All of the above are part of the Trump administration’s shifting rationale for pummeling Iran and killing its leader without first seeking the buy-in of Congress and U.S. allies. There’s more that’s unclear about the widening war launched by the president and Board of Peace leader — including an exit strategy, a timeline and who President Donald Trump wants to take control of Iran from what he calls the “sick people” who run it now.

What makes the latest U.S.-Iran conflict different from a series of others is that the Trump administration’s own officials do not appear to be clear or uniform on the important questions at hand: Why and why now?

“It’s the standard practice to agree on the rationale before you start and then stick to delivering a consistent messaging,” said David Schenker, a former Trump administration official who is now a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “But that’s a challenge for this administration.”

By Wednesday, the White House was describing the Republican president’s decision to launch Operation Epic Fury as a consideration of past Iranian threats to the U.S. “and the president’s feeling, based on fact, that Iran does pose an imminent and direct threat to the United States of America.” Analysts say that’s unclear.

Here’s a curated selection of the Trump administration’s explanations over the last week as the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran expanded into a war.

The re-obliteration of Iran’s nuclear program

WHAT THEY SAID after the U.S.-Israel strikes on Iran last summer:

— “THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED!” — Trump in a June 24, 2025, post on Truth Social.

WHAT THEY SAID after a reported intelligence analysis suggested Iran’s nuclear program had only been set back a few months:

— “That is a false story, and it’s one that really shouldn’t be re-reported.” — Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a June 25, 2025, interview with Politico.

WHAT THEY SAID since the strike that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei:

— “If we didn’t do what we’re doing right now, you would have had a nuclear war and they would have taken out many countries because, you know what? They’re sick people.” — Trump on Tuesday at the White House.

THE BACKGROUND:

Iran has long insisted its program is peaceful, but the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog and Western nations say Tehran had an organized nuclear weapons program up until 2003.

The current state of the program remains a mystery as officials have not allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency access to the nuclear facilities that were bombed since June. That is according to a confidential report by the watchdog circulated to member states and seen Feb. 27 by The Associated Press.

For its part, Iran has said it has not enriched since June. Satellite photos analyzed by the AP have shown new activity at two of those sites, suggesting Iran was trying to assess and potentially recover material.

Iran is legally obliged to cooperate with the IAEA under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, but it suspended all cooperation after the war with Israel.

Iran’s ballistic missiles

WHAT THEY SAID:

— “Iran possesses a very large number of ballistic missiles, particularly short-range ballistic missiles, that threaten the United States and our bases in the region, and our partners in the region, and all of our bases in the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain.” — Rubio to reporters on Feb. 25.

— “The regime already had missiles capable of hitting Europe and our bases — both local and overseas — and would soon have had missiles capable of reaching our beautiful America.” — Trump during a Medal of Honor ceremony at the White House on Monday.

— Iran “was building powerful missiles and drones to create a conventional shield for their nuclear blackmail ambitions.” — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during the Monday Pentagon briefing.

THE BACKGROUND:

Iran hasn’t acknowledged that it is seeking to build intercontinental ballistic missiles. The country currently has a self-imposed limit on its ballistic missile program, limiting their range to 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles). That puts all of the Mideast and some of Eastern Europe in range.

Trump administration officials told congressional staffers in private briefings on Sunday that U.S. intelligence did not suggest Iran was preparing to launch a preemptive strike against the U.S. The administration officials instead acknowledged there was a more general threat from Iran and proxy forces.

“There’s been a lot of reporting that the assessments from the intelligence and military didn’t suggest that there was going to be an Iranian first strike,” said Naysan Rafati, senior Iran analyst at the Washington-based International Crisis Group. “My sense has been that opportunity is at least as much of a significant factor as threats, certainly.”

Israel’s role

WHAT THEY SAID:

— “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. And we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after (Iran) before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.” — Rubio to reporters on Monday.

— “Israel was determined to act in its own defense here, with or without American support.” — House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters. If that happened, he added, “exquisite intelligence” by the U.S. indicated that Iran would retaliate against American assets. “If we had waited, the consequences of inaction on our part could have been devastating,” he said.

— “No,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday, when asked if Israel had forced his hand on attacking Iran. “If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

THE BACKGROUND:

There is no sign that Israel was forced into cooperating with the U.S. in the strike.

An Israeli military official, on customary condition of anonymity, on Wednesday described lockstep planning between the U.S. and Israel. Three weeks before the strikes, Israel understood that the operation was pointing toward another confrontation with Iran and sent a team to the Pentagon, the official said. On Friday, the Israeli army deliberately suggested that the military was standing down for the weekend, releasing photos suggesting that staffers and senior commanders were heading home for Shabbat dinner.

The shared information allowed the strikes to be carried out hours later in a surprise daylight attack, people familiar with the operation told the AP over the weekend. The eventual barrage of U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran came so quickly that they were nearly simultaneous — with three strikes in three locations hitting within a minute — killing Khamenei and some 40 senior figures, another Israeli military official said Sunday.

During the strikes, the U.S. and Israeli war rooms were synchronized in real time to allow for quick adjustments, the first Israeli military official said Wednesday.

In a televised address, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israel had carried out the strikes “in full cooperation” with the U.S.

Trump has been both for and against regime change in Iran. Now what?

WHAT THEY SAID:

— “If Iran shoots and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go.” — Trump on Truth Social on Jan. 2.

— “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.” — Trump to Iranians on Truth Social just after the first strikes.

— “This is not a so-called regime change war. But the regime sure did change, and the world is better off for it.” — Hegseth at the Pentagon on Monday.

THE BACKGROUND:

Washington has a long, complicated history with regime change. See Vietnam, Panama, Nicaragua, Iraq and Afghanistan after Sept. 11, 2001, and Venezuela just weeks ago.

And in Iran, the CIA in 1953 helped engineer a coup that toppled Iran’s democratically elected leader and gave near-absolute power to Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. But as with the shah, who was overthrown in Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, regime change rarely goes as planned.

That’s in part because it’s fundamentally out of Trump’s complete control, as he acknowledged Tuesday.

“Most of the people we had in mind are dead,” he told reporters. “Now we have another group. They may be dead also based on reports. So, I guess you have a third wave coming, and pretty soon we’re not going to know anybody.”

___

Josef Federman and Julia Frankel in Jerusalem contributed to this report from Jerusalem.