logo
McCaul says Israel strikes are 'perfect opportunity' for Iranians to overthrow Islamic regime

McCaul says Israel strikes are 'perfect opportunity' for Iranians to overthrow Islamic regime

Yahoo13-06-2025

EXCLUSIVE: A senior lawmaker in the U.S. House of Representatives said the current conflict with Israel and Iran could be a singular opportunity for Iranians to overthrow their authoritarian Islamic government.
"Now that their top leadership has been taken out, if there's ever a time for the people to rise up against this theocracy, I would think the conditions are set," Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital on Friday.
McCaul was part of a group of lawmakers in the Middle East late last month. Part of that trip was in Israel, where the congressional delegation met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others.
"I think this is the perfect opportunity – it would have been better if, I don't know what level of coordination took place, but I mean, when an event like this happens – to have this theocracy that's in power, out of power, and liberate the people of Iran," McCaul said. "The majority do not like the Ayatollah. There's a real opportunity for that to just end."
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Cracks Down On Biden's Student Loan 'Scheme,' Top Republican Says
Israel unleashed a barrage of airstrikes in and around Tehran beginning Thursday night Eastern Time. The Israeli government said the strikes were pre-emptive, and that Tehran was approaching nuclear weapon capabilities.
Read On The Fox News App
"They were very close to a nuclear bomb," McCaul said.
Israel said it hit Iranian nuclear sites, and that its strikes killed multiple senior Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists. Iran responded by launching missiles toward Israeli territory on Friday afternoon.
McCaul said it was a "major setback" for Iran but that he was sure that officials in Tehran would respond.
"When we were in the region, they felt certain that Iran would strike our military sites in Saudi, Jordan and the UAE," he said.
"The big talk also at that time was, give CENTCOM time to get prepared in the region to get all of its strategic assets in place for a response. And my understanding is … all of our bases and military sites and embassies are on high alert."
The Texas Republican also recalled what he now believes were telling signs that some kind of military operation was imminent.
While in Israel last month, McCaul said he asked Netanyahu about reports that Iran was preparing a nuclear strike.
"And he said, 'If you don't fight, you die,' He said that several times in the context of striking Iran," McCaul said. "He said that, 'I will strike Iran with or without you.'"
"I said, 'Well, sir, we need you to coordinate with us. Whether or not the president decides to do this with you, you need to coordinate with the United States, our allies and partners in the region.'"
Indeed, President Donald Trump told Fox News Channel's chief political anchor Bret Baier on Thursday he had prior knowledge that Israel was going to conduct pre-emptive strikes on Iran.
"Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, and we are hoping to get back to the negotiating table. We will see. There are several people in leadership in Iran that will not be coming back," Trump said.
Republicans Challenge 'Irrelevant' Budget Office As It Critiques Trump's 'Beautiful Bill'
Trump said the strike happened on Day 61 after Iran had a 60-day window to make a deal with the U.S. to contain its nuclear enrichment. He also said he hoped Iran would come back to the negotiating table after the attack.
But McCaul was not optimistic Tehran would agree to sufficient standards.
"I just, I have little faith in the negotiations, to be honest with you," he said.
It's not clear as of now whether those talks will resume.
But if they were to fall through again, McCaul said, Iranians would have incentive to push for a new government "once and for all."
Meanwhile, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has promised a "legitimate and powerful response" to Israel's strikes.Original article source: McCaul says Israel strikes are 'perfect opportunity' for Iranians to overthrow Islamic regime

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump ignites debate on presidential authority with Iran strikes and wins praise from Republicans
Trump ignites debate on presidential authority with Iran strikes and wins praise from Republicans

Hamilton Spectator

time34 minutes ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

Trump ignites debate on presidential authority with Iran strikes and wins praise from Republicans

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's bombardment of three sites in Iran quickly sparked debate in Congress over his authority to launch the strikes, with Republicans praising Trump for decisive action even as many Democrats warned he should have sought congressional approval. The instant divisions in the U.S. Congress reflected an already swirling debate over the president's ability to conduct such a consequential action on his own, without authorization from the House and Senate on the use of military force. While Trump is hardly the first U.S. president to go it alone, his expansive use of presidential power raised immediate questions about what comes next, and whether he is exceeding the limits of his authority. 'Well done, President Trump,' Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina posted on X. Alabama Sen. Katie Britt called the bombings 'strong and surgical.' The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump 'has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.' Democrats, and a few Republicans, said the strikes were unconstitutional. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who called for an immediate classified briefing for lawmakers, said that Trump 'misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East.' Some Republicans had similar concerns. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican and a longtime opponent of U.S. involvement in foreign wars, posted on X after Trump announced the attacks that, 'This is not Constitutional.' But the quick GOP endorsements of stepped up U.S. involvement in Iran came after Trump publicly considered the strikes for days. Many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. The party's schism over Iran could complicate the GOP's efforts to boost Pentagon spending as part of a $350 billion national security package in Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax breaks bill , which is speeding toward votes next week. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies,' Wicker posted on X. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune both were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. Thune said Saturday evening that 'as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Johnson said in a statement that the military operations 'should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., said he had also been in touch with the White House and 'I am grateful to the U.S. servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes.' Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' he posted. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.' Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran, including some of Trump's most ardent supporters who share his criticism of America's 'forever wars.' Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio posted that 'while President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional.' 'This is not our fight,' posted Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. Most Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say, even as presidents in both parties have ignored the legislative branch's constitutional authority. The Senate was scheduled to vote soon on a resolution from Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine that would require congressional approval before the U.S. declares war on Iran or takes specific military action. Kaine said the bombings were 'horrible judgment.' 'I will push for all senators to vote on whether they are for this third idiotic Middle East war,' Kaine said. Democratic Rep. Greg Casar, the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, also called on Congress to immediately pass a war powers resolution. He said politicians had always promised that 'new wars in the Middle East would be quick and easy.' 'Then they sent other people's children to fight and die endlessly,' Casar said. 'Enough.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

This time it's Trump's war
This time it's Trump's war

Vox

time34 minutes ago

  • Vox

This time it's Trump's war

is a senior correspondent at Vox covering foreign policy and world news with a focus on the future of international conflict. He is the author of the 2018 book, Invisible Countries: Journeys to the Edge of Nationhood , an exploration of border conflicts, unrecognized countries, and changes to the world map. US President Donald Trump addresses the nation, alongside US Vice President JD Vance, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, from the White House in Washington, DC on June 21, 2025. Carlos Barria/Pool/AFP via Getty Images Donald Trump claimed during his 2024 campaign for president that America had fought 'no wars' during his first presidency, and that he was the first president in 72 years who could say that. This was not, strictly speaking, true. In his first term, Trump intensified the air war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, ordered airstrikes against Bashar al-Assad's Syrian regime in response to chemical weapons use, and escalated a little-noticed counterinsurgency campaign in Somalia. But in those cases, Trump could say, with some justification, that he was just dealing with festering crises he had inherited from Barack Obama. Likewise, the president has repeatedly claimed that the wars in Gaza and Ukraine never would have happened had he been president when they broke out, rather than Joe Biden. That's a counterfactual that is impossible to prove, and he may have been overly optimistic in his promises to quickly negotiate an end to both those conflicts, but it's fair to say that both are wars Trump inherited rather than chose. This time, it's different. This time, it's Trump's war. On Saturday night, the United States bombed three nuclear sites in Iran at Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, ending weeks of speculation about whether the US military would join the Israeli war on Iran that began more than a week ago. The past few days in Washington have felt a bit like the battles over intelligence in the lead-up to the war in Iraq, but run in fast-forward. Rather than pressuring intelligence agencies to justify his preferred course of action, Trump has simply overruled them. Rather than building a case before Congress and the UN for the need to act, he's simply ignored them. Trump argued that Iran brought the attack on themselves by not taking the deal he was offering — but negotiations were ongoing at the time Trump abandoned the diplomatic path. Trump endorsed the Israeli assessment that war was necessary because new information showed Iran was 'very close to having a weapon.' But this contradicts the very recent statements from his own intelligence agencies and director of national intelligence. According to the Wall Street Journal's reporting, officials in these agencies were not convinced by Israel's new evidence that something dramatic had changed in Iran's nuclear program. It also contradicts Trump's own statements from earlier this month when he publicly discouraged Israel from attacking Iran, saying it would derail his efforts to negotiate a new nuclear deal. It's hard to overstate just how fast the Trump administration's policy has shifted. Just a month ago, Trump appeared to be giving Netanyahu's government the cold shoulder, pursuing direct diplomacy with Israel's staunchest enemies – including Iran – and cozying up to governments in the Gulf that plainly had no appetite for a new war. Now Trump has not only endorsed Netanyahu's war; he has joined it, and boasted in his brief statement from the White House on Saturday that the two had worked as a team like 'perhaps no team has ever worked before.' He ended his speech with 'God bless Israel' along with 'God bless America.' Tonight was also a major blow to those on the right, as well as some on the left, who hoped that the Trump administration would usher in either a new era of military restraint or a shift in priorities away from the Middle East toward China. (The US has now relocated military assets from Asia for this war.) There's still a lot we still don't know, but it's fair at this point to say that this is a war of Trump's choosing. Trump's extraordinary gamble In his statement from the White House on Saturday night, Trump said that the operation had been a 'spectacular military success' and that the enrichment facilities had been 'totally obliterated.' For the moment, we don't have corroborating evidence of that. Israel had mostly avoided striking these sites itself. Only the US has the powerful GBU-57 'bunker buster' bombs that can destroy Iran's most security nuclear sites, particularly the underground uranium enrichment facility at Fordow, and only the US has the aircraft that can carry them. US officials told the New York Times that US bombers dropped a dozen bunker busters on Fordow on Saturday. Many experts believe the facility would be difficult to destroy and require multiple strikes, even with those bombs. Doubts about whether Fordow could be destroyed were reportedly one reason why Trump hesitated in ordering these strikes. In his statement, Trump also implied that this was a one-off operation for now. Speaking of the pilots who dropped the bombs, Trump said, 'hopefully we will no longer need their services at this capacity' but also threatened that if Iran did not 'make peace' then 'future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' He added: 'There are many targets left.' The hope appears to be that Iran will now be forced to cut a deal to entirely give up its nuclear program. But an Iranian regime mindful of its own legitimacy is also likely to retaliate in some form, possibly by targeting some of the roughly 40,000 US troops deployed around the Middle East. The hope may be that these will be limited tit-for-tat strikes like those that followed the US assassination of Gen. Qassem Soleimani in 2020, though subsequent assessments have found that those attacks did more damage than was initially thought and could easily have killed far more US troops. In any event, the Iranian regime is far more desperate now, and once the missiles start flying, it could get very easy for things to escalate out of control. If Iran has any remaining enrichment infrastructure, either at these sites or hidden elsewhere throughout the country, the country's leaders may now feel far less hesitation about rushing to build a bomb. There was long a view that Iran's leaders preferred to remain a 'threshold nuclear state' — working toward a bomb without actually building one. In this view, they believed that their growing capacity to build a weapon gave them leverage, while not actually trying to build one avoided US and Israeli intervention. That logic is now obsolete. It's also not clear that Israel simply wants nuclear concessions from the Iranian regime. While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that new intelligence about Iran's nuclear capabilities was the reason for starting this war, it's been clear both from the Israeli government's rhetoric and choice of targets that this is a war against the Islamic Republic itself, and that regime change may be the ultimate goal. Trump didn't mention regime change in his statement, but he has now committed American military power to that Israeli war. So far, this war has been characterized by stunning Israeli tactical successes, as well as the seeming impotence of Iran and its once vaunted network of regional proxies in its response. (Though it's unclear how long Israel's air defense system can keep up if Iranian strikes continue at this pace.) This may have emboldened a president who has backed off of actions like this in the past, convincing him that striking Iran's nuclear program now would be effective and that the blowback would be manageable.

Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis react to the US strike on Iran's nuclear sites
Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis react to the US strike on Iran's nuclear sites

Business Insider

time38 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis react to the US strike on Iran's nuclear sites

President Donald Trump on Saturday confirmed that US warplanes had executed "massive precision" airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, in what he described in a press conference as a "spectacular military success." The military operation marks a significant escalation in the tensions between Iran and Israel and represents a new level of US involvement in the international conflict. Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis reacted to the news. Bill Ackman Billionaire hedge fund manager Ackman, a longtime ally of the president's, was among the first to publicly react to the news with a post on X. "Thank you to our great military for its superb execution on ridding Iran of its nuclear threat," Ackman wrote shortly after the news broke. "All Americans are eternally grateful for you." Thank you to our great military for its superb execution on ridding Iran of its nuclear threat. All Americans are eternally grateful for you. — Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) June 22, 2025 He continued later, writing in a separate post: "To state the obvious, @realDonaldTrump's actions tonight are a lot better than relying on the IRGC's 'commitment' to not develop nuclear weapons." Jason Calacanis Serial entrepreneur Calacanis posted on X, "Five months into Trump's term, we're at war." In a subsequent post, he elaborated, saying that his initial statement was "just an observation, published without judgement." "We don't have the intelligence that our leaders have, so I will reserve judgement until we know more," Calacanis wrote. "It should be obvious to everyone, however, that no president can just stop conflicts on day one. We now have three conflicts were involved in." It's just an observation, published without judgement We don't have the intelligence that our leaders have, so I will reserve judgement until we know more. It should be obvious to everyone, however, that no president can just stop conflicts on day one. We now have three… — @jason (@Jason) June 22, 2025 Spencer Hakimian The founder of the hedge fund Tolou Capital Management responded to the strikes in a series of posts on social media, describing the US military operation as "completely undetectable," given that no flight trackers showed US military aircraft over Iran within 30 minutes of the strikes. "Say what you want," Hakimian wrote. "The United States military is A1 and there's not a close competitor at the moment." In a separate post, Hakimian added: "The most escalatory thing that Iran can do is not to bomb U.S. military bases in the Middle East. It's to close the Strait of Hormuz. And if that happens, Oil goes above $100 in the blink of an eye. Iran is no military match for the United States. But they can wreak havoc via inflation. Just like Russia in 2022." The most escalatory thing that Iran can do is not to bomb U.S. military bases in the Middle East. It's to close the Strait of Hormuz. And if that happens, Oil goes above $100 in the blink of an eye. Iran is no military match for the United States. But they can wreak havoc… — Spencer Hakimian (@SpencerHakimian) June 22, 2025 Shaun Maguire Maguire, a partner at Sequoia Capital, praised Trump as the "Greatest President of my lifetime." "You may just not realize it yet," Maguire wrote in a post on X, alongside a picture of Trump with his fist in the air after he was wounded during an assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. "Bulletproof instincts and nerves of steel." James Fishback A vocal supporter of Trump and cofounder of Azoria investment firm, Fishback praised the US strikes — and criticized those who expressed concern over the rising geopolitical tensions — in a series of posts on X. "Iran can't possibly think this is the start of a U.S. offensive. Trump's been clear from the start: they can't have a nuke. We just accomplished that. We're done here," Fishback said in one post. "If Iran chooses to retaliate against a clearly telegraphed, one-and-done strike, they'd be signing their own death warrant. Trump was right." In a separate post, he added: "The Fordow nuclear site was a uranium enrichment facility, not a mosque. Not everything is Islamophobia. Calm down. Leave your weird identity politics out of this."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store