OPINION | By R.J. Morales, TX3DNews.com
On June 21, 2025, the United States bombed three Iranian nuclear sites in a surprise nighttime operation, marking the first direct U.S. military strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. The decision—made unilaterally by President Trump without a congressional vote—is drawing intense scrutiny, not only in Washington but also here in Texas’ 3rd Congressional District.
One of the loudest voices backing the attack? Our own Congressman, Keith Self.
“I have not seen the actual intelligence,” Self told CBS 11, “but all of the reporting and open-source information I’ve seen is that, yes, Iran was starting to move for a nuclear weapon. They had made that decision. And they have the uranium that would have taken them less than a week to get to… a bomb.”
Self went on to call the strike “defensive” and emphasized the need to protect the 40,000 to 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in the Middle East, including those at major bases now within range of Iranian weapons.
But his justification—that Iran was days away from building a bomb—is already being questioned.
Self went on to call the strike “defensive” and emphasized the need to protect the 40,000 to 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in the Middle East, including those at major bases now within range of Iranian weapons.
But his justification—that Iran was days away from building a bomb—is already being questioned.
What Did U.S. Intelligence Actually Say?
In March 2025, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified to Congress that Iran was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. Her exact words:
“Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. Supreme Leader Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program that was suspended in 2003.”
At the time, Gabbard said the intelligence community saw no evidence that Iran had restarted its bomb program—despite its growing stockpile of enriched uranium. Fast forward to June, and Gabbard changed her tone. After Trump authorized the airstrikes, she claimed her March remarks were “taken out of context” and insisted Iran could build a weapon within weeks if it chose to—but she still did not confirm that Iran had actually made that decision.
So who should voters believe: the March intelligence briefing or the post-bombing political walk-back?
It’s also worth noting that the “open source” reporting Rep. Self references—think tank assessments and enrichment data—has been saying for over a year that Iran was “a week away” or “weeks away” from producing bomb-grade material. And yet, before the June 21 strikes, Iran still had not built a nuclear weapon. That lingering gap between what is technically possible and what is actually happening raises questions about whether this strike was truly necessary—or simply politically timed.
For context, Iran began enriching uranium to 60% in 2021 following a sabotage attack on its Natanz facility and the collapse of nuclear negotiations. The move was widely seen as a political signal—not a civilian energy necessity—and significantly shortened Iran’s breakout time. However, according to both U.S. intelligence and IAEA assessments, Iran has not reactivated its nuclear weapons program. That distinction between capability and intent remains critical.
Why TX-03 Should Care
TX-03 isn’t Tehran, but we’re closer to this story than we think.
Military Families: Thousands of residents in our district have loved ones serving at U.S. military bases across the Middle East. If Iran retaliates—and analysts say they might—those lives could be at serious risk.
Constitutional Conservatives: Many voters in Collin County believe strongly in separation of powers. This strike was launched without congressional debate or a vote. Trump acted alone. And Self didn’t demand consultation or oversight. For voters who value constitutional restraint, that raises serious concerns.
Fiscally Concerned Voters: This strike is now being called the largest conventional bombing operation since the Iraq War. How much did it cost? And who’s paying for it? If this turns into a longer conflict, what will it mean for our national debt and local priorities like schools, infrastructure, and veterans’ care?
Republican Voters: Prior to his election, President Trump ran on not starting new wars. He often accused past leaders of using conflict to distract from political failures. In 2011, he even said of then-President Obama, “Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak and he’s ineffective.” But now, after his own negotiations with Iran failed, Trump is the one ordering bombs to fall. For Republicans who took those promises at face value, the reversal deserves more than blind acceptance.
Questions TX-03 Voters Should Be Asking
-
If Rep. Self hasn’t seen classified intel, how does he know Iran “made the decision” to build a bomb?
-
Why did Tulsi Gabbard reverse her March statement that Iran wasn’t pursuing a weapon?
-
If Iran’s been “a week away” for over a year, why strike now?
-
Why didn’t Congress vote? Why didn’t our representative insist on it?
-
Was this really defensive—or a political escalation that could backfire?
Final Thought
It’s one thing to support strength. It’s another to support military action without verified intelligence, without congressional approval, and without asking tough questions.
Trump promised no new wars and a quick end to the one in Ukraine. But the Ukraine war continues, and now he’s opened the door to a new conflict with Iran. So what is TX-03 supposed to believe? Maybe it’s time to ask whether he’s really the dealmaker he claimed to be.
As Evan Hunt, United States Air Force veteran and Democratic candidate for TX-03, put it in a recent Facebook statement: “This conflict is a result of reckless decisions and presidential tweets.”
So how should we feel in TX-03?
Do we feel betrayed by a president and a congressman who told us one thing but are now doing another?
Or are we just going to go along with it—blindly supporting whatever the next shift is—because someone said it’s about strength?
These are not partisan questions. They’re constitutional, moral, and practical ones.
Because if we don’t ask them now, we may be forced to ask them later, under much worse circumstances.
TX3DNews.com | Your News, Your Voice, Our Community
Editor’s Note (June 23, 2025):
A previous version of this article incorrectly identified Evan Hunt as an Army veteran. He is, in fact, a United States Air Force veteran. We regret the error and have updated the article to reflect this correction.