A prominent liberal voice is drawing attention after publicly backing President Donald Trump’s decision to launch military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, known for his frequent critiques of Trump, told viewers that the strikes were not only justified but exactly what any responsible commander-in-chief would have done under similar circumstances.
The airstrikes, described by the White House as a “spectacular military success,” targeted critical uranium enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan using Tomahawk missiles and bunker buster bombs.
The administration said the goal was to prevent Iran from achieving weapons-grade nuclear capabilities following failed diplomatic efforts.
Speaking Monday on “Morning Joe,” Scarborough dismissed partisan interpretations of the decision and emphasized that the strike was a response to growing national security threats.
“This was not about politics,” he stated. “It was about national security.”
Scarborough argued that any U.S. president, regardless of party, would be faced with the same urgent choice given Iran’s uranium enrichment progress.
U.S. intelligence reportedly found that Iran had advanced its nuclear program to the point of enriching uranium to nearly 60 percent purity, approaching the level required for weaponization.
The revelation prompted weeks of planning by Trump’s national security team, culminating in the operation, which officials say seriously damaged Iran’s underground infrastructure.
Iranian officials, however, pushed back on U.S. claims, asserting that the targeted nuclear sites had already been evacuated prior to the attack and that damage was minimal.
Nonetheless, American sources indicated that the strikes disrupted Iran’s ability to continue enrichment activities at key locations, according to the New York Post.
Scarborough cited former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s philosophy that U.S. presidents are often forced to choose between two equally difficult foreign policy options.
“You’re never handed a good decision and a bad decision,” he said. “You’re handed two very difficult choices.” He added that Trump made the necessary one under intense pressure.
Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, also appearing on MSNBC, supported Scarborough’s analysis.
He noted that the Trump administration had exhausted diplomatic channels and concluded that force was the only option remaining.
“In the end, military action may have been the only viable option,” Ignatius said.
The Pentagon reportedly named the mission “Midnight Hammer,” and sources within the Department of Defense have described it as one of the most technically precise operations against hardened nuclear targets in recent years, according to CBS News.
Among the most significant targets was the Fordow facility, which is buried deep within a mountain and considered one of Iran’s most secure nuclear sites.
In a striking moment, Scarborough pointed out that even Democrats like Hillary Clinton would likely have made a similar call in the same situation.
The remark underscored the bipartisan gravity of the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
While MSNBC has traditionally offered sharp criticism of Trump, Scarborough’s comments suggest that the seriousness of the issue transcends political divisions.
His remarks reflect a broader understanding that protecting U.S. national security interests sometimes requires forceful and unpopular decisions.
