Trump: "Might have forced Israel's hand on Iran"

[Ihatetomatoes]

So Trump confirms it was him not Israel pushing this.

BBC news today

Agree that Israel were going to attack Iran. America have joined in the war for their own reasons however which makes it a joint US/Israel war.

Thanks Kirinm.
I know indeed the Pentagon is contradicting Trump. And this is not a good sign.

@Twiglets1 you cannot really use that line of argument because is not any of the posters that said US attacked because Israel was going to attack, it was Rubio, yesterday. I am pretty sure you can access his speech on youtube or transcripts on newspapers.
It was Rubio who said it. It does not paint a good picture. And now Trump is rushing around to change the picture.
But it is not originated on antisemitism. It is what US representatives said.

I know exactly what Rubio said.

Just because Israel told the US that they had decided to attack Iran, that does not mean that the US attacked Iran because of Israel. We know they were very close to attacking from the fact that they had moved warships etc into the region.

This is what Rubio said yesterday to the press:

Okay ... somebody asked me a question yesterday – did we go in because of Israel. And I said – you asked me that, you, that follow up. And I said no. I told you this had to happen anyway. The President made a decision, and the decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic missile program, that Iran was not going to be allowed behind its ability to conduct these attacks. That decision had been made.

The President systemically – made a decision to systematically destroy this terroristic capability that they had, and we carried that out. I was very clear in that answer. This was a question of timing, of why this had to happen as a joint operation, not the question of the intent. Once the President made a decision that negotiations were not going to work, that they were playing us on the negotiations, and that this was a threat that was untenable, the decision was made to strike them.
That’s what I said yesterday, and you guys need to play it. And if you’re going to play these statements, you need to play the whole statement, not clip it to reach a narrative that you want to do. All right?

https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/03/secretary-of-state-marco-rubio-remarks-to-press-7/

I afree that Rubio and tge press and Trump, as usual, have developed a "when I said this, I meant that, in that context..." issue. And it can be that the press has taken statements out of context, it would not be the first time.
But it has been reported so in UK press. So you cannot attribute people talking about it to antisemitism amongst those reading what was widely reported.

Agree, not afree lol

I attribute it to antisemitism when people don't bother reading what was actually said but instead rush to twist things to suit a certain narrative. Even in Rubios initial statement about it he was asked did the US go in because of Israel and he said No.

For the avoidance of doubt, this is what Rubio actually said at the first press conference when asked Are you saying the U.S. was forced to strike because of an impending Israeli action?

No, first – well, two things I would say. Number one is: no matter what, ultimately this operation needed to happen. That’s the question of why now. But 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.
Look at the damage they’re doing now. And this is a weakened Iran. Imagine a year from now. So that had to happen. Obviously, we were aware of Israeli intentions and understood what that would mean for us, and we had to be prepared to act as a result of it. But this had to happen no matter what.

https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/03/secretary-of-state-marco-rubio-remarks-to-press-6/

I still think that is not applicable.

No surprise there.

Why is it anti semitic to disagree with the current government of Israel? Is it anti Islamist to disagree with the current Iranian regime? Is it anti American to disagree with the actions of President Trump?

I never said it was anti semitic to disagree with the current government of Israel.

Even lots of Israelis do.

I was talking about something else entirely - people claiming that this is Israel's war and the US are just "joining in" to quote @kirinm

It is not even that, actually. It is about discussing Rubio's words, in the way it was published in much of UK media: saying that Israel was going to attack, so US atracked as they thought Iran would immediately come after them.
It is not even a criticism of Israel, but to point out the uncertainty about reasons, plans and outcomes that the US confused statements brings about.
The truth of who started it first.... who knows? They do not even know themselves!

Two things can be true. Iran can be problematic, and Trumps response to that can be problematic. Taking out their leader with no idea who will follow is not beneficial to the Iranian people. Making unsubstantiated claims about their nuclear capabilities in order to justify bombing them does not help the Iranian people. If you can name a single country in history who has benefitted from the US taking out their leader without having a plan in place of how to rebuild that nation, maybe you’d have a good point. But there are none.

Who has signed the UN treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear weapons? Iran (among 190 other States). This opens them up to having inspectors come in to see what they have, what they are doing, what they are developing etc. You know who hasn’t? Israel. They refuse to conform or deny whether or how many weapons they have, where they are, what they are made of. They will not let any of their nuclear facilities be inspected by the IAEA.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East that we have seen credible evidence of possession of nuclear weapons (given to us by an ex nuclear technician who worked there for a couple of decades), and yet we keep hearing how Iran or Iraq (or anyone else who has oil and/or minerals we’d really like) is an imminent nuclear threat?

None of this is about protecting Iranian people.

I was responding to a comment another poster made about the Epstein Files @BoredZelda so I don't understand your post tbh. It seems to be something copy and pasted not responding to my actual post that you quoted at all.

He is lying. It’s quite clear Israel were going to act regardless and he got in line.

just as Rubio said.

Accusing people of being conspiracy theorists and antsemites is getting old. People are allowed to disagree with you while being reasonable people.

And if you think Trump gives a shit about the Iranian people… well I don’t think you do at all. And even if he did, let’s examine the US record of bombing, attacking and invading people into positive regime change. From Vietnam through Central America to Afghanistan. Shit on shit on shit.

I understand her post perfectly.

No one is denying that Israel were going to act regardless. But I hardly think Trump gets in line. Trump joined Israel in attacking Iran because he wanted to and the US had been preparing for war for many weeks - hence moving the warships to the region.

Did I say Trump gives a shit about the Iranian people? No.

I picked you up on your stupid comment that Trump only joined the war because of the Epstein files.

I know people are allowed to disagree with me, they do it all the time on these discussions. But at least some people make their points persuasively & without trying to reduce a complex war to “Epstein”.

'will have some fun with that'

How do you think she did at PMQ's?

I think Starmer came off better than her actually- but Trump hadn’t made the Churchill comment then so I think she will play on that next PMQs.

What can Iranian people do?

He had made the comment before today's PMQs

Sorry I got confused .... haven't seen today's PMQs.

How did she do?