Israel planned to attack Iran, so US struck Iran first to stem retaliation: Marco Rubio

The United States decided to strike Iran on Feb. 28 as it foresaw an Iranian retaliation against the U.S. in response to Israel's attacks, the U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Mar. 2.

"If we stood and waited for that attack to come first before we hit them, we would suffer much higher casualties," Rubio said before a classified briefing for congressional leaders on the war.

Why now?

Rubio said one of the common questions he has been asked about the operation was, "Why now?"

U.S. president Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to take action against Iran in the past, and first made good on it in June 2025, when the U.S. bombed three nuclear sites in the country.

However, in January 2026, after preliminary discussions between the two sides on limiting Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missile production hit a dead end, Trump was considering major strikes.

Tehran consequently vowed an immediate response to any military attack, CNN reported.

Pre-emptive action

Explaining what prompted U.S. to strike now, Rubio called it a "pre-emptive" action.

"It was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States,” he said.

This prediction proved to be true, he added, claiming that Iranian missiles forces had already been pre-positioned and activated to launch within an hour of the U.S.'s initial attack.

Assessing the risks of waiting for such a potential attack, Trump made a "very wise decision", Rubio asserted.

"We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action, we knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces," he said, "and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties."

Had to happen no matter what

When asked by a reporter if the U.S. was forced to strike because of an impending Israeli action, Rubio denied it.

"No matter what, ultimately this operation needed to happen," he said.

The impending Israeli action was a reason for "why now", he explained, but the operation needed to happen to prevent Iran from building up enough missiles and drones to "hold the whole world hostage" in about a year.

He went on: "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."

'Dictated by' Israel

Other U.S. lawmakers echoed Rubio's comments that same day.

Senator Mark Warner, who serves as vice-chair of the intelligence committee, said Iran posed a more urgent threat to Israel rather than to the U.S. as Trump has claimed.

"There was no imminent threat to the United States of America by the Iranians. There was a threat to Israel," he said after the classified briefing, as quoted by The Guardian.

"If we equate a threat to Israel as the equivalent of an imminent threat to the United States, then we are in uncharted territory," he said.

While emphasising that he stood with Israel, Warner questioned Israel's interests drive U.S. decisions to act.

He called the campaign "still a war of choice" and said it has been acknowledged by others that it was "dictated by Israel’s goals and timeline", as quoted by The Hill.

If the operation were driven by imminent security threats from Iran against the U.S., he believed the U.S. "would have had better planning".

The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson also spoke to reporters after the briefing, sharing that Israel was determined to attack Iran with or without the U.S.'s support.

He added that senior Trump administration officials had evaluated that Iran would have immediately retaliated against U.S. personnel and assets in response, and thus they made the "very difficult decision" to act first.

Related stories

Top images from secrubio/Instagram and AFP