Donald Trump built part of his political identity by attacking the Iraq War and promising to end “endless” U.S. military engagements abroad, a posture that helped propel him to the White House in 2016 and was a centerpiece of his 2024 comeback. Yet one year into his second term he has ordered military actions in multiple countries and initiated a large-scale campaign against Iran without seeking congressional approval.
The administration has named the Iran operation “Operation Epic Fury.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt framed the action as necessary to meet “a direct and imminent threat” from Iran, accusing Tehran of killing and maiming Americans and promising to stop those attacks. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted the campaign would not become another “endless” war, but Mr. Trump himself acknowledged the possibility of a longer engagement: what was initially expected to last “four to five weeks” could be extended, and he emphasized the U.S. had the capability to operate “far longer than that.”
The stated objectives for Operation Epic Fury are to degrade Iran’s missile capabilities, destroy elements of its navy, prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and contain its proxy forces by limiting Tehran’s ability to arm and fund militias outside its borders. Six U.S. service members have died during the Iran operation so far.
The campaign follows other recent moves by the administration, including a January strike in Venezuela aimed at capturing Nicolás Maduro and public discussion of a potential “friendly takeover” of Cuba, suggesting the U.S. could be involved in multiple foreign engagements at once.
Mr. Trump’s hard line on Iran predates this term: he withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-era nuclear agreement, ordered the 2020 strike that killed Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani and last year authorized strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. He has repeatedly said preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is a top priority — a point the White House notes he has made numerous times since taking office — and he told NBC News that that concern helped prompt “major combat operations.”
Trump’s skepticism of foreign intervention stretches back before he entered the presidency. In 2016 he criticized President Barack Obama for risking military action for political reasons and used opponents associated with the Iraq War as campaign contrasts. Although earlier statements surfaced suggesting prior support for the Iraq invasion, Trump said he changed his mind and faulted how the war was conducted.
During his first term, Trump relied mainly on limited strikes and withdrawals rather than launching new large-scale wars, a record his allies highlighted in 2024. Supporters, including Iraq War veteran JD Vance, praised him for resisting hawkish pressure. He ordered troop withdrawals from Syria and backed reductions in Afghanistan and Iraq, emphasizing that other countries should take on more responsibility.
Yet the current willingness to conduct major operations against Iran and to leave open the possibility of deploying ground forces marks a clear shift from the anti-entanglement message central to his earlier campaigns. Trump told the New York Post he does not “have the yips with respect to boots on the ground,” declining to give the kind of categorical assurances some presidents offer against sending U.S. troops.
That divergence between past campaign promises and present actions has tested the administration’s reputation for avoiding protracted conflicts. As the Iran operation continues and its scope remains uncertain, questions persist about how far the White House will go to meet its objectives and whether Congress or the public will push back as the conflict unfolds.