In a shockingly aggressive move, former President Donald Trump today declared that the US has already bombed three Iranian nuclear targets. This will be a dramatic departure from U.S. foreign policy. This move aligns with Israel‘s ongoing efforts to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, which has raised concerns regarding regional stability and international law.
The airstrikes are an important start, but a critical turning point. They come in addition to more than a week of heavy, coordinated Israeli strikes against Iran’s air defenses and missiles arsenal. Trump’s announcement emphasized the United States’ offensive capabilities, stating that the military could target Iran’s core nuclear operations, which are reportedly buried deep underground. The strikes have been met with explosive and unpredictable responses from legislators on both sides of the aisle.
Republican leaders were quick to praise the move. Senator John Fetterman posted on X, stating, “This was the correct move by @POTUS. Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.” Many others shared his views, arguing the strikes are vital for addressing Iranian threats, both real and imagined. They view this action as an important step toward their own safety.
“The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing ‘death to America’ and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs’ misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped,” – John Thune
Even some Republican lawmakers, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, were calling for calm in the chaos. She urged her followers on X, “Let us all join together and pray for peace.” At the same time, nationalists like Markwayne Mullin doubled down on the America first line, tweeting, “America first, always.”
Not all responses were positive. Democratic congressman Ro Khanna criticized the attacks, claiming that military actions like these need authorization from Congress. As he expressed on X, “Trump attacked Iran without authorization of Congress. We need to go back to DC as soon as possible. It’s past time to pass @RepThomasMassie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to prevent America from getting dragged into another endless Middle East war.”
Congressman Don Beyer critiqued Trump’s decision, asserting that “President Trump has no constitutional authority to take us to war with Iran without authorization from Congress.” His concerns speak to a deeper worry among many legislators—fear of executive overreach and what unilateral military action might mean.
That chasm among legislators featured support from unexpected Democrats. Senator John Fetterman stood up for the strikes, countering that they were necessary to protect our national security. He called attention to the obvious threat that Iran developing nuclear weapons is.
“If Iran was not fully committed to building a nuclear bomb in an accelerated timeframe I’d be shocked if they are not now – have we just unleashed something that’s worse than what was happening before?” – Raja Krishnamoorthi
Increased tensions from this situation have sounded warnings everywhere about the threat of a widening conflict in the Middle East. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries expressed concerns about the potential consequences of Trump’s actions, stating, “The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm’s way.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took a harsher position, demanding the impeachment of Trump for his military strikes. She described the attack as a “grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers,” warning that it could lead to prolonged conflict: “The President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.”
The recent developments highlight a growing chasm in Congress when it comes to foreign military interventions. The opposing views underscore the deeper issues over competing philosophies on national security, executive power, and American engagement in foreign wars.