Donald Trump has pushed back against mounting criticism of his administration’s military campaign against Iran, as the conflict widens and some allies question whether the operation aligns with his “America First” pledge.
“I don’t have the yips with respect to boots on the ground — like every president says, ‘There will be no boots on the ground.’ I don’t say it,” Trump said at a White House event. “I say ‘probably don’t need them,’ (or) ‘if they were necessary.’”
The president and senior aides defended the approach as Iran continued retaliatory drone and missile strikes against Israel, US bases and Gulf states. Israel and Hezbollah also exchanged fire, opening another front.
Get the latest headlines in your email 
Unease among allies
Trump returned to office pledging to avoid “forever wars” and long criticised nation-building and regime change. But the current conflict has unsettled parts of his political base.
Erik Prince, a longtime Trump ally, said on War Room that he was “disappointed” and warned the operation would “uncork a significant can of worms”.
Other conservative voices, including commentator Tucker Carlson, have also questioned the decision to strike Iran.
Still, many Republican lawmakers have rallied behind the president. Representative Tim Burchett said Iran were “bad actors” who had supplied weapons to Hezbollah and killed Americans, and rejected the idea of a major split within the movement.
Timeline and casualties
Trump described the joint US-Israeli campaign as “substantially ahead of schedule”, estimating it could meet objectives within four to five weeks, though he cautioned it might take longer.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was less specific, saying the timeline could shift.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine said the US military expected further casualties. As of Monday, six US service members had been killed in action, with others seriously injured during Iranian retaliatory strikes.
Regime change questions
The administration has not detailed who it would support to lead Iran following the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other senior figures.
Trump has called on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps to lay down its arms but has not committed to backing opposition groups. Analysts note that air power alone rarely produces regime change.
Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute suggested the administration may instead accept “regime collapse” or “regime implosion”, allowing it to distance itself from long-term consequences.
Meanwhile, Israel is reportedly pressing for a sustained operation. Daniel Shapiro, a former US ambassador to Israel now at the Atlantic Council, said Israeli leaders may worry Trump could “declare victory” too early.
Intelligence and nuclear claims
Administration officials told congressional staff that intelligence did not indicate Iran was preparing an imminent strike on the US, though broader regional threats remained.
Trump has argued action was necessary because Iran was seeking long-range ballistic missiles. Tehran has not acknowledged such a programme. A US Defense Intelligence Agency report last year said Iran could develop an intercontinental missile by 2035 if it chose to pursue one.
Rafael Grossi of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran has an “ambitious” nuclear programme but no active nuclear weapons programme. Iran has not allowed inspectors to revisit damaged sites.
Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association warned that “regime change is not a viable nonproliferation strategy”, arguing Iran’s nuclear knowledge “cannot be bombed away”.
Join the discussion? 
Already a member? 
Adapted by ASEAN Now · Source · 02.03 2026
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment