Tensions Escalate as U.S. Strikes Iran Without Congressional Approval**

The recent U.S. military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, ordered by President Trump without Congressional consent, prompt debates over legality and potential escalation of conflict with Iran.**

Before launching military strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure, President Trump chose not to consult Congress, despite constitutional guidelines that assign war declaration powers solely to the legislature. This has led to significant controversy and criticism, particularly among Democrats and some within his own party, who view the action as an illegal declaration of war.

Supporters of the strike argue it was a targeted operation aimed strictly at curtailing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and thus does not equate to an act of war. Secretary of State Marco Rubio assured the public on Fox News, "This is not a war against Iran." Vice President JD Vance echoed this sentiment, claiming Trump had the necessary authority to act against the proliferation of mass destruction weapons.

However, as the political discourse unfolds, President Trump suggested on social media that his military objectives could extend beyond nuclear facilities, hinting at regime change if the Iranian government fails to improve its standing. Critics have voiced concerns over the hasty nature of these strikes, noting that they come shortly after Israel commenced its own bombing of Iran, potentially igniting a larger conflict if retaliatory measures are taken by Tehran.

The backlash from various political factions is amplified by ongoing attempts in Congress to establish stronger checks on presidential military powers, efforts born from the experiences of past military engagements in the Middle East and Central Asia.