do this at the time we did it, I think they had in mind to attack us,” he said.
U.S. President Donald Trump has suggested that key members of his administration played a major role in influencing his decision to launch a controversial military strike against Iran, saying he acted on intelligence that warned of an imminent threat.
Speaking during a public presentation on Tuesday March 10, 2026, Trump said the decision was largely based on advice and intelligence assessments from senior officials and close allies, including Pete Hegseth, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff and Marco Rubio.
Hegseth currently serves as the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Kushner previously held the position of Senior Advisor to the President, Witkoff is the U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East, and Rubio is the U.S. Secretary of State.
Trump indicated that the group convinced him that Iran was preparing to launch an imminent attack on the United States, prompting the administration to take what he described as a pre-emptive action.
According to the president, delaying the strike could have allowed Iran to attack first.
“It’s all been blown up. They have no radar. They have no telecommunications. And they have no leadership,” Trump said while describing the aftermath of the military operation.
He added that intelligence briefings suggested Iran was approaching what he called a “point of no return.”
“The situation was very quickly approaching the point of no return and the United States found it intolerable, in my opinion, based on what Steve and Jared and Pete and others were telling me,” Trump said.
Trump also noted that Rubio played a significant role in the discussions leading up to the strike.
“I thought that they were going to attack us. I thought they would. If we didn’t do this at the time we did it, I think they had in mind to attack us,” he said.
The remarks appear to distribute responsibility for the decision among members of Trump’s inner circle as scrutiny continues over the intelligence used to justify the strike on Iran.
The administration has faced growing criticism from lawmakers in Washington, particularly on Capitol Hill, where several members of Congress have described the military action as an “illegal war.”
Following a classified two-hour briefing last Wednesday, Senator Chris Murphy, a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, warned that the administration’s war strategy appeared “incoherent.”
Murphy said officials struggled to publicly defend the campaign and pointed to what he described as a disconnect between Trump’s rhetoric and the military’s operational goals.
According to the senator, the objectives presented during the briefing did not include dismantling Iran’s nuclear program or pursuing regime change.
“They are going to spend hundreds of billions of your taxpayer dollars and get a whole bunch of Americans killed, and a hardline regime will still be in charge,” Murphy wrote on X.
He added that the military’s focus on destroying missile sites and drone factories would not resolve the conflict in the long term.
“The question that stumped them: what happens when you stop bombing and they restart production? They hinted at more bombing. Which is, of course, endless war,” Murphy said.
Another major concern surrounding the conflict is the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply passes.
While the administration says it is making progress, critics argue the situation risks escalating further.
Meanwhile, Hegseth confirmed on Wednesday that United States Central Command had begun targeting Iranian vessels suspected of laying naval mines, saying U.S. forces were “wiping out” the boats as part of ongoing operations.
