Return to Transcripts main page

State of the Union

Three U.S. Troops Killed Amid Iran Operation; Interview With Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA); Interview With Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX); Interview With Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ). Aired 12-1p ET

Aired March 01, 2026 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:57]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST (voice-over): Epic Fury. The United States and Israel attack Iran and assassinate its supreme leader.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's been mass terror, and we're not going to put up with it any longer.

BASH: As Iran retaliates, what will it mean for the region and the world?

Iraq War veteran and Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego and Republican Senator Ted Cruz join me in moments.

And exit strategy. President Trump wants regime change, but with American troops in harm's way....

TRUMP: We may have casualties. That often happens in war.

BASH: ... does he have a plan for what comes next?

Retired General David Petraeus and former special presidential envoy Brett McGurk are here.

Plus: False promise?

TRUMP: I'm not going to start a war. I'm going to stop wars. We're going to end these endless wars.

BASH: A self-proclaimed peace president starts another war in the Middle East. How will Americans respond? Our political panel breaks it all down.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BASH: Hello. I'm Dana Bash in Washington, where the state of our union is once again at war in the Middle East. This morning, the world is waking up to a new paradigm in Iran. After

37 years in power, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is dead, killed in a joint U.S.-Israeli strike aimed at destroying the regime's military capabilities and decimating its leadership.

Other leaders killed in the attacks include Iran's defense minister, the head of the Iranian Security Council, and the commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

In a tragic development, U.S. Central Command confirms this morning that three American service members have been killed. Five more are seriously wounded.

Joining me now is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a veteran of the Iraq War, Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego.

Thank you for being here, sir.

First, I want to start with your reaction to the news you just heard. Three U.S. service members are dead.

SEN. RUBEN GALLEGO (D-AZ): Well, this is always the fear, and this is why it's so important that we actually have real leadership that understands the consequences of war.

And as someone, unfortunately, who I had to experience also an illegal war, there's nothing worse than seeing your friends die for a cause that isn't in the national interest of this country.

I'm -- I was actually with my mom this morning at breakfast, and she reminded me about the feelings that she had knowing that I was in the middle of a war and not knowing if I was alive, I was dead for a couple days.

And now we're putting potentially tens of thousands of our families going through that, with a president, by the way, that's not had one real press conference to really explain to the American public, why are we putting our men and women in danger? What is the national interest of our country being -- going to war right now?

And why are we going to expend potentially the blood of Americans and potentially destabilize a whole area? There is no leadership right now that's coming from this president, and we're in the middle of dropping bombs right now, and men and women are dying.

BASH: Well, Senator, he did a video in which he said that there was a threat from Iranian missiles on the American homeland.

And some senior administration officials did a briefing with reporters saying that they got some intelligence that there was preeminent strikes potentially coming from Iran because of the threat of U.S. forces. Have you seen anything to back that up?

GALLEGO: Well, again, these are excuses. I mean, these are excuses.

And there is no -- there was no way that any Iranian ballistic missile can hit the U.S. mainland. That is just entirely false.

But the president actually had an eight-minute conversation, a one-way conversation, without taking questions, but then went to a long fund- raiser at Mar-a-Lago the whole time. He spent more time raising money for millionaires than to talk to the American public, who are about to send these poor working-class kids to go defend the interests of whom?

The United States, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Qatar? We don't know. And we don't know what -- the end result of this. There is no plan. There's no clarity of the decision where we're going. There's no clarity of who's actually going to take over in Iran.

We may have made things worse, not better, because sometimes the persons that take over tend to be the hard-liners, because those are the ones that are surviving.

[12:05:06]

BASH: Well, an extremely hard-line leader, the supreme leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei, is now dead, as are several members of the top leadership. Is that a good thing?

GALLEGO: Certainly, it's a good thing in the sense that he's a horrible person, but the question is, what is the plan now? Who's going to take over? Who do we negotiate with to actually get out of this?

Because it sounds like right now, hope is the plan, right? I hear Lindsey Graham saying, I hope things go well, President Trump saying, I hope the Iranians take over.

When countries depend on their foreign policy being -- ending with hope, it usually does not end up well. I am one of those persons that had to live through that. Well, you have to actually have the clarity of plan, of mission, and what is the extra strategy here?

Right now, we're just hoping something happens in Iran so that way things end well. That is not in our national interest. What we just did was essentially go to war on behalf of at least a couple of interests in the Middle East, and now they are -- they have no plan to get us out of this.

How is that going to end up helping us be safer, our allies be safer in the long run? And, in the end, how is, again, this in our national interest? It's not.

BASH: Well, the Iranian charter is "Death to America."

GALLEGO: Look, I mean, are we going to go to war because people say mean things to us? That's not serious policymaking.

You go to war to defend the national interest of the United States. You go to war to make sure that Americans are kept safe or our national interests. You don't put men or women on the line because people say mean things to you. That is not how you actually do real national security. That's what teenagers do. BASH: And what about supporting terrorist proxy organizations

globally?

GALLEGO: There are so many ways that you could actually erode and fight terrorism globally. There's -- why, you could even do a kinetic strike. You could do surgical strikes. You could do it on the spot.

But when you have gone and done a full regime change, and you're still not explaining what the plan is here, you actually could create a situation that could be worse.

Look, I hope I am wrong. I hope this all ends up well. The problem is, we're all saying this word hope, hope, hope, and yet we're using men and women, American men and women, to actually execute a flawed plan. We're using, by the way, very limited munitions already to defend our allies and ourselves in a region that is going to continue to have a lot of situations, while also distracting us from China.

And none of this is, again, pointing to us actually having any direction that actually helps us understand and fix this in regards to our personal national interest as a country.

BASH: You're on the Homeland Security Committee. How concerned are you about the proxies I was just talking about or even Iran carrying out some sort of retaliation on U.S. soil?

GALLEGO: We should always be aware of potential terrorism.

We have a very good professionalized force. Homeland Security now has $175 billion more than they ever had. So they're going to have sufficient amount of manpower, and, in time, if they focus on this, versus going after some of these undocumented people that are here and are not -- should not be priorities.

So there is an opportunity for us, obviously, to make sure that we're right-siding Homeland Security, that we have the internal security we need. But the best internal security we need -- that we could have, the best security we could have in general is for us not to stop -- not to start stupid wars without any actually idea of how the outcome is going to be finished in a good regard for us.

BASH: Senator, the Department of Homeland Security is currently shut down over funding and really a policy dispute. Does that need to be rectified ASAP because of the potential threat here since the war began?

GALLEGO: Certainly, but the Department of Homeland Security has, again, $175 million -- $175 billion. They have agents that are hiring every day.

They have ICE agents that are coming out of their training camp every 45 days. They're going to be paid. They're still going to get paid through the shutdown because it's a separate line of funding. We can definitely work to fund especially CISA, FEMA, and TSA and let them be funded, and everything else will be fine. So there's a lot of ways that we can be doing this. But this idea that

there's -- our Homeland Security officials, the professionals are not doing the work right now is actually absolutely false.

BASH: Senator, you have called for the Senate to immediately return to session and vote on a war powers resolution that could block the use of forces in Iran. How do you see that going down? What do you see the language of that being, and where do you see the votes?

GALLEGO: Well, I know I'm going to vote yes. This is an illegal war. The justification for war was -- is not there. It was made up.

From some of the things that we're gathering, Iran actually had conceded a lot, to the point where, again, there was no imminent threat of any nuclear capability. Another senator talked about them potentially being able to load a bomb and send a bomb. That is absolutely ludicrous, and not even close to that.

[12:10:06]

And so there's isn't -- the president and -- has not justified at all why we are at war. So, for me, it's a very simple vote. It should be everyone's very simple vote.

But why are we engaging in any type of process conversation? We know what happened here. This was a B.S. reason for us to go to war. This president talked all the time about how he was going to keep us out of war, all the time. He also talked all the time about exposing the pedophiles on the Epstein list.

Coincidentally, that's also happening right now. This president talked about that. He talked about running to end wars and expose the pedophiles. Now he is starting wars and covering for pedophiles. And it's not a coincidence, I think, that it's all happening at the same time.

BASH: There -- the argument, which I know that you have heard for the why now, separate and apart from the very different things we're hearing from the administration and Democrats who have seen the intelligence and others in the intelligence community about the imminent threat, was that this is a moment in time that hasn't presented itself in decades, that Iran is at a very weak point.

You don't think that was a reason to take out the supreme leader and to try to denigrate the military command in Iran?

GALLEGO: So, we're essentially attacking a country because they're weak. Not exactly in our national interests, is what you're saying.

No, I don't think so. I think what we have to do when we act, when we use our men and women, when we use our prestige around the world in terms of calling in allies, when we're potentially distracting ourselves from China, is that we're doing it because it's the best interest of our national security.

And also, by the way, when you do it, what is the exit plan? Right now, it seems like the president has a day one plan and a day two plan. What is the day 10 plan, day 20 plan? What's going to happen when we start running out of munitions? What happens when we start running out of Patriot batteries?

These are the things that a real leader would understand and would actually plan out. And also then you would actually go back to the American public and explain to them what victory looks like, because no one's actually has described victory right now. And if you can't describe victory, then you don't really know how to put a plan together.

And all right now I think they're running on is a hope that things end well. And I hope it ends well too, but leadership does not -- leadership requires you to actually have a plan and figure out how to execute it to keep the American public safe and to actually make sure that it is in the national interest of this country.

BASH: Senator Ruben Gallego, thank you so much for being here. I appreciate it.

GALLEGO: Thank you.

BASH: Coming up: Will Americans rally behind President Trump, or are they wary of yet another war in the Mideast?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:17:03]

BASH: Now that Iran's supreme leader is gone, the question on everyone's mind, both in the Middle East and here in the U.S. is, what comes next?

Here with me now is retired U.S. Army General David Petraeus and former presidential special envoy Brett McGurk.

It's an honor to have you both here. We are at the wall because I think it will really help people understand what we have seen and what we're going to see next.

And I will start with you, General Petraeus, in terms of the strike targets inside Iran. What were U.S. forces able and Israeli forces able to get, and what do you think they're going for next?

GEN. DAVID PETRAEUS (RET.), FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Well, of course, this is a massive operation.

There were hundreds of Israeli aircraft, hundreds of American aircraft, hundreds of cruise missiles coming out of ships, submarines and so forth. And the focus of the Israelis, it appears, was largely on the regime leaders.

And, of course, they had extraordinary success in taking out the supreme leader and a number of the other most important figures in the regime, really quite stunning. In fact, it's particularly stunning that the arrogance of the Iranians that they all gathered together for meetings presuming that we didn't attack in the early morning hours like we normally do, and, therefore, they had a period of daylight during which they could come together and talk.

The U.S. meanwhile was going largely after the air and ballistic missile defenses that are left in Iran and then the missile and other retaliatory capabilities. And, again, keep in mind that there were hundreds of targets by each of the Israeli and U.S. forces, so a really extraordinary amount of ordnance being dropped and going in as cruise missiles as well.

And it appears to have been very, very devastating in a lot of ways, but still always an ability to retaliate with both the longer-range that could reach Israel and then the shorter-range, of which they have a substantial number, that can reach across the Gulf.

BASH: Yes, I mean, and we're saying that happened. We just were reporting on devastation in Beit Shemesh, which is outside of Jerusalem. That's a pretty big target.

And what does that tell you about what is still left in the Iranian arsenal?

PETRAEUS: Well, sure. We should understand that even in the 12-day war, with all of the ballistic missile and air defenses that we assembled -- and they were very considerable -- and we have done it again now. It's not just the Patriots and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems that are on the ground, but also all the ships have Patriot-like systems.

There are planes flying to try to take out missiles and drones and so forth. So this is a very, very comprehensive effort. And it's all integrated with the host nations and with Israel, to be sure.

But, even then, 5 to 7 percent of the missiles got through during the 12-day war. And if they hit, unfortunately, as the one did that you reported on earlier, there can be a pretty big amount of devastation.

BASH: And then, Brett, what does it tell you about the fact that Iran is retaliating the way it is when it comes to who's actually in charge now?

[12:20:00]

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: It's a great question.

George Kennan, a great diplomat, said, war, once initiated, has a momentum of its own. You don't know exactly where it's going to go. I think, over Iran right now, very importantly, look, the United States and Israel has complete not just air superiority, but air dominance, and they're still targeting leaders. This is still going on.

We're still doing waves of strikes. So whoever might step up into a leadership role is very vulnerable. The Iranians have announced they have a constitutional process. Remember, they have only had one succession in their entire history since 1979. So this is really in uncharted territory. They have a succession process under their Constitution, a counsel of

the president, the chief justice and a cleric to be named. That's -- they say who's running the country now. But those people haven't been seen.

Ali Larijani, who's a key adviser to the supreme leader for many decades, he's likely making some decisions. But what I'm seeing Iran do, they're firing off missiles. This was probably a precooked plan for when they were attacked. It's unclear who is making strategic decisions. And they're making some mistakes, Dana.

They're attacking in civilian areas of the. gulf and the Gulf states, the GCC states there, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, are uniting. And I would watch this over the coming days. Do they actually -- their air forces are now engaged in defense. Do they actually join in some attacks into Iran in self-defense? I think that's a key question.

That was not, I think, on my bingo card when this started. I think the Gulf wanted to stay out of it.

BASH: Yes.

MCGURK: They're being drawn in. So that's something to watch over the coming days.

PETRAEUS: A big mistake, I think, actually, Dana, because, again, the Gulf states...

BASH: Which is a mistake?

PETRAEUS: That they have been attacking the Gulf states.

The Gulf states wanted to stay out of it, as Brett said. So they did not even allow us to use their bases in a number of cases. Now they're into it. They have been attacked, and not just our bases, but civilian areas as well. And so they're going to take place now with the defensive measures.

As Brett mentioned, we have aircraft in the sky now. I'm sure they're being integrated by the combined air operations center. And if that continues, they're going to probably take further measures.

BASH: I want to talk about the chaos and instability in the region, obviously militarily, but also economically.

I mean, you see the Strait of Hormuz, which is right there. I mean, that's a key geographical location for a lot of these countries.

MCGURK: Well, 20 percent of global trade -- 80 percent of Iran's oil, of course, goes to Asia and China. China has a big interest here.

And I -- one geostrategic issue, Russia and China are very quiet here. And, of course, they're very much partners, strategic partners, of Iran, very quiet. I think that's very telling.

Yes, we'd expect, when oil markets open, the price of oil is going to go up, I think, fairly significantly. We will see. OPEC met today. They announced they're going to be increasing production. But, look, think about escalation dominance in a conflict like this.

If Iran makes moves in the Straits of Hormuz, as they're threatening -- they targeted some tankers today -- U.S. air forces have escalation dominance here. We can target Iran wherever we want. So Iran has to be calculating that, to the extent Iranian leaders are even thinking strategically.

They seem to be just firing off their missiles without a strategic plan. And that shows real disarray in their chain of command.

PETRAEUS: Yes, may be a result of all the leaders taken out. They're just acting on pre-decision that they were authorized before.

But, again, 20 percent of the world's crude oil and 20 percent of the world's liquefied natural gas come right through the strait.

BASH: Comes through here, yes.

PETRAEUS: There's already a report that the traffic is down by some 50 to 70 percent. And then, as Brett mentioned, there was a ship attack right in here. And that's going to -- Maersk has announced that they're stopping going through here and also through the strait that the Houthis have disrupted in the past.

They're, of course, an Iranian surrogate as well. So we will -- we will see an effect, but it likely will be a short-term effect. It will not be enduring unless there's some really significant escalation, say, mining of the Strait of Hormuz that for some reason requires longer than normal to clear.

BASH: Thanks to you both. Really appreciate you being here.

PETRAEUS: Great to be with you.

MCGURK: Thank you, Dana.

BASH: Coming up, Senator Ted Cruz will be here to discuss the events in the Middle East.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:28:33]

BASH: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

Donald Trump is a wartime president. Is he ready for everything that comes with that?

My panel is here with me now.

And, sadly -- Congressman Buddy Carter, I'm going to start with you. Sadly, that includes the death of service men and women. We know that three were killed and at least five injured. We don't know more than that. You represent many military bases.

REP. BUDDY CARTER (R-GA): Yes, absolutely.

And this is a tragedy, and our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the families, and we pray that God will protect those troops that are out there now.

BASH: Generally speaking, are you supportive of what the president is doing?

CARTER: Absolutely, I'm supportive.

I mean, let's face it. This is -- this is historic. This has been 47 years in the making that we have found here that Iran has been funding terrorism, and they have thousands of American citizens' blood on their hands and killed thousands of Americans.

Let's not forget what has happened here. They have been funding terrorism for years. And to have this happen and the president take this action, I can -- I applaud him for doing that. And those who are protesting this, the liberals in America who are protesting this, they are protesting in it, but the Iranians around the globe, they're celebrating in the streets. They're so happy.

BASH: I want to move on because we have some wonderful people here, but it's not just liberals protesting it. There are some hard-line conservatives who are not happy. They say the president promised to end wars and not start them.

[12:30:01]

CARTER: The president has addressed an imminent threat, and that was important.

We had -- Iran had thousands of missiles aimed at American bases, and he has addressed that. The Iranians just did not get it. They didn't understand. He has made it clear they're not going to have a nuclear weapon. We cannot afford that. This president has saved millions of lives in the future.

SABRINA SINGH, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: I don't think that there's any tears being shed over the supreme leader being killed, other senior leaders that are responsible for the deaths of Americans or Iranians in Iran.

I think the issue here is that there was not actually an imminent threat that was going to reach the United States with ballistic missile capabilities or even their nuclear enrichment program. The nuclear enrichment program, I mean, there was significant damage done during that June 12-day war last year.

But the threat that this was imminent, this was more of a war of choice. And I think the larger question here is, when the president says to the Iranian people, it's in your hands, well, how? How is it in their hands? If you're not going to have American boots on the ground actually delivering some type of security for election processes, police, it's actually not in their hands.

And just one more point that I will make on this, is, this war is going to have extreme economic consequences. And I know you probably face questions from your constituents all the time on affordability, gas prices. I mean, there's no question that tomorrow oil markets are going to open up and the cost of the barrel is going to go from $5 to 10. And that's going to hit Americans' pocketbooks.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't think -- I think you're overstating the case on the oil. It is going to have some impact on the economy of China, because that's where they get their oil, from Iran.

And what we did in Venezuela, what we did in China, and what we did in Iran has as much to do with China, I think, as anything, I also want to say, may God rest the souls of those troops, but they died in a noble cause.

And, as Buddy said, 47 years, Americans are dead, the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. I totally disagree with you about the threat not being imminent. I spoke to senior, very senior administration officials yesterday. They believe that the Iranian regime was about to fire ballistic missiles, not at the United States, but into U.S. military bases and civilian targets.

They were going to attack Israel. They are already attacking other Gulf states.

SINGH: Yes, but you can't make the case back then in last year saying that you have completely obliterated the nuclear capabilities of Iran and then say that there's an imminent threat.

JENNINGS: And I will address that as well, because...

SINGH: I mean, those -- that's a dichotomy that just doesn't exist.

(CROSSTALK)

SINGH: And the reality is that the national security apparatus has assessed that there was not an imminent threat.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: I know. My guess is, I have spoken to higher-ranking officials than you.

On the Iranian enrichment, the United States offered them free, unlimited, lifetime, civilian-grade nuclear fuel. They said no. They had given us the runaround about their intentions on enriching uranium for military purposes. How long do you want to wait?

"Death to America"? "Death to Israel"? How long do you want to wait? We waited 47 years. We have crossed every red line. Every president says they want to do something about it. Only Donald Trump had the guts to do it. You said you're not shedding any tears for the regime, but you appear just not to like Donald Trump enough to be mad about it.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: This is a good thing.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Hang on. I want to get you in.

And I also want to say, like, every president, U.S. president, since Jimmy Carter was opposed to the regime.

JENNINGS: And who did something about it?

BASH: But the question is, and still is, what comes next? What's going to happen?

(CROSSTALK)

SINGH: Yes, and how long...

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think I might be representing at this table just like an average American right now that doesn't understand how nuclear weapons actually are developed, don't understand if they're -- or know for sure if there was an imminent threat or not.

I know many Americans woke up yesterday and said, oh, my God, we're at war. And, today, they woke up and said, oh, my God, Americans are dead. And I think everyone can say that's just not something we love to say as people, because war does a couple of things. War can bring freedom, but it also brings death.

And that is why we have rules and regulations and processes so that we don't just go to war at the decision of a president.

We actually empower you, sir, to vote and determine. And if you vote...

(CROSSTALK)

CARTER: And we will vote. We will vote on the War Powers Act. We will do that.

ALLISON: OK.

But do you realize that we're at war now, and you haven't?

WARREN: No, we're not at war now. We...

ALLISON: So, the president says we're at war, but we're not at war?

CARTER: The president has done his job. He has addressed an imminent threat. And I applaud him for that. He should have.

And this is something we need to keep in mind. And when Americans woke up this morning, they were safer. They were safer because Iran is not as strong as they were today, because Iran is not as strong as they were two days ago.

ALLISON: Those soldiers weren't. Those soldiers were dead.

SINGH: Can I just make the point that Scott was saying?

Because I take issue with the fact that you think I'm against everything that this president is doing. I actually think that the 12- day war weakened Iran and Iran walked away from a deal that they should have taken. I mean, that was a miscalculation on their part. And striking allies and Gulf nations is a miscalculation of Iran.

But what I think the larger question here is, Scott, is that this war is going to draw down our stockpiles. It's going to pull capabilities from other regions, including the Indo-Pacific. And at the end of the day, I do think we are losing our eye on the threat of China.

[12:35:04]

And, frankly, there is someone in the Pentagon ringing alarm bells about what is happening to our military in terms of the stress it is putting on their extending carriers, et cetera.

BASH: Scott, I want to ask you about the politics of this, because it is mixed in your party.

There are some with very big megaphones who are not happy with the president, because he did promise not just during the campaign, but at his inaugural address, that he's the guy who's going to bring peace and not start wars.

JENNINGS: Yes, and he is bringing peace.

We're already -- Iran has been at war with us for 47 years. The central pillar of the regime is "Death to America." The other pillar is "Death to Israel," who is our ally. They have been at war with us, they have been killing American personnel and American soldiers for nearly five decades.

This is not an attempt to start a war. This is an attempt to prevent further conflict. This is an attempt to get the largest state sponsor of terror off the field. This is an attempt to stabilize the Middle East.

I don't view this, Ashley, as starting a war, as much as ending the people who are the preeminent terror threat in the world. They're at war with everybody. They're at war with us, and they're at war with Western civilization.

ALLISON: What happens now, though? Not that -- OK, so this is a serious question, because we have seen regimes fall and countries not be stabilized. And so what's next?

JENNINGS: My gosh, I don't know. I mean, what if we leave a country that for the next 47 years kills Americans, kills American personnel, funds terror around the .

ALLISON: That's not the question.

JENNINGS: That's what we have now. That's what we -- we couldn't have it any worse now.

What comes next?

ALLISON: We couldn't?

SINGH: We actually don't know.

(CROSSTALK)

SINGH: We don't know, actually.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: ... that the Iranian people rise up and take control of their country.

SINGH: We don't know...

(CROSSTALK)

CARTER: Absolutely. It is up to the Iranian people to make that decision of what happens next.

SINGH: But how?

(CROSSTALK)

CARTER: They make that decision. And they will never have a better opportunity to take this government over than they have right now.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: But here's what we can agree. What we can agree on is that we don't have the answers to what's next.

ALLISON: That's right.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Nobody at this table does. And nobody really globally does right now, which is part of the big challenge of where we are right now.

Thank you, all of you.

Well, at end of an era. When we come back, Senator Ted Cruz will join me to discuss this high-stakes moment in the Middle East.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:41:55] BASH: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

It has been a head-spinning 24 hours in the Middle East.

Here to discuss is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas.

Thank you so much for being here, sir.

I do, before we talk about some of the other issues, want to start with your reaction to the fact that three U.S. service members were killed as part of this operation, five others are seriously wounded.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Well, it is no doubt tragic any time American service men and women lose their lives.

And when one -- when a nation engages in military conflict, unfortunately, casualties are part of the risk calculus. President Trump's decision to go into Iran, and to go in with overwhelming force, is the most consequential decision of his presidency. I believe it was the right decision.

I spent the entire day with him Friday, the day before he launched this attack, and he and I discussed it at great length. And I think the president is acting to keep America safe and to make America safer. Iran for 47 years has been the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

They provide over 90 percent of the funding for Hamas. They provide over 90 percent of the funding for Hezbollah. They have killed nearly 1,000 Americans over the course of the years. And the president is acting now decisively, finally, after 47 years to remove this theocratic, homicidal regime that had set its goal clearly and unequivocally.

The goal, the ayatollah would chant regularly, "Death to America," well, that ayatollah is no longer able to deliver on that promise that he had made.

BASH: And, Senator, what you say about Iran and how diabolical the regime is, no question it has been that way for decades.

President Trump says, in terms of the timing, why now, one of the reasons for striking Iran is that they could soon have a missile that would reach the American homeland. I had the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner, on this program earlier. He said he saw no intelligence that supports that claim that there is an imminent threat.

Have you seen anything that supports that, or did the president tell you that when you were with him on Friday?

CRUZ: Well, Iran has a very significant cache of missiles, both short-range, medium-range, and they're working on long-range missiles. Much of the military strikes that are being carried out right now are taking out those missiles, in particular the southern missile belt the United States is focusing on.

Iran has been building roughly 100 missiles a month. And so one of the military objectives of this action is to take those missiles out. Those are the very same missiles that they're firing right now at just about every other country in the Middle East. They're attacking all of their neighbors indiscriminately.

And this action, we have seen Israel has launched over 1,200 airstrikes in the last day. The United States has launched more than 900 airstrikes in the last day. This is focused on taking out that missile capacity, degrading their military capacity.

[12:45:13]

BASH: OK.

CRUZ: But, critically, you asked, why now?

Let me tell you why now, because this is the opportunity where the regime is at the very weakest point it has been for 47 years. Last year, Iran lost the 12-day war. Tyrannies stay in power by convincing their people, convincing their enemies that they are invincible, that they cannot be defeated.

And there are real-world consequences to losing a war, not just political messaging and spin. If there is anything possibly worse than losing a war for an Islamist dictator, it is losing a war to Israel. And Israel clearly, unequivocally, defeated the ayatollah in the 12- day war.

And President Trump sent our bombers to take out their nuclear facilities and did so with incredible success. That means -- what I urged President Trump on Friday, I said, this regime is teetering. It is hanging by a thread. Do not miss this opportunity, because removing this regime that wants to murder us -- remember, this ayatollah has for months hired hit men with the stated purpose of murdering President Donald J. Trump.

BASH: Right.

CRUZ: Removing this regime from power makes America much, much safer.

BASH: So, just to be clear, your argument for the why now is the weakness of that regime, not the imminent threat of the missiles that they have had and they have been building for a very long time?

CRUZ: That's precisely the argument I presented to the president, is, this opportunity is here, it is now, and removing the ayatollah makes America much, much safer.

BASH: That's different from what the president said and what the administration is saying, which is that there was an imminent threat from Iran.

CRUZ: Well, the president has said repeatedly, if you look at his eight-minute speech laying out the basis for this attack, he went through the 47 years of massive animosity, of murder, of terror.

This is a regime over and over again that has made the decision to murder Americans, to murder our allies. They -- right now -- the most significant threat of violence right now is Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis, which are the proxies that are controlled and paid for by Iran.

And those proxies, they target Americans and they target Israelis and our other allies.

BASH: Right.

CRUZ: We're seeing that unfold right now. And, by the way, they're not just limited to the Middle East. One of the reasons the president went and arrested Maduro...

BASH: Right.

CRUZ: ... is because Maduro had welcomed Iran, had welcomed Hezbollah into Venezuela to be a terror base potentially against the United States.

And so this is the president acting as a strong commander in chief, fulfilling his responsibility of protecting the American people.

BASH: I have to ask about the differing views, let's say, inside your party about whether this is the right thing to do, starting with the president himself, campaigning on and saying in his inaugural address that there would be no more wars.

And there were a fair number of Republicans who voted for him liking that promise. Tucker Carlson is somebody who liked that promise. He told ABC that the president's decision to strike Iran is -- quote -- "absolutely disgusting and evil."

Your response?

CRUZ: So, I will say your quote of the president was slightly off.

He did not say there would be no more wars. He said there would be no more forever wars. Those are very different things. I emphatically agree with him. You are not going to see a major U.S. troop presence in Iran. He and I talked about that on Friday, talked about Israel leading many of the attacks.

We talked about targeted airstrikes taking out the military capacity of the regime to attack the protesters. And I also urged arming the protesters so the people of Iran could fight back, because they were slaughtered.

BASH: Is that going to happen? That was one of my questions. Is the U.S. going to help them?

CRUZ: Forever wars -- I hope so. I do not know for sure. I did not get a clear answer on that. That is what I advocated for. Look, Tucker Carlson -- as President Trump has said, Tucker Carlson is

a kook. He's an isolationist. His views are fringe. And Tucker Carlson has spent the entire Trump presidency attacking President Trump, attacking his foreign policy, because Donald Trump is not an isolationist.

[12:50:17]

He's not interested in sending our sons and daughters to be in extended wars and have major casualties. But he does understand that, when faced with a serious threat, you act. It's why President Trump bombed the nuclear facilities in Iran. It's why President Trump arrested Maduro.

And it's why now President Trump is acting decisively to take out a theocratic lunatic who pledges "Death to America." That's not a forever war. That is a commander in chief fulfilling his responsibility.

And I think that Tucker Carlsons of the world represents a small fringe group in the Republican Party. I'd like them to be smaller and more fringe. I think they are wrong, and I think they are projecting their isolationism onto the president. And they're lashing out at President Trump because he has rejected their views as foolish and naive and misguided.

And, ironically, Tucker Carlson's views on Iran are the exact same as Barack Obama's views on Iran, and both of them are wrong.

BASH: Senator Ted Cruz, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it.

CRUZ: Thank you.

BASH: When we come back: the end of an era in Iran and the beginning of an uncertain future.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:56:12]

BASH: Jubilant scenes last night here in Washington, crowds with American, Iranian and Israeli flags, not a combination you often see together, chanting "USA" and celebrating the death of Iran's supreme leader.

In Los Angeles, home to the largest Iranian community outside of Iran, tears, hugs and dancing, and, in Tehran, cheers and anti-regime chants even amid the terror of war.

The death of Ayatollah Khamenei turns a page in Iranian global history, one that began 47 years ago with the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and the foundation of an Iranian regime that has bedeviled every American president since Jimmy Carter. But while one chapter is now closed, the next chapter, what it holds, that's anyone's guess.

Thank you so much for spending your Sunday morning with us.

The news continues next.