Rubio narrows goals of Iran war to objectives that can be easily achieved by military strikes

“I hear a lot of talk about we don’t know what the clear objectives are,” Rubio said on ABC’s Good Morning America.

“Here they are. You should write them down. Number one, the destruction of their air force.

Number two, the destruction of their navy. Number three, the severe diminishing of their missile launching capability. And number four, the destruction of their factories so they can’t make more missiles and more drones to threaten us in the future.”

“Here’s the problem. These are all ‘tactical’ objectives. They are not strategy.

Because there IS NO strategy,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said in a rebuttal posted on X. “Why the change? Because we are failing in the original mission. Iran still has most of their missiles.”

“We CANNOT destroy all their drones. Their drone attacks continue,” Murphy argued.

“Their ‘navy’ isn’t what closes the Strait of Hormuz. It’s thousands of speed boats and suicide boats. And like their drones, we can’t destroy them all.”

As if to underscore the point, Iran struck a fully-loaded Kuwaiti oil tanker off the coast of Dubai. Officials said there were no injuries or oil leakage reported. RUBIO: U.S. NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR REOPENING STRAIT: Rubio is setting the political condition for the U.S. portion of the war to end with the fate of the Strait of Hormuz.

“When this operation is over, it will be open, and it will be open one way or another,” Rubio said in an interview with Al Jazeera.

“It will be open because Iran agrees to abide by international law and not block the commercial waterway, or a coalition of nations from around the world and the region, with the participation of the United States, will make sure that it’s open. But one way or the other, it’s going to be open.” Speaking to reporters in Paris last week, Rubio suggested that despite the fact that the U.S.-Israeli war led to the closure of the vital waterway that carries 20% of the world’s oil supply, it should not be up to the U.S. alone to reopen the Strait.

“We don’t have to lead that plan, but we’re happy to be a part of it.”

“Countries … all over the world have a lot at stake and should contribute greatly to that effort to ensure that neither the Strait of Hormuz or, frankly, any international waterways should ever be something that’s controlled or tolled by a nation-state or by a terroristic government like the one that exists in Iran today.”

Meanwhile, the Iranian military scoffed at President Donald Trump’s Sunday claim that Iran was allowing 20 “big boats of oil” through the strait as “a sign of respect” for him and a signal that the negotiations are going well.

“Contrary to the insinuations of the US media and Trump himself, no vessel has passed through the Strait of Hormuz without an agreement with Iran and a ‘we-for-our-price’ payment,” the military said in a post on X. “No enemy cargo has and will not pass through the Strait.” The passage of Pakistani-flagged tankers is something Iran has permitted since the start of the war, as it considers Pakistan, which is seeking to mediate potential peace talks, an ally. BOLTON: BLOCKADE A BETTER OPTION: In an appearance on CNN, former Trump national security adviser John Bolton said that Trump’s threat to hit desalination plants, which could spark a water war in the region, is a bad idea.

“I wouldn’t recommend that,” Bolton said.

“Mostly because I’m concerned about retaliation to our Gulf Arab allies.”

“I think the president’s focused on one thing and one thing only, and that’s the international price of oil,” Bolton said.

“Not thinking about nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, terrorism. He’s thinking about the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.” Rather than send U.S. ground to secure Iran’s Kargh island distribution point or take over islands in the mouth of the Gulf, Bolton said the U.S. should close the Strait to all traffic.

“The better answer is to blockade the Strait of Hormuz and not let any Iranian oil out. If our Gulf Arab allies can’t ship oil, then neither should the Iranians, nor should they be able to earn the proceeds from that, which in one way or another filter back to their war effort to kill American service members.” Good Tuesday morning and welcome to Jamie McIntyre’s Daily on Defense, written and compiled by Washington Examiner National Security Senior Writer Jamie McIntyre (@jamiejmcintyre) and edited by Christopher Tremoglie.

Email here with tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. Sign up or read current and back issues at DailyonDefense.com. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email and we’ll add you to our list.

And be sure to @jamiejmcintyre.

Happening Today

: War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine are scheduled to provide an update on the war to Pentagon reporters at 8 a.m. The briefing, the seventh of the monthlong campaign, will be livestreamed on the Pentagon’s website. The briefing comes as President Trump posted on Truth Social last night what appeared to be a U.S. attack on an underground ballistic missile and ammunition stockpile in Isfahan, employing a 2,000-pound “bunker buster” bomb. The video, which showed a massive explosion, was posted without comment.

Hegseth Denial

: ‘WE DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE RETRACTION’: The Pentagon’s chief spokesman has issued a flat denial of a story published by the Financial Times that alleged that a stock broker from Morgan Stanley, acting on behalf of Pete Hegseth, “attempted to make a big investment in major defense companies in the weeks leading up to the US-Israeli attack on Iran.” Citing “three people familiar with the matter,” the FT reported the broker “contacted BlackRock in February about making a multimillion-dollar investment in the asset manager’s Defense Industrials Active ETF, shortly before the U.S. launched military action against Iran.

“This allegation is entirely false and fabricated. Neither Secretary Hegseth nor any of his representatives approached BlackRock about any such investment. This is yet another baseless, dishonest smear designed to mislead the public,” Hegseth spokesman Sean Parnell posted on X. “We demand an immediate retraction.”

“Secretary Hegseth and the Department of War remain unwavering in their commitment to the highest standards of ethics and strict adherence to all applicable laws and regulations,” Parnell wrote.

Is Trump Contemplating

A WAR CRIME?: There’s been a lot of talk about whether President Trump’s Monday Truth Social post, in which he threatened to “conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!)” amounts to a threat to commit potential war crimes. Under international law, which Trump has previously said he doesn’t feel bound by, targeting infrastructure that primarily provides essential services to the civilian population is prohibited. At yesterday’s briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was pressed on the question by NBC reporter Garrett Haake.

“Why is the President threatening what would amount to potentially a war crime with the U.S. military? And how do you square that with the administration repeatedly saying that the U.S.