House Republicans are signaling that they’re largely OK giving President Donald Trump the reins as the U.S. and Israel continue their joint operation against Iran.

But one red line looms on the horizon for most GOP lawmakers, one that would put dozens of them in a difficult position between supporting their party leader and keeping in line with Congress’ constitutional authorities.

‘I would like to see congressional approval for boots on the ground,’ Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., told Fox News Digital. He added, however, that ‘right now, it’s just an intervention, which is very similar to what Obama and Clinton and other presidents throughout my lifetime have done.’

The ongoing strikes, which killed Iran’s supreme leader and other high-ranking members of Tehran’s repressive regime, have so far been comprised of coordinated missile launches on military targets.

But the Trump administration has not ruled out having a U.S. presence on the ground there despite assurances that the mission will be finite and only lasting a matter of weeks rather than months or years.

‘The president is doing what he should be doing. … I agree with the policy,’ Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. ‘If at some point this extends beyond … in terms of boots on the ground and budgetary need and scope, that starts to then demand our involvement, then we’ll look at it.’

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said she too backed the operation, but added, ‘If ground troops get involved, I think that’s a very different conversation. That’s not where we are today.’

‘We’re taking it day by day at this point to see how things progress, but that would certainly be something that we as Congress would like to be involved in the discussion,’ Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, R-Pa., told Fox News Digital.

But he also argued that forcing the operation to end too early could do more harm than good.

‘Once the president has taken that action, that first action, if we were to pull back, it would actually leave us more vulnerable and less safe by leaving all of their capabilities in place but having started a conflict like this,’ Mackenzie said. 

‘So, we do need to follow through on the objectives, but we also need to be very much on guard to make sure that it doesn’t expand beyond what we are able to achieve.’

Others, like Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., were skeptical it would get to that point.

‘I don’t think we’re going to get to that point. This is much different than Iraq or Afghanistan. The capabilities that we’ve developed, the intelligence that we developed, working with the IDF — we had the capabilities now that we did not have,’ Alford told Fox News Digital.

‘Now, should it come to boots on the ground, which I don’t think it will, that’s an entirely different story. … We’re only five days into this, and I think what you’ve seen so far is having tremendous effect.’

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt would not rule out the possibility of the U.S. sending ground troops to Iran, though she said Wednesday it is not being considered at the moment.

During the first White House press briefing since Operation Epic Fury was launched, a reporter asked whether ground troops would be sent into Iran.

‘Well, they’re not part of the plan for this operation at this time, but I certainly will never take away military options on behalf of the president of the United States or the commander in chief, and he wisely does not do the same for himself,’ Leavitt said.

‘I know there’s many leaders in the past who like to take options off of the table without having a full understanding of how things could develop. So, again, it’s not part of the current plan, but I’m not going to remove an option for the president that is on the table.’

Since Saturday, the U.S. and Israel have carried out attacks on Iran using airstrikes and naval attacks, but neither country has put boots on the ground. The attacks that have been carried out thus far have targeted the regime’s security and military infrastructure, including the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior officials.

Leavitt said the U.S. has four main objectives with Operation Epic Fury: eliminate Iran’s ballistic missile threat, destroy its naval capability, disrupt its missile and drone production infrastructure and cut off Iran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon.

The press secretary was asked multiple times if the U.S. wished to see regime change in Iran. She repeated the objectives she previously detailed and reiterated the administration’s stance on the regime.

‘Obviously, as the president has said numerous times, do we want to see Iran being led by a rogue terrorist regime? No, of course not,’ Leavitt said.

So far, the U.S. has hit nearly 2,000 targets in Iran, and more than 17,500 Americans have returned to U.S. soil from the Middle East since the operation began.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth gave an operational update earlier on Wednesday, saying he U.S. was ‘decisively’ winning, and later adding that Iran was ‘toast’ and if it didn’t already realize it, it would ‘soon enough.’

‘I stand before you today with one unmistakable message about Operation Epic Fury. America is winning — decisively, devastatingly and without mercy,’ Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon.

‘The two most powerful air forces in the world will have complete control of Iranian skies. Uncontested airspace.’

Iran postponed a planned farewell ceremony in Tehran for its late supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed Saturday in U.S.-Israeli strikes as part of Operation Epic Fury.

The three-day program was scheduled to begin Wednesday at 10 p.m. local time at Imam Khomeini Prayer Hall, where large crowds were expected to gather to pay their respects, according to Tasnim, a semi-official Iranian news agency. 

Hojjatoleslam Seyed Mohsen Mahmoudi, head of the Islamic Propaganda Coordination Council of Tehran Province, said the postponement followed widespread requests to participate and the need to provide adequate infrastructure and facilities to accommodate attendees.

‘It was decided to hold the ceremony at a more appropriate time,’ he explained.

No additional reason for the postponement was given, and it was not immediately clear when the ceremony would be rescheduled.

Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz warned Iranian leadership in a post on X that any successor who tries to ‘destroy Israel, to threaten the United States and the free world and the countries of the region, and to suppress the Iranian people’ will be an ‘unequivocal target for elimination.’

‘It does not matter what his name is or the place where he hides,’ Katz said.

The funeral of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, drew massive crowds in the country’s capital on June 11, 1989, with an estimated 10.2 million people in attendance, roughly one-sixth of the nation’s population at the time. 

According to Guinness World Records, it drew the largest percentage of a population ever recorded at a funeral.

Khamenei’s death triggers a closely watched succession process overseen by Iran’s Assembly of Experts, the clerical body responsible for appointing the supreme leader.

‘The IRGC is a key stakeholder in this process, and will heavily influence its outcome,’ Jason Brodsky, policy director at United Against Nuclear Iran, told Fox News Digital.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered one of his bluntest defenses yet of President Donald Trump’s strikes on Iran Tuesday, sharply rejecting criticism and describing the regime as ‘lunatics’ as he argued the president acted at the right moment to prevent Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

‘Let me explain to you guys this in simple English, okay? Iran is run by lunatics, religious fanatic lunatics,’ Rubio told reporters.

‘They have an ambition to have nuclear weapons,’ Rubio said. ‘This is the weakest they’ve ever been. Now is the time to go after them.’

Rubio said Trump made the ‘right decision’ to dismantle Iran’s military capabilities before they could shield a nuclear program.

‘The president made the decision to go after them, take away their missiles, take away their navy, take away their drones … so that they can never have a nuclear weapon,’ Rubio said.

He acknowledged ‘there will be a price to pay,’ but argued it would be far lower than allowing Iran to become nuclear-armed.

‘That is a much lower price to pay than having a nuclear armed Iran,’ he said.

Rubio grew visibly sharper when pressed on whether Israel dictated the timing of the operation.

‘Your statement is false,’ he told one reporter who suggested the U.S. acted because Israel was about to strike.

Rubio confirmed Monday that Israel was prepared to act independently.

‘We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces,’ Rubio said. ‘And we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them … we would suffer higher casualties.’

He emphasized Tuesday that the decision ultimately rested with President Donald Trump.

‘The president determined we were not going to get hit first,’ Rubio said. ‘If you tell the president of the United States that if we don’t go first, we’re going to have more people killed and more people injured, the president is going to go first.’

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said after a classified briefing that Israel was ‘determined to act … with or without American support,’ and that U.S. officials concluded ‘a coordinated response was necessary.’

‘I am convinced that they did the right thing,’ Johnson said.

Despite Rubio’s harsh rhetoric toward Iran’s clerical leadership, administration officials have emphasized that the mission is not aimed at overthrowing the regime but at dismantling its military capabilities.

Rubio repeatedly framed the operation as focused on destroying Iran’s ballistic missiles, launchers, drone capabilities and naval assets.

‘Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,’ he said. ‘It cannot have the things it was hiding behind to have a nuclear weapons program.’

So far, U.S. and Israeli strikes largely have targeted missile infrastructure and military facilities. Officials have not indicated that nuclear enrichment sites have been the primary focus of the campaign.

Some Democrats questioned whether the administration demonstrated an imminent threat to the United States.

‘There was no imminent threat to the United States of America by the Iranians. It was a threat to Israel,’ Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., said after the briefing. ‘We equate a threat to Israel is the equivalent of an imminent threat to the United States. Then we are in uncharted territory.’

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said after the classified briefing, ‘I have no idea what the objective is, and I didn’t get any additional clarity.’

Rubio brushed aside the criticism, predicting opponents would emerge from briefings claiming they ‘didn’t hear anything’ while insisting the administration complied with congressional notification requirements.

‘This is an action by the president to address a real threat,’ Rubio said. ‘The world will be a safer place when these radical clerics no longer have access to these weapons.’

Every year around this time, Jews read the ancient Scroll of Esther and remember a Persian courtier named Haman who plotted ‘to destroy, to kill and to annihilate all the Jews’ of the empire in a single day. The story feels less like distant history and more like a chilling parallel to our present reality, because, once again, a regime in Persia — today’s Islamic Republic in Iran — openly dreams of annihilation and domination, with Jews as a central target but far from the only ones.

The holiday of Purim is often presented as a children’s tale of costumes and noisemakers, but at its core is a political battle between good and evil. A powerful ideologue identifies a people as an intolerable obstacle to his vision, secures state power behind his hatred and issues a bureaucratic death sentence. It takes courage, unity and a willingness to fight back to stop this brutal plot. Replace scroll and signet ring with rockets and proxies, and you have the worldview of today’s Iranian regime toward Israel, the United States and now, several neighboring Persian Gulf States.

When Hamas stormed Israeli communities on Oct. 7, murdering, raping and kidnapping civilians, it did not act in an ideological vacuum. Hamas has long relied on Iran’s regime for training, funding and supplying weapons.

The terror group sits within a wider ‘axis of resistance’ Tehran has painstakingly built around Israel and across the region. Whether or not Tehran signed off on the exact timing, the regime has spent decades forging a regional ‘ring of fire,’ including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Syria and Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, explicitly to make good on its promise that Israel is a ‘cancerous tumor’ to be removed and that American power in the Middle East must be driven out.

But in the 21st century, the Iran regime’s war is not only against Jews and not only fought with rockets and drones. It is fought with code, cameras and carefully crafted narratives aimed at Israelis, Arabs, Americans, Europeans, dissident Iranians and anyone who stands in the way of the regime’s revolutionary project. The regime has developed a sophisticated influence apparatus that uses botnets, fake personas and social media influencers to shape how global publics understand the conflict and how free societies see themselves.

Investigations have exposed networks of inauthentic accounts on X, Facebook, Instagram and Telegram pushing divisive, demoralizing content at scale. In one documented campaign, bots flooded Hebrew‑language discourse with tens of thousands of posts in under two days, amplifying internal Israeli divisions and sowing panic about the fate of hostages. Other operations have impersonated Israelis, Americans and Europeans online, pushing narratives that call for Western retreat, civil conflict and the abandonment of allies from Israel to Ukraine.

This is not the random trolling we’ve seen for years. It is state‑directed information warfare intended to achieve strategic goals, including to weaken Israeli morale, to crush the Iranian opposition, to fracture Western support, and to invert victim and aggressor in the eyes of the world. When regime‑linked operations amplify incendiary content about ‘Zionist control,’ repackage anti‑Jewish conspiracy theories as anti‑Israel ‘anti‑colonialism,’ and simultaneously smear Iranian dissidents as foreign agents, they are targeting anyone who challenges Tehran’s ambitions.

The West should recognize how a hostile regime is using every tool, including terror proxies abroad, repression at home, campus activism in the West, and algorithm‑hacking online to delegitimize democratic allies and normalize violence against minorities and dissidents. The same regime that arms Hamas and Hezbollah also guns down women removing their headscarves in Tehran, supplies drones to Russia for use in Ukraine and threatens Persian Gulf Arab states that dare to work openly with Israel. The ideological hatred that animated Haman has simply been updated and universalized.

That is why this Purim, we can all be considered like the Jews who were in the regime’s crosshairs in the sense that the story demands a vulnerable minority singled out by a power that cannot tolerate their existence, ordered to bow and vanish for the sake of someone else’s totalizing ideology. To stand with Israel after Oct. 7 is not to ignore other victims of Iran’s regime; it is to understand that the same system that dreams of erasing the Jewish state also dreams of crushing Americans, Europeans, Sunni Arabs, women on the streets of Mashhad, Shiraz or Esfahan, and students on Western campuses who refuse to chant its slogans.

Purim ends with the intended victims standing up, fighting back and surviving. For Israel and the Islamic Republic’s other targets to do the same today, free nations must be willing to confront the regime across all fronts: degrade its military capabilities, defeat its terror proxies on the battlefield, support its domestic dissidents, harden our information space against manipulation and deny Tehran the impunity it has enjoyed for far too long. The lesson of the Scroll of Esther is not parochial. It is that when a regime builds its identity around annihilation, indifference is complicity and by the time the decree reaches your own door, it may be too late.