Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
Democratic Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy warned that President Donald Trump’s administration has developed an “insane” plan for renewed military strikes against Iran that could trigger a “devastating escalation” across the Middle East.
Murphy said lawmakers received a detailed briefing on potential military operations, including a possible short-duration offensive, during a panel on Wednesday at the Middle East Institute. The war, which began with U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran on Feb. 28, has continued at a reduced intensity following the collapse of a temporary ceasefire, with both sides exchanging limited attacks as Iran restricts shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and Washington maintains a naval blockade, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Murphy warned that strikes against Iranian civilian infrastructure could prolong the eight-month conflict and further endanger American personnel, according to the senator’s official remarks.
“I will just say this, their plan is insane,” Murphy said. “It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law.”
As the war continues to drag on, renewed escalations cast fresh light on what Marco Rubio initially suggested to the press in March when this year’s U.S.-Israeli campaign began.
“We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces,” Rubio told reporters on March 2. “If we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties. This had to happen, no matter what.”
The war has already claimed the lives of 23 American service members, including 11 killed by hostile action, while another 865 have been wounded, according to the Pentagon’s casualty database. The remaining 12 deaths were classified as nonhostile, including fatalities from accidents and illness.
At least 3,636 people were killed in Iran during the initial fighting through April 7, including 1,701 civilians and 1,221 military personnel, according to the Human Rights Activists News Agency. The figures exclude deaths from subsequent fighting and leave another 714 fatalities unclassified.
The regional conflict has also killed at least 4,389 people in Lebanon since March 2, with another 12,424 wounded as of Oct. 12, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry.
“They’ve been asked by the president to develop a plan,” Murphy said at the event. “Whether they believe it will work or not, I do not know. But the plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that will be devastating for our security interests.”
Murphy and the Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
Iranian retaliation has damaged or destroyed hundreds of buildings at American military installations across eight Middle Eastern countries, including Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Dozens of American aircraft were also damaged or destroyed, including four F-15E fighters and up to 30 MQ-9 Reaper drones, according to the Pentagon’s inspector general.
Iranian attacks additionally caused approximately $184 million in damage to American diplomatic facilities in four countries, according to the same Pentagon report.
The conflict had cost the United States an estimated $47.1 billion as of Oct. 16, including approximately $29 billion to replace expended munitions, $11.9 billion in operational expenses and $6.1 billion to replace lost equipment, according to a Pentagon assessment obtained by Stars and Stripes. The estimate excludes damage to American military bases and infrastructure from Iranian attacks.
However, one analyst previously told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the true cost is probably much higher.
“I think Pete Hegseth has lied to Congress about the cost of the Iran War,” the cofounder of the Security Policy Reform Institute, Stephen Semler, previously told the DCNF. “It’s already the most disliked war in history, according to my own analysis of polling data dating back to World War II. So I think the administration has gone really far out of its way to hide the costs of the war, even the direct costs I’m talking about, from the American public.”
Semler estimated that the cost of the Iran War is likely over $112.3 billion. The cost of the war may be one of the key factors driving the approval of this war among U.S. adults to historic lows.
Roughly 65% of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of military operations against Iran and just 33% approve, according to an Oct. 8 Pew Research Center survey of 5,062 adults. Disapproval increased from 61% in March, while 73% expressed serious concerns about rising fuel prices and 71% worried about American military casualties.
Americans also expressed strong opposition to further escalation, with 46% opposing a substantially larger military campaign against Iran and just 24% supporting one, according to a September YouGov survey. The poll found that 75% of Democrats opposed expanding the conflict, while 53% of Republicans supported a larger offensive.
Murphy, who recently visited Saudi Arabia and Qatar, warned that renewed American military operations could provoke further Iranian retaliation, placing already damaged U.S. installations at additional risk, according to an Oct. 11 CBS News interview.
The American naval installation in Bahrain was effectively unusable following Iranian attacks, while Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar was operating at significantly reduced capacity. He also accused Pentagon officials of preventing him from visiting Al Udeid or receiving briefings from regional military commanders, the senator said, according to the Senate transcript.
Pentagon officials had discussed potential renewed military operations during a classified briefing, but questioned whether military commanders believed the proposed campaign could accomplish its objectives, Murphy said.
He further warned that targeting civilian infrastructure could undermine America’s commitment to international law and create another prolonged confrontation, according to his official remarks.
The remarks followed reports that American officials had warned Middle Eastern allies to prepare for another round of military strikes against Iran after the Nov. 3 midterm elections. President Trump had not reached a final decision, the Associated Press reported, citing two diplomats briefed on the discussions.
Trump previously threatened to destroy Iranian civilian infrastructure in April, explicitly identifying bridges and electrical facilities. “Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants!” Trump wrote in an April 2 Truth Social post.
American forces subsequently struck Iranian bridges and other transportation infrastructure during July operations, the Associated Press reported. U.S. Central Command maintained that its strikes targeted Iranian military objectives, according to CENTCOM.
International humanitarian law prohibits deliberately attacking civilian objects, although infrastructure serving military purposes can become a lawful target. Such strikes must satisfy requirements concerning military necessity, proportionality and precautions to minimize civilian harm, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
There are reasonable grounds to believe U.S. forces carried out two strikes on civilian sites that constituted war crimes, the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran said on Sept. 17, according to the U.N. Human Rights Office.
One international law expert previously told the DCNF exactly what would make these strikes war crimes according to the Geneva Convention.
“There’s a pretty common fallacy that if something is capable of having a military function as well as a civilian function, that makes it a legitimate target,” Gabor Rona, a professor of practice at Cardozo Law School, previously told the DCNF. “That’s not the test … but rather, is it actually being used in a way that effectively supports military operations?”
“There’s a second step, and that deals with what’s called the principle of proportionality … If an attack on even something that is being used for military purposes creates civilian harm that is clearly in excess, or is anticipated to create civilian harm clearly in excess to any military value gained, that too makes the attack a violation of the laws of armed conflict of the Geneva Conventions,” Rona previously told the DCNF.
Rona previously explained that civilian harm must still be minimized, even if these two criteria are met.
“There is one more hurdle that has to be met in order for something to be targetable,” Rona previously told the DCNF. “So even if the harm is not disproportionate to civilians, even if the object is being directly used for military purposes by the enemy, there is still an obligation on the part of the attacking party to take feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm.”
Trump previously announced that American forces would not resume attacks against Iran before the midterms, although he left open the possibility of renewed operations afterward, the Associated Press reported.
The administration has maintained that its military campaign is intended to eliminate Iran’s offensive missile capabilities, degrade its navy and prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, according to the Pentagon’s inspector general.
Murphy, however, argued that renewed bombing would be unlikely to force Tehran into concessions over the Strait of Hormuz, which remains severely restricted by Iranian threats and military activity. He suggested additional strikes could instead strengthen hardliners within Iran and further complicate diplomatic efforts, according to his Senate office.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Continue reading...
[ H/T WorldNetDaily ]
