Rejected! The resolution to force Trump to end Iran strikes

The Senate rejected a resolution Wednesday to block President Donald Trump from ordering further strikes on Iran, declined to halt a war that Trump started without the consent of Congress. Democrats along with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) forced a vote on the war powers resolution over the opposition of most Republicans, who control the Senate. Democrats implored a handful of Republicans to break with their party to end the conflict and reassert Congress’s control over declaring war.

“This essentially is the vote whether to go to war or not,” Paul told reporters. But Paul was the only Republican who voted to advance the resolution, which failed 47-53 on a procedural vote. One Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman (Pennsylvania) voted against it.

The vote was the latest setback in Democrats’ long-shot strategy to block Trump from ordering military strikes without authorization from Congress. They have forced votes on eight war power resolutions in the House and Senate a record for a single Congress since Trump returned to office in an attempt to block him from striking Venezuela, Iran and boats near Latin America suspected of smuggling drugs. All of them have failed. Republicans in Congress broadly support Trump’s decision to strike Iran, though a few have raised concerns about Congress’s lack of involvement.

“Yes, I wish I would have been consulted,” Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said in a statement. “I wish my vote would have been asked for before this. But the President did act within his legal bounds to do what he has done.”

Curtis and other Republicans argued that ordering the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the war days after it started would send the wrong message. Sen. Todd Young (R-Indiana) said he wished in retrospect that Congress had done more to assert its authority before the strikes.

“We should’ve been holding hearings and asking probing questions and making the case to get a greater measure of unity around this operation on the front end,” Young told reporters ahead of the vote. “But here we are. We’re at war.”

Democrats countered that it was not too late to halt a war it did not authorize.

“We must act to stop Trump’s belligerence,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) said on the Senate floor before the vote. “The American people will be watching how senators vote. History will judge this chamber for how we act.”

Democrats have argued that Americans do not want to be ensnared in another war in the Middle East, but early polls have presented a less clear picture of how the public views the war. A CNN poll found 59 percent of Americans disapproved of the decision to strike Iran and 41 percent approved. But a Fox News poll found registered voters evenly split: 50 percent approved and 50 percent disapproved. Several other surveys including a Washington Post flash poll have found results in between the CNN and Fox polls.

Many Democrats have compared Trump’s strikes on Iran to the Iraq War, although President George W. Bush sought and received authorization from Congress before the U.S. invasion in 2003. Trump has not asked for authorization to strike Iran, and Democrats warned that failing to rein him in now could set a precedent.

“If we vest the sole power to make war in the president of the United States, the sole decision to bring a country into war with the president of the United States, there is no check on the use of that authority, there is no check on the abuse of that authority,”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California) who introduced the resolution with Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia), Paul and Schumer said on the Senate floor before the vote. The House is set to vote Thursday on a similar war powers resolution, which Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said he believes he has the votes to defeat.

“The idea that we would take the ability of our commander in chief … to finish this job is a frightening prospect to me,” Johnson told reporters. “It’s dangerous, and I am certainly hopeful and I believe we do have the votes to put it down.”

The War Powers Resolution, which Congress passed in 1973 in response to the Vietnam War, allows a single lawmaker to force a vote to withdraw U.S. forces from a conflict or to block strikes when hostilities are imminent. But even if Congress passed such a resolution, it would stand little chance of forcing Trump to end the war with Iran because he could veto it. Overriding a veto would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers. No war powers resolution has ever overcome a veto.

Kaine and Paul waited for weeks to force the vote as Trump massed U.S. forces near Iran, even as the two countries continued to negotiate over Iran’s nuclear program. Kaine said last week that he wanted the vote to happen before any strikes because it would increase its odds of passage.

But at least two House Democrats said they would oppose the resolution if their colleagues forced a vote on it while negotiations were ongoing, making it hard for Democrats to get the timing right. Kaine said before Wednesday’s vote that he would file more resolutions to end the conflict in Iran if the vote failed. The Senate and House votes this week are “the first effort of all Congress going on the record about this, but I can assure you it’s not going to be the last,” he told reporters.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) argued before the vote that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 was unconstitutional and suggested another way that Democrats could force an end to the conflict so by refusing to vote for legislation funding it. Democrats might get such an opportunity soon if the administration asks Congress for more money to prosecute the war.

“If you want to stop this war, say we will not pay for it,” Graham said on the Senate floor. “I would not agree with you, but at least it would be constitutional.”

The 1973 law also requires the president to withdraw forces after 60 days or 90 days if the president seeks an extension unless Congress declares war or authorizes the use of military force. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) said he does not believe the Trump administration needed to seek authorization to continue the Iran campaign even if it lasts for longer than 90 days.

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities, the operations that are currently underway there,” - Thune told reporters.

But Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) said he believed Trump would need to seek authorization from Congress if he wanted to deploy ground troops in Iran, which the administration has not ruled out.

“Most American presidents have said, ‘Listen, if I’m going to commit ground troops into combat, that constitutes war in the constitutional sense and would require some sort of authorization,’” Hawley told reporters. “I think that’s a pretty tried-and-tested line.”

BREAKING NEWS! Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is killed in Israeli strike, ending 36-year iron rule!

The supreme leader of Iran known as the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in Israeli attacks, with U.S. support, on Saturday. He was 86 years old is now toast! Our own President Trump announced the Iranian leader's death on social media, saying Khamenei could not avoid U.S. intelligence and surveillance. A source briefed on the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran told NPR earlier Saturday that an Israeli airstrike killed Khamenei.

Remember these people have been in power for 36-years, Khamenei was unwavering in his steadfast antipathy to the U.S. and Israel and to any efforts to reform and bring Iran into the 21st century. Khamenei was born in July 1939 into a religious family in the Shia Muslim holy city of Mashhad in northeastern Iran and attended theological school. An outspoken opponent of the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Khamenei was arrested several times.

He was surrounded by other Iranian activists, including Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who became Iran's first supreme leader following the country's Islamic Revolution in the late 1970s. Khamenei survived an assassination attempt in 1981 that cost him the use of his right arm. He served as Iran's president before succeeding Khomeini as supreme leader in 1989. Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, D.C., says Khamenei was an unlikely candidate. Then a midlevel cleric, Khamenei lacked religious credentials, which left him feeling vulnerable, Vatanka says.

"He knew himself. He didn't have the prestige, the gravitas to be … the successor to the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini," he says. "He spent the first few years in power being very nervous," says Vatanka. "He really literally felt that somebody is going to, you know, take him down from the position of power." But Khamenei was cunning and able to outwit other senior political figures in the Islamic Republic, according to Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group. He says that with the help of the formidable Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Khamenei built up his power base to become the longest-serving leader in the Middle East.

"Ayatollah Khamenei was a man with strategic patience and was able to calculate a few steps ahead," he says. "That's why I think he managed — on the back of the Revolutionary Guards to increasingly appropriate all the levers of power in his hands and sideline everyone else." Khamenei's close ties to the Revolutionary Guards allowed Iran's military to develop a vast commercial empire in control of many parts of the economy, while ordinary Iranians struggled to get by. Vaez says Khamenei also began to build up Iran's defensive policies, such as developing proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip to deter a direct attack on Iranian soil.

"And then also becoming self-reliant in developing a viable conventional deterrence, which took the form of Iran's ballistic missile program," Vaez says. As supreme leader, Khamenei also had the final word on anything to do with Iran's nuclear program. Over time, Khamenei increasingly injected himself into politics. Such was the case in 2009, when he intervened in the presidential election to ensure that his favored candidate, the controversial conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, won office. Iranians took to the streets to protest what was widely seen as a fraudulent election. Khamenei brutally crushed those demonstrations, triggering both a backlash and more protest movements over the years.

Iran killed thousands of its citizens under Khamenei's rule, including more than 7,000 people killed during weeks of mass protests that started in late December 2025, according to the Human Rights Activists News Agency, a U.S.-based organization that closely tracks rights abuses in Iran. "Khamenei had always supported and endorsed repressive government crackdown, recognizing that these protests were damaging to the stability and legitimacy of the state," says Sanam Vakil, an Iran expert at Chatham House, a London-based think tank. But Khamenei was unconcerned about getting to the root of the protests, says the Middle East Institute's Vatanka, and remained stuck in an Islamic revolutionary mindset against the West. "He on so many occasions refused point-blank to accept the basic reality that where he was in terms of his worldview was not where the rest of his people were," Vatanka says.

He adds that 75% of Iran's 90 million people were born after the revolution and have watched other countries in the region modernize and integrate with the international community. "The 75% he should have catered to, listened to and address[ed] policies to satisfy their aspirations," he says. "He failed in that miserably." The International Crisis Group's Vaez says after the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011, Khamenei did start worrying about the survival of his regime. 

Iran's economy was crumbling, due in large part to stringent Western sanctions, fueling more unrest. In 2013, Khamenei agreed to secret negotiations with the U.S. about Iran's nuclear program, which eventually led to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear agreement. 

Vaez says Khamenei deeply distrusted the U.S. and was skeptical about the deal. "His argument has always been that the U.S. is always looking for pretexts, for putting pressure on Iran," he says. "And if Iran concedes on the nuclear issue, then the U.S. would put pressure on Iran because of its missiles program or because of human rights violations or because of its regional policies."

President Trump's withdrawal from the nuclear deal during his first term in office gave some credence to Khamenei's cynicism. Analysts say Iran increased its nuclear enrichment after that to a point where it was close to being able to build a bomb In early 2025, when Trump reached out to Iran about a new deal, Khamenei dragged out negotiations until they began in mid-April.

But time ran out. In June, Israel made good on its threat to neutralize Iran's nuclear program, launching strikes on key facilities and killing scientists and generals. Iran retaliated, and the two sides exchanged several days of missile strikes. 

On June 21, 2025, the U.S. launched major airstrikes on three of Iran's nuclear enrichment sites. Trump said the facilities had been "completely and totally obliterated," although there was debate among the White House and nuclear experts as to how serious Iran's nuclear program had been set back. Vakil, of Chatham House, says Khamenei underestimated what Israel and the U.S. would do. 

"I think that Khamenei always assumed that he could play for time, and what he really didn't understand is that the world around Iran had very much changed," she says. "The world had tired of Khamenei and Iranian foot-dragging and antics … and so that was a miscalculation."

But it was Iran's use of proxy militias across the region that eventually led to Khamenei's downfall. When Hamas the Palestinian Islamist group backed by Iran attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing nearly 1,200 people and kidnapping 251 others, it triggered a cascade of events that ultimately led to Israel's attack on Iran. The day after the 2023 Hamas-led attack, Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon started firing rockets into Israel, triggering a conflict that led to the Shia militia's top brass being decimated including top leader Hassan Nasrallah. Israel and Iran traded direct airstrikes for the first time in 2024 as part of that conflict.

Israel's bombing of Iranian weapons shipments in Syria also helped weaken the regime of Syria's then-dictator, Bashar al-Assad, an important ally of Iran. Assad fell in December 2024 and fled to Russia in early January 2025. By the time Khamenei died, his legacy was in tatters. Israel had hobbled two key proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, and had wiped out Iran's air defenses. 

With U.S. help, it left Iran's nuclear program in shambles What remains is a robust ballistic missile program, the brainchild of Khamenei. It's unclear who will replace him to lead a now weakened and vulnerable Iran.

Tim Kaine shutdown trying to stop President Trump from using further military force against Iran

So the loser who ran with Hillary Clinton for VP the first time we have a "TIM WALZ" type on the VP ticket.. As both Tim's are idiots who should just retire. These guys are useless but he's some how still a Senator! But Tim Kaine’s (D-VA) tried to stop the war powers of Trump with a resolution, which would have required Congress to debate and vote on whether the president could declare war or strike Iran, was struck down in the upper chamber. The Senate Friday voted down an effort to block President Trump from using further military force against Iran, as Democratic anger festers over the lack of details about the recent strikes on the country's nuclear facilities.

The measure failed in a 47-53 vote, with Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voting with most Democrats in favor of the resolution, and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voting with most Republicans against it. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia introduced the war powers resolution days before the U.S. bombed three locations central to Iran's nuclear program, seeking to force the president to get congressional authorization before entering the conflict between Israel and Iran. "The events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decisions of any one person," Kaine said on the Senate floor ahead of the vote.

Since the measure was introduced, Mr. Trump announced a ceasefire between the adversaries and declared that Iran's nuclear sites were "obliterated" during the 12-day war. On Friday, Mr. Trump said he would "without question" consider bombing Iran again if Tehran was enriching uranium to a level that concerned the U.S. But anger from Democrats, including those who have said that Iran should never be able to obtain a nuclear weapon, has simmered as they say they have been left in the dark about U.S. military actions. It's led some Democrats to question whether the Trump administration is misleading the public about the strikes, especially after an initial classified assessment found that they set back Tehran's nuclear program by a matter of months. Mr. Trump, meanwhile, has said the nuclear program was set back "basically decades."

Top intelligence officials said Wednesday that new intelligence showed the nuclear program had been "severely damaged" and its facilities "destroyed." It would take the Iranians "years" to rebuild the facilities, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth called it "an historically successful attack" in a contentious press briefing Thursday. Classified briefings for the Senate and House were originally scheduled for Tuesday, the same day the initial assessment was leaked. Officials briefed senators on Thursday afternoon and House members on Friday.

A White House official said Tuesday the Senate briefing was postponed because of "evolved circumstances as a result of recent positive developments in the Middle East." After the briefings, some Democrats cast doubt on the administration's characterization of the strikes and questioned assertions regarding how much Iran's nuclear program has been hindered. "I walk away from that briefing still under the belief that we have not obliterated the program," Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, told reporters. "The president was deliberately misleading the public when he said the program was obliterated. It is certain that there is still significant capability, significant equipment that remain."

Rep. Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, said the information disclosed in the briefing was "massively different than what has been told to Congress over the last year, up until a month ago, about both Iranian capabilities and Iranian intent." Crow said he was "not convinced of that whatsoever" when asked whether Iranian nuclear facilities had been obliterated. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, has railed against a lack of transparency and said earlier this week the administration had not presented Congress with any evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat requiring immediate military action.

But Jeffries did not go as far as supporting a resolution to impeach Mr. Trump over the bombings. He and more than 120 Democrats voted with all Republicans to kill the measure, which was introduced by Democratic Rep. Al Green of Texas, on Tuesday. Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also questioned the timing of the strikes.

"It's pretty clear that there was no imminent threat to the United States," Himes said. "There's always an Iranian threat to the world. But ... I have not seen anything to suggest that the threat from the Iranians was radically different last Saturday than it was two Saturdays ago." Kaine's resolution was one of a handful of similar efforts seeking to curtail further U.S. involvement in Iran, though it's unclear whether any will be successful in a Congress controlled narrowly by Republicans. Some Republicans who were initially supportive of the resolutions, like Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, appear to be backing away from forcing a vote as long as the ceasefire holds and the U.S. does not conduct any further bombings. And House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, called the efforts irrelevant because Iran and Israel agreed to stop the fighting. "It's kind of a moot point now, isn't it?" Johnson said Monday. "It seems rather silly at this point and I hope they'll acknowledge it as such and put it to bed because it has zero chance of passing anyway."

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told The Wall Street Journal this week he believes Mr. Trump acted "perfectly within his authority" by striking Iran. "I don't think there's any question the president has the authority legally and constitutionally to do what he did," the South Dakota Republican said. "There are always questions around these things, but past presidents and both political parties have similarly acted in circumstances where there've been airstrikes at various places around the world where our national security interests dictated it."

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, and most major military conflicts in recent history have been launched under an authorization for the use of military force passed by Congress. But presidents have periodically acted without explicit permission from lawmakers, including during President Bill Clinton's 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia and President Barack Obama's 2011 airstrikes on Libya, the Congressional Research Service notes. In announcing his support for Kaine's resolution, Paul said Congress was abdicating its constitutional responsibility by allowing a president to act unilaterally and warned that last week's strikes could have unintended consequences. "Despite the tactical success of our strikes, they may end up proving to be a strategic failure.

It is unclear if this intervention will fully curtail Iran's nuclear aspirations, or, in fact, whether the Iranians may well conclude to double down on their efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon," Paul said. Those opposed to the resolution argued that Mr. Trump acted within his constitutional authority and that the measure would constrain the president's ability to respond quickly to a threat. In an interview last week with CBS News' Major Garrett, Kaine acknowledged that his resolution could fail but said he wanted his colleagues to be on the record about U.S. involvement in another war. "Everyone in the Senate should agree that this is a matter of such gravity and importance that we shouldn't allow war to begin without Congress having a debate in full view of the American public and members of the Senate and House having to go on the record about it," he said.

Are terrorist Cells here thanks to Biden and his "Open Borders?" - Kevin McCarthy

So Kevin McCarthy just said that Because of Biden’s Open Border ‘We Don’t Know’ if There Are Terrorist Cells in America! Well I can guarantee you that there is. This is what was the plan and in 2024 these sleeper cells will probably mobilize and cause a worse scenario than we saw in 2020 when Antifa/BLM and the crooked left congress, and senate caused all sorts of chaos in the middle of the election starting with the so called "Summer of Love" remember that? Well take 2020 and multiply it by 100% and this will probably be what these people can do.



The Obama/Biden crooked administration is responsible for what's going to happen... Make no mistake about it. This is what they're planning so they could engadge in another rigging of the elections. So McCarthy is 100% correct here but Nasty or Disgusting Pelosi however you want to say it endorsed McCarthy and said she would always have his back, and they seemed very friendly. After all the B/S he spoke publically of her as in "we kicked her out of the Speaker" sort of talk.








McCarthy said, “This is a great fear of mine, it is one of the five steps in the program we need to do to secure this border. In 2019, we did not catch one person on the FBI terrorist watch list and today we’ve got 251. Two years ago I sent a letter to the director of the FBI. He still has not responded. The concern is having an open border, Iran and others know.”



He continued, “We don’t know if there’s a cell currently in our country waiting to come forward based upon what’s happening to Israel and other places around the world. We are at a great threat ourselves and it’s based upon Biden’s policies. That’s why and one of the five steps I thought we needed to take, one is securing this border.”



McCarthy added, “A year ago we caught people coming from Yemen on the terrorist watch list. You understand how difficult it is to get on the terrorist watch list? They come from 160 countries, from China, Saudi Arabia, and we know from history what a few individuals can do and disrupt the safety of America.”

Boy George or Rose McGowan? Can't tell. lol

But the picture is a joke the truth is she’s nuts, and now she’s APOLOGIZING TO A TERRORIST STATE!!!

While Iranian people were celebrating, this American moron wannabe actress decided to sympathize with a terrorist.

She claims, “It is only logical to appeal to Iran’s pride by apologizing. I’m taking one for the team.” Nobody asked you too lady… Who are you? The big breasted chick in SCREAM (1996) who fucked Harvey Weinstein to get a movie deal to only accuse him of rape years later? Oh, and you dated MANSON the metal singer who’s known by his fans as the “AntiChrist Superstar” ?

LOL since when do you decide AMERICAN POLICY BITCH? When in the history of the United States, did we become so disconnected with reality that people are apologizing for taking out a bad guy? It’s not subjective whether or not he is a bad guy; it’s OBJECTIVE AS HELL.

Dear #Iran, The USA has disrespected your country, your flag, your people. 52% of us humbly apologize. We want peace with your nation. We are being held hostage by a terrorist regime. We do not know how to escape. Please do not kill us. #Soleimani pic.twitter.com/YE54CqGCdr

— rose mcgowan (@rosemcgowan) January 3, 2020

Thankfully there were thousands of people that started calling her for her complete stupidity, and lack of awareness, and reality. Some of these responses are pure gold.. Rose McGowan needs to see someone to help her understand the atrocities this man brought into the world. Her hashtag #TeamStayAlive is precisely what Trump is trying to do!

With this guy out of circulation, WE HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF STAYING ALIVE YOU MORON! Rose tries to justify her idiotic thought process by saying that she “freaked out because we have an impending war.” Trying to understand the thoughts of the insane is far above my pay grade, but this lady needs help.

I’ve never felt safer. Our President is kick butt and takes names kinda guy. As long as he is our President we are on the #TeamStayAlive.

Leave the middle east if you are an American civilian. President Trump is about to rain down a bunch of American Pride on Iran… #MAGA2020 #IStandWithTrump

Demonstrators celebrate in#Tahrir Squarekilling the terrorist Qassem Soleimani.#Wewanthome pic.twitter.com/kZPCKmFCaN

— محمد فوزي اللامي (@Mo_Allamy) January 3, 2020

“Demonstrators celebrate in # Tahrir Square, killing the terrorist Qassem Soleimani. #Wewant_home” – Translate Tweet

Ilhan Omar Promises To “Stop” Trump After The Killing Of Top Iranian General

Wondering who’s Side Are she’s On? This should tell you all! The world watched, noticed that all the witnesses were based on 3rd unverified info, nothing was based on reality or legit. A FAKE HOAXED impeachment lead by the Fraud Squad on the left. Good job on impeaching someone on lies. The Senate will take care of it. U did nothing.

So what if Trump wants war, knows this leads to war and needs the distraction?

Real question is, will those with congressional authority step in and stop him? I know I will. https://t.co/Fj9TMossEW

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) January 3, 2020

And she said she’s gonna stop Trump? Well is this a threat? She needs to be investigated for threatening the PRESIDENT! Saying what she said is no joke, and she needs to be in prison! She’s not above the law… You cannot threaten the PRESIDENT!

First off, the House has not sent articles of impeachment to the Senate, and this is because the left knows that the House know they have no real case against Trump, and is a fraud, and fake impeachment hustle. I do not think he is trying to “distract” from that fact, and Trump is our commander-in-chief, President Trump has the authority to act to protect Americans. Hate him all you want OMAR. He’s the most powerful man on the planet, and I know him being white is what you’re racist ass hates the most. Soleimani was a bad, bad dude with a long history of killing Americans.

OR as she would say “HE DID SOMETHINGS OVER THERE.” Ilhan Omar is a fucktard loser. Omar is continually more concerned about lives of Islamic terrorists than American citizens and American troops.

She is not on America’s side! She is not loyal to the United States. Her allegiances appear to lie elsewhere. We can hope and pray Omar gets booted out in November! But I’m not confident since I cannot fathom how she was elected in the first place.

In the meantime, expect the Democrats to complain about this victory for the United States… Perhaps they can start another impeachment inquiry into Trump over this. Practicing TDS is what they do best.

Great news out of The White House!

Happy to report that IRANIAN Terrorist Qassem Soleimani is dead, and no longer a threat to the world. As Iran vows ‘harsh revenge’, Trump and Pompeo say Soleimani was planning to take ‘big action’ against American lives. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, a senior Iranian commander and one of the most powerful figures in the Middle East, was killed in an airstrike on the Baghdad International Airport in Iraq at the direction of President Donald Trump, the Pentagon confirmed Thursday. The assassination marks a monumental escalation toward Iran.

.@SecPompeo says Iran’s top military leader Qasem Soleimani was actively plotting in the Middle East and that “President Trump’s decision to remove Qasem Soleimani from the battlefield saved American lives.”https://t.co/jsfwGuBY8l pic.twitter.com/66XTgFacwh

— New Day (@NewDay) January 3, 2020

“This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.”