Trump convenes Situation Room meeting as Iran claims attack on US base in Qatar
President Donald Trump summoned top officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine to the White House's Situation Room Monday afternoon amid reports of Iranian attacks targeting U.S. troops in Qatar, according to a senior White House official who was in the room, granted anonymity to discuss the developing situation.
The official added that the White House and the Defense Department are monitoring the situation in both Qatar, Iraq and elsewhere across the Middle East where the U.S. has military bases.
Iran claimed responsibility for an attack on the U.S. Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar in a statement from the country's armed forces. A U.S. official, also granted anonymity to discuss a developing situation, confirmed that missiles were fired toward the base.
Israel and Iran have been exchanging fire since Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities nearly two weeks ago. The U.S. entered the conflict this weekend by bombing some key Iranian nuclear sites.
The Monday strikes suggest Iran is willing to broaden the fight, targeting U.S. troops and nations allied with Washington elsewhere in the Middle East — a situation Trump had sought to avoid by urging Iran to return to the negotiating table.
Majed al-Ansari, a spokesperson for Qatar's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, both confirmed and condemned the attack in a statement, calling it a 'flagrant violation' of Qatari sovereignty. Al-Ansari added that Qatar's air defenses 'successfully thwarted the attack and intercepted the Iranian missiles.'
'Qatar reserves the right to respond directly in a manner equivalent with the nature and scale of this brazen aggression, in line with international law,' al-Ansari said. Qatar has long tried to maintain relations — often quietly — with virtually all sides in the conflict.
Iran's leaders are caught in a dilemma of needing to respond forcefully while trying to avoid a large-scale reprisal from the United States.
'How do you respond in a way that allows you to save face, but that doesn't end up leading to you losing your head?' said Behnam Ben Taleblu, of the hawkish Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank in Washington.
Iran's Islamist regime also has been significantly weakened by this month's strikes from Israel, according to Taleblu.
Before the open conflict with Israel erupted in mid-June, Iran had the largest and most diverse ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East, with as many as 3,000 missiles, and more than 400 launchers. Israel's strikes, however, are believed to have taken out roughly 40 percent of its launch infrastructure, limiting its ability to use those missiles, Taleblu said.
Amy Mackinnon and Felicia Schwartz contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
17 minutes ago
- Business Insider
US Navy warships picked up multiple new Iranian ballistic missile kills in the latest defense of Israel
US warships intercepted multiple Iranian ballistic missiles aimed at Israel this month, the Navy confirmed over the weekend, sharing new details from its third defense of Israel in a year and a half. Israel launched a new military operation against Iran on June 13, prompting Tehran to retaliate with waves of missile attacks. The US Navy moved five of its Arleigh Burke-class destroyers into the Eastern Mediterranean Sea for support if needed. The destroyers — USS Thomas Hudner, USS Arleigh Burke, USS The Sullivans, USS Oscar Austin, and USS Paul Ignatius — are equipped with high-end interceptors that are specifically designed for ballistic missile defense. Officials had previously confirmed that the US ships were providing air defense for Israel, but it was unclear if they scored any hits. However, in a statement on Sunday, the Navy revealed the destroyers intercepted "multiple" Iranian ballistic missiles since June 14. The Navy did not say which interceptors the destroyers used against the Iranian missiles and referred additional questions to US Central Command, which oversees Middle East operations. Business Insider reached out to CENTCOM for more information but did not receive a response. The disclosure comes as Navy leadership raises concerns that the sea service is burning through one of its top ballistic missile interceptors, the Standard Missile-3. Just last week, Adm. James Kilby, acting chief of naval operations, told lawmakers that American warships were using the SM-3 "at an alarming rate." Navy warships fired multiple SM-3 interceptors to defend Israel from large-scale Iranian missile attacks in April and October of last year. The SM-3 missile is an important element of the Navy's Aegis Combat System, equipped on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers. It uses a kinetic kill vehicle to destroy short- to intermediate-range missiles during the midcourse phase of their flight. The SM-3 is produced in multiple variants, which can cost as little as $10 million on the low end and nearly $30 million on the high end, according to the US Missile Defense Agency. Analysts have argued that the Navy is depleting its SM-3 stockpile in the Middle East without sufficient plans to replace it, which could be an issue in a Pacific conflict, where these interceptors would likely be needed in large quantities. China, a leading concern, has a large arsenal of ballistic missiles. And the SM-3 is not the only missile interceptor that the Navy is heavily expending in the Middle East. American warships have fired hundreds of SM-2s and SM-6s to defend against attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. US military planners have said that one of the challenges of the Red Sea conflict is being forced to use expensive interceptors to defeat cheap Houthi drones. Trying to get on the right side of that cost curve — saving the higher-end missiles for more advanced threats — is an ongoing focus in training across NATO.
CNN
18 minutes ago
- CNN
Senate kicks off marathon voting session on Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
The Senate has kicked off its marathon voting session on President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill after a weekend of negotiations and delays. As Senate Majority Leader John Thune went to the floor Monday morning, he told reporters that 'hopefully we'll know soon enough' if Republicans' have the votes to pass the bill. 'This may take a little while,' he noted. The vote-a-rama – an open-ended, hourslong series of votes on amendments, some political, some substantive – provides an opportunity for Republicans to make any eleventh-hour adjustments to the package and Democrats to push on GOP weak points in the bill and put their colleagues on the spot. Those politically tough votes are likely to provide fodder for campaign ads down the line. Trump's multitrillion-dollar bill would lower federal taxes and infuse more money into the Pentagon and border security agencies, while downsizing government safety-net programs including Medicaid. Democrats are expected to zero in on Medicaid and other safety-net programs as they message against the president's agenda. Monday's exercise in stamina comes after Senate Democrats employed a major delay tactic over the weekend that forced clerks to spend more than a dozen hours reading aloud the entire bill. Senators then debated the bill into the early hours Monday before adjourning and returning to the chamber at 9 a.m. ET to begin offering amendments. Lawmakers are up against an extremely tight timeline to pass the legislation. The president has demanded Congress deliver the bill to his desk by the Fourth of July, but the measure must still go back to the House if it passes the Senate. A number of Republicans are closely watching any changes made to Medicaid provisions in the bill. The Senate version of the megabill would leave 11.8 million more people without health insurance in 2034, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released over the weekend. That's more than the 10.9 million more people projected to be left uninsured by the House-passed version of the bill. Both chambers are calling for historic spending cuts to Medicaid, which provides coverage to more than 71 million low-income Americans, including children, senior citizens, people with disabilities and other adults. The package would also enact changes to the Affordable Care Act that are projected to reduce enrollment in the landmark health reform law that Trump and Republicans have long sought to dismantle. But the Senate version calls for even deeper cuts to the Medicaid, leading to the larger estimate. It would slash federal support for Medicaid by $930 billion over a decade, Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said over the weekend, citing a CBO estimate. The House version is projected to reduce federal spending on the program by about $800 billion, according to the CBO. Both chambers would require certain able-bodied adults ages 19-64 to work to maintain their Medicaid benefits for the first time in the program's 60-year history. But the Senate version would impose the work requirement on parents of children ages 14 and older, while the House version would exempt parents of dependent children. The Senate version would also lower the cap on the taxes that states levy on health care providers to help fund the program and increase reimbursement rates for providers. However, that provision would apply only to the 40 states and the District of Columbia that have expanded Medicaid to low-income adults. The House bill would put a moratorium on the states' existing provider taxes. The first vote taken by senators Monday dealt with a procedural argument over the so-called current policy baseline and how to calculate the costs of the bill. While it may seem dry, Republicans' use of current policy baseline in their calculations will set a precedent allowing both parties to be much more generous when calculating costs of tax bills going forward. Trump and some GOP leaders, including Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo, pushed the alternative 'current policy baseline' scoring method, which seemingly greatly minimizes the deficit impact of the bill because it would not include the cost of extending the expiring 2017 tax provisions. The CBO, however, calculated the cost of the bill using its traditional scoring method, known as 'current law baseline,' which assumed the expiring provisions of the 2017 Trump tax cuts lapse as scheduled at the end of the year. It projected the Senate's bill would also cost far more than the House-approved bill, adding nearly $3.3 trillion to the deficit over a decade. The Senate version is costlier in large part because it contains bigger tax cuts, while shrinking some of the spending cuts and revenue raisers, said Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a watchdog group. For instance, the Senate bill would make permanent three corporate tax breaks that were part of the 2017 law and would lessen the cuts to the food stamp program. 'They expand the giveaways and shrink the takeaways,' Goldwein told CNN. Using the current policy baseline, the Senate version would cost roughly $508 billion over the next decade, according to a separate CBO estimate released Saturday night.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Says He Has a US Buyer for TikTok
This story was originally published on Social Media Today. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Social Media Today newsletter. Checking in on the U.S. TikTok saga, on the 162nd day since the app was banned in the U.S. by federal law. Of course, TikTok hasn't actually been banned despite this, because U.S. President Donald Trump has 'a warm spot' in his heart for the app, and keeps delaying enforcement of the law via executive orders. But technically, TikTok should not be available to Americans, as it hasn't established a deal with a U.S. partner, in line with legislation. So are we any closer to reaching a new agreement on this front? Well, that depends on which reports you choose to believe. According to Trump himself, a deal is all but finalized, with 'a group of very wealthy people' ready to sign on to partner with TikTok's parent company ByteDance on a new regional agreement. President Trump told Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures' program that: 'We have a buyer for TikTok by the way. I think I'll need probably China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it, you know?' Trump said that he'll have more to share on the deal in 'about two weeks,' with, again, a group of very wealthy partners ready to invest in the U.S. operations of the app. Which, given the various names floated as potential U.S. buyers for the platform makes sense, as everyone from Oracle's Larry Ellison, to Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary, to YouTube celebrity MrBeast has reportedly put in a bid for the American stake of the app. Who, exactly, Trump is referring to, however, we can only speculate, but Oracle has long seemed like the most logical partner for the platform, given its past relationship with TikTok U.S. Back in April, The Information reported that a new entity called 'TikTok America' would be formed to meet the app's legal ownership requirements, which would be 50% owned by a consortium made up of Oracle, Blackrock, and Andreesen Horowitz, among others. Trump's latest statements seemingly point to this being the likely make-up of the final deal, which would also see ByteDance retain a 19.9% stake in the app. So it does seem like a U.S. TikTok deal is close, but then again… Last week, Axios reported that TikTok sales negotiations had stalled, with some potential suitors, including billionaire Frank McCourt, saying that things had gone very quiet in the lead-up to the latest ban extension. As per Axios: 'Negotiations between potential bidders and the White House were being led by the vice president's office, but talks slowed ahead of the third ban delay […] U.S. bidders remain eager to strike a deal, but getting the Chinese government's sign-off will require intervention from the U.S. government, which is currently distracted by several other foreign policy obstacles.' Of course, both of these reports may well be true. It could be that the White House is already closing in on one deal, which is freezing out other bidders, which would make it appear as though things had stalled, when actually an agreement is closer than ever. But we don't know, and no one outside of the U.S. officials arranging the sale, and the Chinese government executives negotiating the same, can actually provide any direct insight into what's happening. And aside from President Trump, there's nothing else to go on at this stage. So maybe we're closer to the end, but it does ultimately seem to hinge on broader foreign policy developments, and the progression of U.S.-China trade talks leading into the next TikTok sale deadline. Which is now set to come into effect on September 17th. So maybe we get an update before then, though I wouldn't be expecting anything much for a while yet, given the extended timeline, and the negotiations still to come with Chinese officials. They haven't been rushed to make a deal thus far, and I don't see why they will be now, given the knowledge that Trump will likely just extend the negotiation period once again if things can't be worked out. Which, despite some legal and regulatory concerns, he can do, by submitting further executive orders to withhold enforcement of the TikTok ban. So maybe we hear something in the next two weeks, but probably not, and the only real deadline we have is still some time away. Recommended Reading Trump Says He May Extend TikTok Sell-off Deadline Once Again
