President Trump’s hint that the U.S. could join Israel in launching military strikes against Iran is stirring unease across party lines on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers from both sides are expressing concern that America may soon be drawn into a new war in the Middle East, one with potentially long-lasting consequences.
Trump hasn’t made a final decision, but on Wednesday he said, “I may do it, I may not do it. Nobody knows what I’m going to do.” According to reports, he has already approved a possible strike plan but is waiting to see whether Iran agrees to abandon its nuclear program.
Support for Israel remains strong in Congress, but the idea of direct U.S. military involvement especially a preemptive strike has many legislators urging caution. Some Republicans and Democrats worry this could escalate into another extended conflict, something Trump himself campaigned against in the past.
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) voiced skepticism, reminding reporters that Trump originally ran on a promise to keep the U.S. out of foreign entanglements. “We have to ask: what’s in it for the American people?” he said. “Backing Israel doesn’t automatically mean joining another war.”
GOP Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia echoed concerns about the speed and scope of any military action. “This feels like it’s spiraling,” she said, urging the White House to consider all the consequences before acting. Still, she expressed confidence that Trump would avoid rash decisions, even amid fiery rhetoric from Iranian leaders.
Within the Republican ranks, there’s a clear divide. Some, like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), are advocating for a tougher stance even calling for regime change. Others, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), want the U.S. to steer completely clear. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) cautioned against a new war altogether, saying, “I don’t want another Mideast war. We’ve had enough.”
Even among Trump supporters, there’s resistance to escalation. Social media posts from MAGA-aligned figures reflect a widespread desire to avoid deeper involvement, especially after the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Democrats, meanwhile, are pushing for more transparency. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has requested a classified briefing for all senators, while Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee, admitted he’s been left in the dark. “I don’t know what the plan is if there even is one,” Warner said bluntly.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) is leading an effort to reassert Congress’s constitutional role in approving military action. He introduced a measure that would require formal congressional approval before any strike on Iran takes place. While the bill has attracted limited support so far, Democratic leaders haven’t ruled out taking a stronger stance if the situation escalates.
Though some Republicans believe Trump is within his rights to launch airstrikes, many draw a red line at sending American troops into Iran. “There’s a difference between a targeted strike and boots on the ground,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). “That’s a whole other level.”
As tensions grow, so does the political pressure. With the president keeping his options open and Iran refusing to back down, both parties are bracing for what could become one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions of Trump’s presidency.
