In the weeks leading up to Donald Trump’s directive for US military action against Iran in late February, his senior advisors dismissed what they considered a “far-fetched” presentation from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
According to the New York Times, Netanyahu, alongside several high-ranking Israeli officials and Mossad chief David Barnea, delivered a bold proposal in the White House Situation Room. They aimed to persuade President Trump and his senior staff to undertake a significant move against the Islamic Republic.
The February 11 meeting featured Trump’s key officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, General Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, as well as Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and his special envoy Steve Witkoff.
During an intense session in the Situation Room, Netanyahu and his delegation outlined a compelling argument for why the moment was ripe for action against Iran.
The core of their proposal was striking: Iran’s leadership would be congregated in a single location, presenting an unparalleled chance for a decisive blow, according to the Israelis. Trump appeared captivated by the idea, recalling the previous summer’s successful strikes, as detailed in an excerpt from the upcoming book, “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump.”
The proposed plan aimed to dismantle Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, secure the Strait of Hormuz, and significantly reduce Tehran’s ability to counterattack against the US or its allies.
The Israelis went further, suggesting Kurdish fighters in Iraq could join the assault, that ordinary Iranians might rise up against the regime, and that the threat would only grow if left unchecked.
The following day, after US intelligence analysts reviewed the Israeli blueprint spanning four objectives: killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei; crippling Iran’s power projection; stoking a popular uprising; and triggering regime change – the verdict was pointed. Spooks were convinced by the first two aims. The final two, they were not.
Weeks before Trump approved strikes on Iran, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe poured cold water on an Israeli plan stating that the offensive would bring about popular uprisings and regime change
CIA Director John Ratcliffe told the President and his advisers that the Israeli assessment that regime change and a subsequent uprising were imminent after a US strike was ‘farcical’
‘In other words, it’s bullshit,’ Rubio added after the CIA director’s assessment
At a follow-up meeting on February 12, Ratcliffe and Rubio poured cold water on the plan, particularly the twin promises of regime change and a popular uprising, which the CIA director dismissed as ‘farcical.’
‘In other words, it’s bulls***,’ Rubio added.
According to the Times, US officials believed the first two objectives were achievable with American intelligence and military muscle – but concluded that Netanyahu’s third and fourth aims, including the prospect of a Kurdish ground invasion of Iran, were detached from reality.
JD Vance, absent from the February 11 meeting but present the following day, was equally sceptical that regime change would materialise.
Trump then turned to General Caine. ‘What do you think?’
‘Sir, this is, in my experience, standard operating procedure for the Israelis,’ Caine replied. ‘They oversell, and their plans are not always well-developed. They know they need us, and that’s why they’re hard-selling.’
Faced with the verdict that the Israeli plan had serious holes, Trump told the room that regime change would be ‘their problem’ – though it remained unclear precisely who the President had in mind.
Many of Trump’s advisers distrust Netanyahu, according to the New York Times report
Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dan Caine noted how Netanyahu was ‘hard-selling’ his presentations to the President
Smoke rises from the site of a US-Israeli strike on the Iranian capital Tehran on April 7, 2026
Though many of Trump’s advisers ‘distrusted’ Netanyahu, the President was keen on taking out the Ayatollah and limiting Iran’s ability to project power regionally and through its many proxies, like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, the report states.
No one did more to talk Trump out of the planned strikes than Vance.
But weeks later, just days before the President green-lit US strikes on Iran in conjunction with Israel, Trump’s advisers deferred to the commander-in-chief’s judgement.
‘If we just mean killing the supreme leader, we can probably do that,’ Ratcliffe reportedly told the President.
Rubio noted he didn’t think that regime change or a popular uprising were in the cards.
But that didn’t prompt Trump to change course.
‘I think we need to do it,’ the 79-year-old told the room.
The following day, Trump approved the strikes on Iran.
‘Operation Epic Fury is approved. No aborts. Good luck,’ the President told Caine.
