Veteran Lawmakers Bring Combat Experience to Iran War Debate as Casualties Mount

WASHINGTON — As Congress responds to President Donald Trump’s attack on Iran, lawmakers who served on the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan are making their voices heard in a war debate that has taken on intensely personal meaning.

Many admit mixed feelings — taking satisfaction in seeing vengeance taken on the leadership of an Iranian regime that has targeted U.S. service members for decades, yet fearful that another generation of soldiers could soon face the same combat experiences that they did.

Six U.S. military members have been killed and 18 wounded in less than a week, with estimated costs reaching up to $5 billion, according to congressional sources. The casualties include six service members killed in a drone strike in Kuwait.

“Do I take gratification? You know there’s the Marine side of me: Yeah, of course,” said Arizona Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego, whose company suffered some of the heaviest losses on the U.S. side during the Iraq War. “I know they killed a lot of American soldiers, American Marines. But do I also understand that I have a responsibility not to let my lust for revenge drive my country into another war?”

Experiences in the post-9/11 wars are also coloring decisions within the Trump administration, given that top officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, were once deployed to Iraq.

“As somebody who knows a lot of friends that didn’t come home and a lot of Gold Star families, that’s why the week before the attack, I was actually one of the ones that was talking about caution and why we needed to avoid at all costs getting into another long, drawn-out Middle Eastern war.”

— Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ), former Navy SEAL

While initial votes on Iran saw Congress divide mostly along party lines — with Republicans backing Trump’s actions and Democrats warning of an extended conflict — veterans in both parties share deep reservations about entering the conflict.

Crane, who left college to enlist the week after the Sept. 11 attacks, said his concerns were partially assuaged by briefings from the Trump administration indicating the president is not planning a drawn-out war. He voted against a war powers resolution that would have halted attacks on Iran unless Trump got congressional approval.

But Crane acknowledged that wars are never straightforward. “I’ve been on military operations that did not go to plan many times, and so I understand the nature,” he said, calling for the Trump administration to approach the conflict with “humility and caution.”

The House has begun debate on H. Con. Res. 38, a War Powers resolution seeking to remove U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities with Iran, while Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie plans to force a vote on requiring congressional approval for military action.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is leading a parallel war powers resolution in the Senate. “No one gets to hide or give the president an easy pass around the Constitution,” Kaine said. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) argued that Trump “does not have the right to commit forces to a war of choice without Congress and a declaration of war.”

Even some Republicans are expressing hesitation. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) noted that while the administration has left open the possibility of troop deployments, “the American people don’t want troops on the ground.”

Congress recently approved $175 billion in new Pentagon funding as part of tax legislation signed last year, even as Trump’s MAGA coalition shows signs of fracturing over the conflict, with some arguing the president has abandoned his “America First” principles by entering another overseas war.

Gallego and other Democrats worry it may already be too late for caution. Lawmakers have been seen wearing bracelets etched with the names of friends killed in battle, telling stories of coming under attack from Iran-backed militant groups and reflecting on their own life-changing injuries suffered during combat.