Trump dismisses intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program as Israel escalates war

Despite U.S. intelligence confirming Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, Trump threatens military action and pushes for escalation, evoking parallels to pre-Iraq War propaganda.

251
SOURCENationofChange

President Donald Trump’s open dismissal of his own intelligence agencies’ assessment that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon has raised alarms among analysts, lawmakers, and the public, as the U.S. edges closer to another Middle Eastern conflict. Speaking on Tuesday, Trump ignored a recent statement from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified that “U.S. spy agencies continu[e] to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.” When pressed, Trump responded bluntly: “I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one.”

Gabbard’s remarks, delivered before Congress in March, confirmed the longstanding U.S. intelligence position that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and has not restarted it. “Supreme Leader [Ayatollah Ali] Khomeini has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003,” she testified. Nonetheless, Trump’s latest comments appear to discard those findings in favor of amplifying threats and justifying Israel’s recent aggressive actions in Iran.

The White House’s position is increasingly being compared to the pretext for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Then, as now, intelligence assessments did not support claims of an imminent threat, but were sidelined in favor of a narrative geared toward military intervention. Trump’s claim that Iran is close to acquiring a nuclear weapon is contradicted not only by U.S. agencies but by allied intelligence services and reporting. CNN recently reported that Iran is likely up to three years away from developing a functional nuclear weapon, and the Wall Street Journal noted that even U.S. officials were skeptical of Israeli-provided “intelligence” alleging new nuclear activity by Iran.

In the face of these contradictions, Trump has intensified his rhetoric. On his Truth Social account Tuesday, he posted, “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” Shortly afterward, he issued another post in which he threatened to assassinate Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: “We don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin.”

These statements followed an Israeli airstrike earlier in the day that targeted a building housing the Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, part of Iran’s state broadcaster, during a live broadcast. Israel’s defense minister warned, “residents of Tehran will pay the price, and soon.”

The escalating conflict is fueling concern that Trump, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is preparing the groundwork for direct U.S. military involvement. Netanyahu has long warned that Iran is months away from acquiring a nuclear weapon—a warning he has issued for decades. Trump appears to be adopting similar rhetoric to justify more aggressive action.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Pentagon has increased its presence in the region, with “a third U.S. Navy destroyer enter[ing] the eastern Mediterranean Sea to help defend Israel, and a second U.S. carrier strike group is heading toward the Arabian Sea.” The buildup, while officially described as defensive, “puts the U.S. on a firmer footing to join Israeli attacks on Iran should Trump decide to do that.”

An unnamed Israeli official told CNN that “the country’s entire military operation in Iran is premised on the fact that the U.S. will join at some point.” Israel’s foreign minister, in an echo of the Iraq War era, has compared Khamenei to Saddam Hussein.

Iran has responded with strong warnings. In a statement to Al Jazeera English, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said that “deeper American involvement in the war would be extremely reckless, extremely irresponsible.” He added, “No one can imagine in our region, not only in Iran, that Israel started this war without prior green light by the United States.”

Baghaei urged the international community to intervene. “I think the whole international community, in particular those who are members of the [United Nations] Security Council, must shoulder their responsibility and act in order to stop this aggression.”

Iranian officials have warned of possible retaliatory strikes on U.S. military bases in the region if attacked. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote, “Getting the U.S. mired in the Mother of Forever Wars will destroy any prospect for a negotiated solution, with dangerous, unpredictable, and likely UNFATHOMABLE consequences for regional security and the global economy.”

At home, Trump is facing mounting pressure from Congress. At least 32 lawmakers in both the House and Senate have voiced support for resolutions to prevent Trump from launching attacks on Iran without congressional approval. “No president should be able to bypass Congress’ constitutional authority over matters of war,” said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), co-sponsor of a House war powers resolution alongside Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). “The American people do not want to be dragged into another disastrous conflict in the Middle East.”

A poll conducted by the Economist/YouGov between June 13 and 16 revealed that 60 percent of U.S. adults oppose military involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict. Only 16 percent supported it, with 24 percent unsure. Notably, 53 percent of Trump voters also opposed U.S. involvement. The poll found that support for negotiations was slightly higher among Republican respondents (61 percent) than Democrats (58 percent).

A separate survey by the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) and YouGov found that 53 percent of Iranian Americans “strongly” or “somewhat oppose” U.S. military action against Iran. Only 36 percent expressed support. A significant majority of Iranian Americans expressed a preference for a renewed nuclear agreement. NIAC president Jamal Abdi said, “Regardless, these results reinforce what we already know—our community is overwhelmingly against war and demands a foreign policy rooted in diplomacy, not destruction.”

Earlier this year, Trump sent a letter to Khamenei warning of consequences if a deal was not reached. “I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing,” he wrote. In a March interview with NBC News, he threatened, “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing, and it will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.”

A poll commissioned by Demand Progress and conducted by the Bullfinch Group found that 53 percent of registered voters—including 58 percent of Democrats, 47 percent of Independents, and 56 percent of Republicans—believe Trump should be required to obtain congressional authorization before attacking foreign targets.

Legislation reinforcing Congress’s constitutional war powers was introduced Tuesday by Reps. Massie and Khanna and co-sponsored by at least 14 other lawmakers. In the Senate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have introduced similar legislation.

The debate unfolding in Washington and across the country underscores deep public skepticism about another war in the Middle East, especially one driven by disputed intelligence and escalating rhetoric. As Israel intensifies its campaign and Trump considers direct military action, the risk of a larger, more catastrophic conflict grows daily—despite overwhelming intelligence, public opinion, and diplomatic history arguing for restraint.

FALL FUNDRAISER

If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

[give_form id="735829"]

COMMENTS