President Trump’s senior advisers are reportedly pushing a controversial strategy that suggests Israel should strike Iran before the United States launches an assault, as reported by Politico. This idea, according to two individuals familiar with these private discussions, is to leverage an Israeli attack to politically justify a U.S. military response.
This approach is rooted in the belief that American voters would be more willing to support a war with Iran if the U.S. or an ally were attacked first. Recent polling shows that while Americans, especially Republicans, might favor regime change in Iran, they’re hesitant to risk American lives to achieve it.
It seems President Trump’s team is really thinking about the optics here, alongside other justifications like Iran’s nuclear program. One person close to the discussions put it pretty bluntly, saying, “There’s thinking in and around the administration that the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us, and give us more reason to take action.”
Despite these alarming discussions, there are still some diplomatic efforts underway
Special envoy Steve Witkoff and President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, are actually heading to Geneva to try and make a deal with the Iranians. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was also at the White House recently, pressing the administration to act on Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missiles, and support for proxy groups. However, even with these talks, the prevailing sentiment among those closest to the president is quite stark: “we’re going to bomb them,” according to one of the sources.
While some advisers might want Israel to go first, the more likely scenario could be a jointly launched U.S.-Israel operation. If a military strike happens, the targets are pretty clear: Iran’s nuclear sites, or whatever’s left after previous U.S. strikes last June. Also high on the list is Iran’s ballistic missile infrastructure, which Israel views as a serious threat to its safety.
There’s even talk of a “decapitation strike,” which would mean targeting Iran’s elderly supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, Iran’s governing system is designed to have successors ready, so it’s not just about one person. The U.S. could also aim for facilities and multiple layers of the government, including the top ranks of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Hitting Iran comes with some serious risks, and the scope of any potential attack is a big question mark. One major concern is depleting U.S. munition stockpiles; the administration worries this could leave an opening for China to make a move on Taiwan. As one source explained, “If we’re talking about a regime-change scale attack, Iran is very likely to retaliate with everything they’ve got. We have a lot of assets in the region and every one of those is a potential target.”
They also noted that these assets aren’t protected by the “Iron Dome,” so there’s a “high likelihood of American casualties,” which brings its own “political risk.” Such an operation could last days or weeks, and its results could be unpredictable, especially if the U.S. relies solely on airpower.
The U.S. already has thousands of troops stationed at bases across the Middle East, and President Trump has significantly beefed up the firepower in the region, sending two aircraft carrier strike groups and dozens of fighter jets. This is the biggest accumulation of U.S. military might there since the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Pentagon officials and lawmakers on Capitol Hill have also been warning that prolonged strikes could really strain U.S. military supplies.
Published: Feb 26, 2026 12:00 pm