‘Shameless’: Critics Hammer Pete Hegseth for Claiming ‘We Didn’t Start’ War on Iran
Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
The defense secretary suggested that “the US went to war because Iran has ballistic missiles and drones it has used as a deterrent or to respond to US/Israeli attacks,” said journalist Jeremy Scahill.
In the Trump administration’s first public remarks to reporters on the strikes the US and Israel launched in Iran over the weekend, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blamed the Middle Eastern country for the attacks that have killed at least 555 people there as well as at least four US soldiers—and suggested Iran posed an imminent threat because of its defensive military capabilities.
Hegseth said the strikes that began early Saturday morning and included deadly attacks on children attending school were “retribution” for Iran’s “savage, one-sided war against America” that has played out for “47 long years” as the country has waged proxy attacks on the US.
RECOMMENDED…
As Trump Marches US Toward Iran War, Critics Ask: Where’s the ‘Pushback’ From Dems and Media?
Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: ‘Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack’ in Decades
“We didn’t start this war, but under President Trump we’re finishing it,” said Hegseth.
Despite the fact that hours before President Donald Trump announced the US and Israeli attacks, the Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi reported that diplomatic talks he was mediating were making significant progress toward a peace deal, Hegseth asserted that Iran had a “conventional gun to our head” and suggested the US had no choice but to wage war.
Pentagon officials said in a congressional briefing Sunday that Iran had not been planning to strike any US military targets in the region unless it was attacked first, according to CNN.
The defense secretary also claimed Monday that Iran was “not negotiating” and said it was “stalling” in the talks with the aim of rebuilding missile stockpiles.“
“To be clear,” said journalist Jeremy Scahill of Drop Site News, “he is claiming the US went to war because Iran has ballistic missiles and drones it has used as a deterrent or to respond to US/Israeli attacks.”
Drop Site noted that Hegseth made no mention of “the 1953 US-backed coup in Iran,” US support for autocratic rule there from 1953-79, “or that the US and Israel launched the February 28 strikes.”
On the UK talk radio show “Leading Britain’s Conversation,” British journalist Jon Sopel said Hegseth was making “the exact argument that [former President] George W. Bush made in 2003 with the weapons of mass destruction and ‘They could be launched in 45 minutes.’”
Promises to end the US government’s penchant for embarking on endless regime change wars, added Sopel, were part of “what propelled Donald Trump to the presidency, and yet Donald Trump and [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu have launched these strikes against Iran.”
The defense secretary attempted to contrast the operation in Iran—dubbed Operation Epic Fury by the US military—to protracted wars like those the US has waged in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The conflict will not be an “endless war,” Hegseth said.
He claimed at one point in the briefing that the clear-cut objective of the attacks is to “destroy the missile threats, destroy the navy, no nukes” and scoffed at a reporter’s question about Trump’s Sunday statement in which he said he expected the conflict to be resolved in “four weeks or less.”
“President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it may or not take. Four weeks, two weeks, six weeks. It could move up, it could move back,” said Hegseth.
Hegseth spoke alongside Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, who appeared to temper expectations of a quick resolution to the war started by the US and Israel.
“To be clear… this is not a single overnight operation,” Caine said. “The military objectives [US Central Command] and the Joint Force have been tasked with will take some time to achieve, and in some cases will be difficult and gritty work.”
Caine added that the military objective is “to protect and defend ourselves, and together with our regional partners, prevent Iran from the ability to project power outside of its borders.”
Law professor Jennifer Taub denounced Hegseth’s remarks as “utter nonsense” and condemned his claim that the US and Israel are hitting military targets “surgically.”
“Shameless,” she said. “We or Israel bombed a girl’s school on Saturday when school was in session, killing 175.”
Along with Hegseth’s claim that Iran was to blame for the strikes launched by the US and Israel, his comment that the US will expedite the operation by not getting bogged down in “stupid rules of engagement” alarmed observers.
“’No stupid rules of engagement’ means no Geneva Conventions or other international humanitarian laws, which the US signed and supported for more than a century,” said journalist Mark Jacob. “Hegseth and Trump are pro-war crimes.”
Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: ‘Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack’ in Decades ›
- US-Iran Talks Delayed for ‘Logistical Reasons’ After Hegseth Social Media Threat ›
- Hegseth: ‘We didn’t start this war but under President Trump we’re finishing it’ : NPR ›
- Hegseth addresses strikes in Iran and says this conflict is ‘not endless’ – The Washington Post ›
- ‘President Trump has all the latitude in the world,’ Hegseth insists as Iran conflict intensifies | AP News ›
Call Grows to Impeach Trump, ‘The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet’
Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law,” said one pair of campaigners, “establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life.”
After the unprovoked bombing of Iran over the weekend by the United States and Israel—strikes that included the unlawful assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei—the call for US President Donald Trump to be impeached and removed from office has grown as the straightest path to hold the US leader to account for the attacks which policy and human rights experts have condemned as a serious war crime.
With a regional war in the Middle East that was already boiling from Gaza to Lebanon and from Syria to Yemen now exploding in the wake of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Globe and Mail columnist Debra Thompson on Sunday called Trump “the most dangerous man on the planet.”
RECOMMENDED…
Three-Time Trump Voter Calls C-SPAN to Apologize for ‘Supporting This Rotten, Rotten Man’
As Trump Marches US Toward Iran War, Critics Ask: Where’s the ‘Pushback’ From Dems and Media?
“Rather than ending wars,” Thompson notes, “Trump has initiated military action eight times, carrying out attacks in seven countries (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Yemen, Somalia, and Venezuela) in 2025.” Such a pattern of violence and warmongering should make clear that failure to restrain Trump has only emboldened him.
“The recurring danger in this latest presidential aggression is that there are no guardrails, no constraints, and no post-hoc justification,” writes Thomson, “other than that Mr. Trump is the President of the United States and can do whatever he wants.”
But American presidents cannot simply do whatever they want. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll out Sunday, less than 25% support the president’s aggression against Iran. In the first wave of the US military attack, an Iranian school for girls was bombed, killing over 108 civilians, mostly children.
While some congressional lawmakers are pushing for a vote this week on a War Powers Resolution to curtail US military operations against Iran, others are demanding more robust action from Congress to bring Trump’s war-making to an end.
“Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war, as well as to raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, and fund and regulate the military,” declared novelist and political activists Stephen King on Saturday. “Impeach the SOB.”
Mike Hersh and Alan Minsky, respectively the communications director and executive director of the Progressive Democrats of America, argued in a Sunday op-ed for Common Dreams that “Trump’s illegal, unconstitutional war on Iran is not only a moral and humanitarian disaster, but also a profound constitutional crisis.”
According to Hersh and Minsky:
Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life. These intertwined crises cry out for an immediate, decisive response by the Congress and the US public.
Therefore, PDA demands that all members of Congress, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike, uphold their oath of office to defend our constitutional republic. The Constitution offers one and only one remedy when President a repeatedly breaks the law and arrogantly refuses to abide by the limits on the power clearly laid out in the Constitution. That remedy is impeachment, followed by removal from office.
Matt Duss, executive vice president for the Center for International Policy, said that US lawmakers, as well as the American people they represent, “must also be ready to hold the president and his administration accountable for this breach of US and international law.”
“The failure to hold past presidents liable for war crimes and related violations of our own laws has helped lead to this dangerous moment, with a seemingly unrestrained president endangering millions of lives with impunity,” warned Duss. “The forever wars and the imperial presidency must finally come to an end.”
Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Amid Fears of ‘Imminent’ Strike on Iran, Poll Shows US Public Opposes Trump Military Interventions ›
- Not Just Progressives: Over Half of Trump Voters Oppose US War on Iran ›
- Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Trump’s Strikes on Iran ›
- Trump, Troll-in-Chief, Wags the Impeachment Dog By Going to War With Iran ›
- Don’t Let Tyrant Trump Plunge Us Into War With Iran ›
- 128 House Democrats Join GOP to Kill Trump Impeachment Resolution ›
- Calls for Impeachment Grow as Trump Floats ‘Regime Change’ in Iran ›
- Trump Should Be Impeached, Removed From Office for Illegal War on Iran ›
Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: ‘Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack’ in Decades
Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable,” said one analyst.
Senior Trump administration officials attempted during a briefing with reporters on Saturday to make their case for the joint US-Israeli military assault on Iran that has so far killed hundreds and plunged the Middle East into chaos.
According to experts who listened to the briefing, which was conducted on background, the justification for war was incredibly weak. Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, told Laura Rozen of the Diplomatic newsletter that the administration’s argument was “the flimsiest excuse for initiating a major attack on another country without congressional authorization, in violation of the UN Charter, in many decades.”
RECOMMENDED…
As Trump Marches US Toward Iran War, Critics Ask: Where’s the ‘Pushback’ From Dems and Media?
Trump Admits War Would Be Disastrous for Ordinary Iranians as He Weighs Military Assault
During his early Saturday remarks announcing the attacks, President Donald Trump claimed that “imminent threats from the Iranian regime” against “the American people” drove him to act. But Kimball said that administration officials “provided absolutely no evidence” to back that assertion during the briefing.
“What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable,” said Kimball.
Following the start of Saturday’s assault, which Trump explicitly characterized as a war aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, unnamed administration officials began leaking the claim that Trump feared an Iranian attack on the massive US military buildup in the Middle East, prompting him to greenlight the bombing campaign in coordination with Israel and with a nudge from Saudi Arabia.
Kimball, in a social media post, took members of the US media to task for echoing the administration’s narrative. “Reporters need to do more than stenography,” he wrote in response to Punchbowl’s Jake Sherman.
“The American people were lied to about Iraq. The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price.”
Trump and top administration officials also repeated the longstanding claim from US warhawks that Iran is bent on developing a nuclear weapon, something Iranian leaders have publicly denied—including during recent diplomatic talks. Neither US intelligence assessments nor international nuclear watchdogs have produced evidence indicating that Iran is moving rapidly in the direction of nukes, as claimed by the administration.
Rozen noted that some remarks from administration officials during Saturday’s briefing “suggested Trump’s negotiators”—a team that included Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff—“may not have had the expertise or experience to understand the Iranian proposal to curb its nuclear program.” Rozen reported that one administration official kept misstating the acronym for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog.
Trump administration officials, according to Rozen, seemed astonished that Iranian negotiators would not accept the US offer to provide free nuclear fuel “forever” for Iran’s peaceful energy development, viewing the rejection as a suspicious indication that Iran was opposed to a diplomatic resolution—even though, according to Oman’s foreign minister, Iran had already made concessions that went well beyond the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord that Trump abandoned during his first stint in the White House.
Experts said it should be obvious—particularly given Trump’s decision to ditch the previous nuclear accord—why Iran would not trust the US to stick by such a commitment.
The administration’s inability to provide a coherent justification for war tracks with the rapidly shifting narrative preceding Saturday’s strikes—an indication, according to some observers, that Trump had made the decision to attack Iran even in the face of diplomatic progress and left officials to try to cobble together a rationale after the fact.
In a lengthy social media post, Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted war was necessary because Iran “refused to make a deal” and because the Iranian government “has targeted and killed Americans,” hardly the claim of an imminent threat push by the president and other administration officials.
Brian Finucane, a senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, noted in response that the Trump administration has “sidelined anyone who could articulate… a coherent argument, partly because expertise is deep state and woke and partly because they just don’t care.”
The result is another potentially catastrophic war that runs roughshod over US and international law, puts countless civilians at risk, and threatens to spark a region-wide conflict.
“President Trump, along with his right-wing extremist Israeli ally Benjamin Netanyahu, has begun an illegal, premeditated, and unconstitutional war,” US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement on Saturday. “Tragically, Trump is gambling with American lives and treasure to fulfill Netanyahu’s decades-long ambition of dragging the United States into armed conflict with Iran.”
“The American people were lied to about Vietnam. The American people were lied to about Iraq,” Sanders added. “The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price.”
Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Amid Fears of ‘Imminent’ Strike on Iran, Poll Shows US Public Opposes Trump Military Interventions ›
- Not Just Progressives: Over Half of Trump Voters Oppose US War on Iran ›
- Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Trump’s Strikes on Iran ›
- Trump, Troll-in-Chief, Wags the Impeachment Dog By Going to War With Iran ›
- Don’t Let Tyrant Trump Plunge Us Into War With Iran ›
- 128 House Democrats Join GOP to Kill Trump Impeachment Resolution ›
- Calls for Impeachment Grow as Trump Floats ‘Regime Change’ in Iran ›
- Trump Should Be Impeached, Removed From Office for Illegal War on Iran ›