Iran War: Trump Responds After 3 U.S. Troops Are Killed

New details about the U.S. troops killed in the fighting there. At least 17 Americans have died since the war started. This weekend, CENTCOM says one service member was killed in northern Iraq while trying to detonate a downed Iranian attack drone, and remains have been recovered in Jordan amid the search for a service member still missing after an Iranian attack that left two others dead. And just in moments ago, the Pentagon identified those two soldiers who were killed in Jordan. First Lieutenant Tyler James Feehan, a 25-year-old from Hawaii, and Private Isabel Gonzalez, a 19-year-old from Texas. President Trump spoke about the losses. Well, we feel very badly, but you know, those great people, those great patriots are out there fighting that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Iran has been very, very badly damaged. They've lost everything almost militarily. Let's get to Kevin Liptak live at the White House for the latest reaction from there. Good morning, Kevin. Yeah, this has been one of the deadliest stretch of days since this war began almost four months ago, really ratcheting up the cost for Americans, but also deepening the quandary for President Trump. And the death toll does appear likely to rise, CENTCOM saying that it's still working to identify remains that were found at the site of that attack on Jordan. They say that two service members had been killed when they came under attack from Iranian missiles and drones. We also understand that there was an additional death in northern Iraq over the weekend when a service member was working at a controlled detonation of unexploded ordnance. Both of these incidents, I think, underscoring that Iran really does retain missile and drone capabilities that perhaps President Trump may have been underplaying over the last several months, but also seems to have the ability to evade U.S. air defense systems, really comes amid escalating exchanges between the two countries, both sides going after increasingly sensitive targets, including civilian infrastructure. Last night, CENTCOM saying that it carried out the ninth straight consecutive night of attacks on Iran. And I also understand from U.S. officials that additional American firepower is heading to the region, including F-16 jets, F-35 jets, as well as additional aerial refueling tankers all now heading to the Middle East. It's all, I think, led to some anxieties, as you see these increased attacks by the U.S. on southern Iran that perhaps President Trump could be preparing for some sort of ground invasion. And certainly the president is at something of a strategic crossroads here as he determines which way to go amid this escalating conflict with Iran. Of course, these deaths, I think, just reiterate that the U.S. doesn't actually need ground troops in Iran. In order for positions in the region to be at heightened risks, those troops that are arrayed across the Middle East are now coming under fire. Three American deaths in just 24 hours, a ninth night of strikes. Kuwait intercepting attacks once again this morning. What does this tell you about the threat level to the thousands of troops now, not only in the region, but around the world? So it tells us that our air defenses have to be right all the time and the Iranians only have to be right once. And unfortunately, we did see some pretty substantive attacks. I'm hearing from multiple U.S. officials that the number of casualties actually in these attacks, particularly in Jordan, was much higher. That there could have been several dozen wounded in Jordan alone than additional attacks in Saudi Arabia. And that when they hit the base in Erbil in northern Iraq, it was actually – it hit a weapons storage depot as well and there were secondary explosions there. So quite a substantive attack. I'm told that the Iranians also look like they've adapted their tactics based on previous strikes in which they have maneuverable warheads now coming off the missiles that are coming in. And that's making it more difficult to shoot things down. So not a lot of information has been released, but that is so far what I'm being told by U.S. officials. The New York Times also reporting that the number of U.S. troops that have been injured in attacks has not been disclosed over the past few weeks. Jordan in particular has been on the receiving end of a number of these strikes. What message is Iran sending by specifically targeting Jordan? So Iran, they've targeted Jordan and this attack was successful, unfortunately, but they've also attacked many of our other bases in the region. So it's twofold. It's part of their overall strategy that they've launched in response to the U.S. military action that was launched several months ago, and that is they want to maximize U.S. casualties. They want to ensure that the Gulf states and also Jordan, where we have basing that's being used to launch, put pressure on Washington to end the war, and they want to increase the cost of goods by choking off the Strait of Hormuz by holding it at risk. And lastly, they want to cause division within the president's political base. I'm told by many – multiple sources in the region that those are the four courses of action Iran is pursuing as part of an asymmetric strategy to get the U.S. to end its military operations. Group Chat is back, and we're adding retired Air Force colonel and CNN military analyst Cedric Clayton. Thank you so much for being here. I'm sorry it's under these circumstances, as the death toll of U.S. killed in action is now 17. I want to ask about one of those deaths. They were trying to detonate a drone, right? A Iranian drone lands. They're trying to get rid of it. Someone dies in the process. And it reminded me of the fact that the U.S. has had to have this whole system to intercept and deal with drones, an expensive system. How is it handling up under the onslaught from Iran? Yeah, well, this is one of the key questions that CENTCOM and really all military officials in the U.S. have to answer this morning, Adi. And, you know, one of the things to look at here is that the Iranians have some very cheap, very efficient drones in many respects. So, you know, when you look at one of the common ones, the Shahid 136, about $30,000 a pop. And if it's coupled with explosives, then you've got a whole different set of things to worry about. So when the explosive ordnance disposal technicians look at these weapon systems, they have to go in and they try to defuse them, basically defusing bombs when they do this. And we know that many of the drones that the Iranians have have fuses that go off after the bomb, after the drone impacts a particular area. So after it impacts, then it goes off again. It can. Is this a sense, is this adaptation? Are we seeing in Iran that has not been obliterated militarily, but has found ways to adapt? Well, they've definitely found ways to adapt. And sometimes there are malfunctions of their equipment as well. So in this case, we're probably talking about a malfunction. But those are the kinds of things that do happen. And the explosive ordnance folks look at these things in an effort to try to determine what those weapons actually are, what they're capable of and how they actually, you know, how they explode, how they work, and whether or not there are other countermeasures that we can use. So when it comes to those countermeasures, we're looking at a lot of different things. And it's, you know, it's definitely a very difficult problem set because it's a lot cheaper to throw things like drones of the Shahid type against a particular target than it is to defend. So it's not that we're running out of things. It's that we are running out of the things to intercept. Well, there are some things that we're running out of, or at least there's difficulty, like, for example, the Patriot missiles. You know, when you look at the PAK-3 interceptors that are part of the Patriot packages, those are, first of all, hard to build. When you look at the rate of production and the rate of expenditure of those missiles, then it becomes a shortage. But the key thing to remember, Adi, is this. CENTCOM and other elements are moving into a different era where we're actually using drones against the Iranians as well. And some of the defense systems that we have right now are actually of the cheaper variety. There's a system called the Lucas system, for example, that is a reverse-engineered Shahid drone. And it is about $30,000 to $40,000 as well in terms of its expense. So we're getting to the point where we're getting better at that fiscal equation. Yeah, but we're going to need money. You said fiscal equation. I know Hegseth is asking for, I think, $80 billion Iran war supplement, $1.5 trillion for the fiscal year, and then a $30 billion estimated current cost of the war at this point. What's the political appetite right now? Once you have service members dying, I have a hard time picturing any lawmaker I've ever met saying, we're not going to give money to this. Sorry, guys. The political appetite is such that Republican leaders are using a maneuver that only needs Republican votes to try to push through this. I think in any other circumstance, you would have found some Democrats who are willing to say, well, we may not love this war, but the Pentagon does need the money and the resources. But because of what we talked about earlier, how the president has not made a case for this war, how they have sought essentially no authorization from Congress to authorize these strikes, the Democrats are saying we're not going to help. Yeah, and I just want to say, when we look at the YouGov polling, this is for mid-July, was Iran war a wrong decision? So this is people being asked essentially, how do you feel about the president's handling of the war? Democrats, needless to say, 89 percent not happy. Independents, 65 percent saying the Iran war was the wrong decision, not like wrong direction, wrong decision. And non-MAGA Republicans, 51 percent. Now, I know you're not political, but I feel like every military man who came of age post-Vietnam is now aware of how much the public sentiment matters. The forever war generation, how much the public sentiment matters. I don't want to overestimate casualties when there are going to be casualties in war. But how do you see it, given that people don't think he made the right call going? Yeah, well, one of the things that's different about the Vietnam era and what we're dealing with right now is that there is genuine support for the military itself. So when you look at the American population at large, there's a lot of support for the military. You know, I have not encountered the types of things that I encountered the first year I went through ROTC. First year I went through ROTC, people were against, and it was 1980, you know, who were against the Vietnam War. It was still a, you know, vestige that was over, had been over for five years at that point. And you looked at, you know, a completely different equation. But when it came to, you know, basically the election of Ronald Reagan, all of a sudden sentiment changed, even on a liberal college campus. I went to Cornell and that was a completely different environment. And then as, you know, during the Reagan years, there was a much better sense that people had that the military was becoming better, that it was becoming more efficient. And that actually is true because the military learned lessons from Vietnam. They changed the way they did business. And, you know, you saw the debacle, you know, going back to Iran, you saw the debacle in Desert One, which was the hostage rescue attempt. But I think as a result, beyond also the draft and many other things, it's made the U.S. populace more sensitive to deaths. Absolutely. And I think in, you know, deaths are a horrible thing. And it's one of the, you know, if you can call it a good thing, is the fact that people realize more what this is all about. In the past, when we didn't have ubiquitous media coverage about military actions, they were kind of abstract. Deaths were kind of abstract. And that is a real problem. But nowadays, people are very sensitive to it. And they're very, I think they're very thankful for what the military is doing. I certainly sense that when I talk to people in general. And it's, you know, it's something we definitely notice.