Peter Doocy: This is only going to make Trump MORE angry

The Iran conflict could be on the brink of a dramatic change.President Trump reportedly close to his decision on what he calls a massive attack.He's also set to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next Tuesday at the White House.And that meeting could help shape what comes next.The United States now has launched strikes on the radical Islamic regime of Iran.military targets, and 13 straight nights of it and other strategic points there.

I'm Harris Faulkner.You are in the Faulkner Focus.Earlier today, US -led forces shot down five explosive drones over Erbil.That's near an airport base that hosts American troops.Witnesses are reporting at least seven explosions, several plumes of black smoke.Local security officials reporting no one was killed in any of that, no damage to mention, and there is no evidence the base itself was hit.

The incident raises fresh concerns for US forces in the region.And the United States is rapidly degrading Iran's military capabilities, but there is new evidence.The radical Islamic regime is rebuilding at remarkable speed.The satellite image that you see on the left side of your screen shows damage from our strikes to tunnel entrances and an access road and a missile base in northwestern Iran.Now look at the picture on the right, that satellite image on the right of your screen.This is just a few weeks later showing a newly paved road and freshly excavated entrances.

Those rapid repairs are helping Iran stay in the fight.But look, we have been at war for really fewer days than they were in that ceasefire.I mean, if you take the 145 days or so of war, at least 130 of them have been during the ceasefire.What do you think that means?going to do with the ceasefire?That's what they've been doing, gearing up, because fighting is their identity.

Here's Fox News Senior Strategic Analyst General Jack Keane.

As we speak right now, the Iranians are talking about negotiating again.And so that choice is available to us.We can go back and negotiate and kick the can down the road and see if we can get a better deal.But I think where the president is, he sees them for what they really are.Look, this regime hasn't changed, truth be known, in 47 years.The same ideology, different people.

So the choice going forward is, do we fix this regime and shut down their behavior once and for all?

Access to the important shipping, oil shipping lane, Strait of Hormuz, at the heart of the conflict right now, President Trump posted until further notice.that from this point forth, any and all damages done to ships, cargo or anything related thereto will be paid for by Iranian money that the United States has in its possession and controls.Lieutenant General Karen Gibson is with me in focus today.First, I want to bring in our senior White House correspondent, Peter Doocy, at the White House.Peter.

Harris, President Trump doesn't think the Iranians are getting it.That trying to restart their nuclear program, trying to take over the Strait of Hormuz, is only going to make him more angry.And that is why peace talks are off indefinitely.

We're doing very well against the Islamic Republic of Iran.We're doing extremely well.They would like to do something, but I say they're not ready yet.They need more of the same.They're not ready yet.They got some evil intentions.

We cannot let them have a nuclear weapon.

Now the president is telling Axios about Iran.I'm considering a massive attack, bigger than ever before.I'm close to making a decision.We are all set for it.And Secretary Rubio is responding directly to Iran's foreign minister, who posted this week, our defense doctrine is clear, eye for an eye.

I think I saw, you know, guys, I saw Arachi, their foreign minister, who the other day say something about their policies, an eye for an eye.The president's policy is a head for an eye.

President Trump has never liked suggestions that early on in this campaign he was pushed towards the war by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.We have just learned that Benjamin Netanyahu is going to come meet with the president this week when he is in town for Lindsey Graham's funeral.What impact, if any, that has on the president's decision to order possibly the biggest strike against Iran ever remains to be seen.But we'll know on Tuesday.

Yeah, and the backdrop, too, here in New York City, by the way, you know is Mayor Mamdani, who's been throwing out all those threats that Netanyahu should be arrested when he gets here in September for the General Assembly at the UN.But now he's coming sooner than that.The president has already said that Madami, and I'm paraphrasing, is ridiculous to say that.And of course, he doesn't have the authority to arrest Prime Minister of Israel.Just adding that in.Peter, thank you very much.

And things are going so well with Trump and Mamdani.

All right, I'm glad you always get the last word, because it's always the best one.Thank you, Peter.All right, in focus, Lieutenant General Karen Gibson, former sitcom intelligence director and actor.active duty U .S.Army intelligence officer for 33 years.

have done that, having to do with yet another oil shipping lane and the tariffs that they pay inside Yemen.Your take on it?

Well, the Houthis are certainly an Iranian proxy.They're not an Iranian puppet.You know, they willingly take considerable financing and lethal, sophisticated weapons from Iran, but not always instructions.And so I would kind of differentiate this.Certainly, there have been opportunities for the Houthis to get engaged, for example, from day one.money that flows to these groups from Iran what what can you tell us about that because I understand perhaps the independence with motive but but they can't be financially independent that way because it costs money to do what they're doing certainly but they do control you know some part of Yemen the territory of Yemen so you know they have their own that's of the aid from the IRGC.

That's critically important information.Thank you very much, Lieutenant General.I'm glad you went there.Let's talk a little bit about what it takes, not just with the terrorists in Yemen, but you've got Hezbollah, you've got the president having met in recent days with the president of Lebanon.And the way that you just described the Houthis sounds a little bit like maybe a smaller version of Hezbollah controlling a certain section, a southern section of a different nation.

is inherently a Lebanese entity who is sworn as part of their manifesto to the destruction of the state of Israel.Another distinction I'd make there, the Houthis have not always been aligned with Iran, but the Lebanese Hezbollah has, and there is a much closer linkage there.But they also, particularly under Nasrallah, who was of Israel.

deal to him, and then to Iran and presented it to top Iranian officials who refused to even entertain the proposal.The terms of the rejected deal are unclear.Meaning, they're not public, but Iranian officials described it as a, quote -unquote, temporary deal that did not resolve the question of who would control the Strait of Hormuz.Did we just glaringly miss this with the Strait of Hormuz?I mean, this has become, in their eyes, equal to any sort of discussion about nuclear weapons.Now, we're clear -eyed on they can never get one, but they are clear -eyed on they really want the Strait.

Absolutely.I think there were probably perhaps some flawed planning assumptions and a belief that Iran would not mind the straights or damaged straights.Well, they could.I think there were some flab planning assumptions, those who assumed they would not do that because it would hurt the Iranian economy.But we should not underestimate the willingness of the men who are leading the Islamic Republic, their willingness and ability to absorb pain, whether that's in the form of years -long sanction regimes or punishing airstrikes.The well -being of the Iranian people is not at the top of their list.

And if they believe that this is what they need to do to choke off the Straits of Hormuz, order to get what they want from the United States.And I think they're willing to do that.Our airstrikes don't seem to have budged the needle on their determination to control the straits, at least not yet.

One last question, and it has to do with Saudi Arabia.And, you know, the reporting around that says that the president made the demand that any sort of deal going forward with regard to them having nuclear capacity in terms of energy is how I understand it.The enrichment question is still open.But they would have to join the Abraham Accords.What would be the reason they wouldn't want to do that?Yeah.

Might they decide to do it?Why would they want to?

So they may want to.Certainly, the logic for doing so is very strong.But it would be exceptionally difficult for the crown prince to publicly defend the formal recognition of Israel at this time, as long as the issues related to Palestinian statehood are unresolved.Saudi Arabia is not Bahrain or the UAE.They are the custodian of two of the Islamic world's holiest sites.And as such, they hold a strong leadership position.

in the Arab and Islamic world that comes with a certain responsibility.And again, to recognize Israel at this time without some kind of concessions towards the Palestinian people would really be politically toxic for them.And it's not something that could happen right now, given Israel's public positions towards the Palestinians and their potential for statehood.Something needs to change in Israel before Saudi Arabia can publicly acknowledge them.What is the something?A change towards possibility for Palestinian statehood, a recognition of a possibility of a two -state solution, some change in the status of Palestinians, probably not just in Gaza, but also in the West Bank.

Wow.So feasibly an impossibility at this point in history, no doubt.Lieutenant General Gibson, it's always great to have you in Focus.Thank you for being with me.