Simi Jalo-Osho

Well, the general feeling is pretty much reflected in that vote. It's mainly split between party lines. The defence secretary Pete Hegseth has framed this mission as laser-focused, and this resonates with republican lawmakers who want to avoid forever wars, as they call it, by using massive air power rather than ground troops.

Republican senators like Lindsey Graham, Tom Cotton have argued that the Iranian regime is on the verge of a collapse. And so the U.S. must maintain overwhelming force to ensure that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon.

But democratic figures acknowledge that yes, there might have been a threat from Iran, and yes, Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, but they have condemned how the strikes are being done. They feel there's a lack of a plan being shared by the administration. The Senate's minority leader, Chuck Schumer, Senator Tim Kaine, who introduced or led that resolution,

The US will be drawn into a sort of regional quagmire.

Some centrist Democrats, most notably John Fetterman, who voted on the side of the Republicans with regard to that resolution, has argued that the killing of Ayatollah Khamenei is a net positive for the US and for the world. There's another vote coming. The House of Representatives are going to vote on a similar measure. Could sentiment change the longer the war goes on or if it expands further?

So the House of Representatives are due to vote on a similar measure, like you said, but actually on two different resolutions. So there's one resolution that's calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from the Middle East. And there's another resolution, which is a more moderate alternative that gives the president...

30 päivästä lopputuloksen lopputuloksen lopputuloksen lopputuloksen

Joten nämä ovat kaksi asiaa, jotka voivat todella vahvistaa presidentin tuotantoa. Yksi, jos maanhoitajat tulevat tähän konfliktiin, mutta kaksi, jos tämä jatketaan ilmaisesti.