Trump 'Throws Allies Under The Bus' As He Blames Hegseth, Jared, Witkoff And Rubio Over Decision To Bomb Iran

Donald Trump has placed several of his closest advisers at the centre of his justification for launching military strikes against Iran, repeatedly naming Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff as key figures in his decision-making and sharpening debate over who should be held responsible for the escalation.

The remarks come as the White House continues to defend Operation Epic Fury, the US–Israeli campaign launched in late February targeting Iranian missile infrastructure and military facilities.

During comments to reporters, Trump suggested the decision to act militarily followed intelligence assessments presented by key members of his national security team.

'I thought they were going to attack,' the president said, referencing briefings he received from Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.

Trump Cites Intelligence From Inner Circle

Trump's explanation centred on intelligence assessments that Iranian forces posed an imminent threat to American and allied interests in the region.

Speaking to reporters, the president argued that information from his advisers convinced him that Tehran was preparing for a possible attack on US forces.

According to transcripts from a CNN interview segment, Trump said negotiations with Iran had stalled and he believed Tehran was preparing hostile action. 'We were having negotiations with these lunatics... and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first,' he said.

Trump also suggested that Israel had been preparing its own operation against Iranian targets, which influenced the timing of US involvement.

Rubio confirmed that American officials expected an Israeli strike could trigger retaliation against US troops in the region. The administration therefore considered a pre-emptive attack necessary to reduce potential casualties.

The comments have drawn attention because Trump's remarks appear to shift emphasis towards the advice he received from advisers, rather than presenting the decision solely as his own.

Operation Epic Fury And The Escalation With Iran

The strikes against Iran began on 28 February 2026 as part of Operation Epic Fury, a coordinated campaign between the United States and Israel.

According to US defence officials, the operation has targeted missile production facilities, naval assets and other military infrastructure associated with Iran's ballistic missile programme.

In a Pentagon briefing, Hegseth described the campaign as a focused effort to eliminate Iran's ability to threaten American forces and regional allies.

'The mission of Operation Epic Fury is laser-focused: destroy Iranian offensive missiles, destroy missile production, destroy their navy and other security infrastructure,' Hegseth said during a Department of War briefing.

The Pentagon has also said the strikes aim to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons capabilities.

US officials report that thousands of targets have been struck since the campaign began, including missile depots and naval installations.

Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks across the region, including strikes on military facilities hosting US personnel. Several American service members have been killed in retaliatory attacks, underscoring the widening scope of the conflict.

Growing Questions Over Strategy And Messaging

The president's comments have intensified scrutiny of the administration's messaging around the conflict.

In recent days, Trump has offered shifting explanations regarding the strategic goals of the military campaign.

During an informal press interaction aboard Air Force One, the president acknowledged uncertainty about how long the conflict might last, saying the war could continue for 'whatever it takes' until Iran capitulates.

Trump has also faced criticism for remarks following a deadly strike on a girls' school in southern Iran, an incident that remains under investigation.

Iranian officials blamed US and Israeli forces for the attack, while American officials have said the circumstances remain unclear.

Meanwhile, Hegseth has continued to defend the broader military campaign, warning that the war could involve further casualties.

The defence secretary said in a recent television interview that American losses were possible as the conflict continued, while insisting the operation was necessary for national security.

Political Fallout Inside Washington

Trump's references to advisers have also triggered discussion within Washington about how decisions on military action are made inside the administration.

Under the US Constitution, the president serves as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and ultimately authorises military operations.

However, modern military decisions typically involve recommendations from defence officials, diplomats and intelligence agencies.

Hegseth has emphasised that diplomatic efforts preceded the strikes, saying the administration had repeatedly attempted negotiations with Tehran before launching military action.

'They tried over and over again, earnest attempts at peace,' Hegseth said in the Pentagon briefing, describing what he characterised as unsuccessful diplomatic efforts.

For now, the White House continues to maintain that the decision to strike Iran was based on intelligence assessments and the need to prevent a potential attack on US forces.

The debate over responsibility for the Iran strikes, however, is likely to continue as the conflict unfolds and the administration's strategy faces increasing scrutiny.