U.S. and Israel Strike Iran – My Thoughts on March 1, 2026

I have to begin this analysis with a disclaimer that I am very proud of my Jewish heritage, almost as proud as I am of my American heritage. I decry those who claim that Israel and the Jewish people should be wiped off the face of the earth – those mostly from the Islamic fundamentalist influence. October 7^th was a horrific day for Israel and for Jews around the world. Indeed, Hamas needed to be attacked and must be replaced as the rulers over the Palestinian people. The other disclaimer is that I support the Palestinian people in their quest for their own nation, and it is clear that Israel’s subsequent attacks on Hamas harmed an unreasonable number of Palestinian civilians. I pray for peace in the Middle East and the world. People of all faiths – Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc. need to live in peace and respect freedom of religion.

The big question is was this attack on Iran by the U.S. and Israel that killed their “Supreme Leader” Ali Khamenei justified. Now, there are those on the MAGA side of the equation who support President Trump, regardless of what actions he takes. Of course, there are those detractors of his who no matter what the president does, oppose President Trump. I believe both groups are negligent in their civic responsibility to oversee and question the actions of their elected leaders (or leader, as in the case of President Trump). We must remember that “We the people of the United States” are the supreme leaders in our democratic republic. Our elected leaders must ultimately answer to us and we must communicate what our preferences are on policy. We must respond accordingly if leaders do not follow our Constitution or our rational interests.

As always being the political moderate that I am, my opinion is mixed on this military action. First, I stand with the people of Iran and particularly with women and minorities who have suffered brutally under this Islamic regime forced upon the Persian people. Many protestors just recently were beaten and killed by this regime that tolerates no dissent. This government has called for the annihilation of Israel and “Death to America” for decades. I certainly have no issues with this leader being taken out of power (I say this with the understanding that my preference would have been a peaceful transition of power in which Khamenei would have voluntarily stepped down). So, as many have expressed, the question is not one of whether this ruthless leader should no longer be in power in Iran, but what are the consequences of this military action and could there have been other effective, non-violent policy measures implemented instead (or first).

Many opposing this move in the U.S. question whether President Trump has the constitutional authority to basically start a war. Congress has the power to declare war, but given our nuclear-armed world and the need for the Commander-In-Chief to be able to defend the nation, there is flexibility afforded to the executive branch in military actions up to a point. I think experts would concur that this point is when the U.S. enters into a full-scale war.

The other issue is does this attack on Iran and the killing of its leader, result in a Middle East that is more unstable for people throughout the region. Could this lead to an ongoing war throughout the region that could even escalate outside of it? It is too early to tell at this point. If somehow the entire regime of Iran could be dismantled and a democratic-style government could be installed, that would be a great victory for the people of Iran and the Middle East. A democratic Iran which had peaceful relations with the United States, Israel and the West, would no longer be a threat as far as the nation having a desire to build a nuclear weapon to attack Israel, the U.S. etc. Yes, many in Iran and Iranians (as well as their supporters) around the world have been thanking President Trump for taking out Khamenei, but we have to see how this develops. I’d like to know what the planned endgame is for this preemptive strike(s) on Iran. Is the goal just to take out the leadership of Iran or is there an actual plan to implement on-the-ground reforms to stabilize the nation (i.e. Is the United States going to put boots on the ground in Iran?)?

My overall opinion is that the goal of the United States should be to support a future Iran that is democratically led. Thus, I am fine with having an official policy that regime change is in the best interests of the United States and, not to mention, the people of Iran, but my vision would have been that we emphasize a peaceful transition of power in Iran first, before a strike was made. Now, per the writing of this analysis on March 1, 2026, I just watched Senator Ted Cruz on CNN explain to Dana Bash that the reason why this was the best time to take out the Iranian leadership was because the regime is weaker now than at any other time. This assertion by Senator Cruz is per the U.S. and Israeli initiatives in the summer of 2025 which took out Iranian nuclear facilities. He probably is correct and more than likely the Iranian leadership would not be willing to give up power and, for example, exit Iran voluntarily. However, I do believe we needed more of a systemic process here before going in for the attack as the U.S. and Israelis did this weekend.

I would have suggested a communications campaign, loosely based off of how the George W. Bush administration proceeded before going into Iraq in 2003. The Trump administration should have first given the Iranian government an opportunity to step down. As this request and ultimatum would be given, the administration should have gone to Congress outlining the reasoning as to the plan for attack if the Iranian leadership refused to step down. Again, a systemic process that ensures Congress has its say and with a Republican-controlled Congress, I wouldn’t foresee any issue with the Trump administration being given the “green light” to go forward with military action. What is needed here are the details. Congress and the American people need to understand what the plan entails – are we just striking with bombs or will American soldiers (“boots on the ground”) be sent to Iran to occupy? Upon obtaining Congressional approval (Congress has the power to declare war and this certainly was not a situation in which the United States was in immediate, imminent danger from Iran), then the Trump administration could have also been communicating with the United Nations (UN) on the policy of regime change with the emphasis on a peaceful transition if the senior leadership of Iran would leave. I agree that long-term, this brutal regime is and has been a threat to the security of the United States and the world. Now, I would not approach the situation with the attitude that the U.S. would be seeking UN approval, only that we would communicate our policy and the possibility of military action with the cooperation from the Israelis. My personal opinion is that the United Nations has its flaws as far as not standing united to a sufficient level against bad actors like Iran, Russia and China. There is an anti-U.S. and anti-Israel sentiment in the UN that limits how much deference should be afforded to this organization. I certainly felt that the UN did not sufficiently denounce the attacks on October 7^th in Israel. I also think that there has been a tendency to quickly criticize the U.S., instead of some real sinister nation-states as mentioned above (and I’m talking about the governments and not the people of Iran, Russia and China).

In conclusion, I agree with the Trump administration on regime change in Iran. The Iranian regime has supported the murder of Americans and Israelis for generations now and it is time for this government to be replaced. I would have approached the process in a more controlled and again, systematic manner, than what seems at least at this point to be a quick to attack mentality that could result in unintended consequences. Military action probably would have been inevitable anyway, but my constant criticism of the Trump administration is that it takes overly aggressive action even domestically. I’m thinking here of Elon Musk’s DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) campaign in which federal government employees were fired, but then they had to be quickly rehired to ensure core governmental tasks/services were not interrupted. Of course, we’ve seen the poorly trained immigration enforcement officers sent throughout the interior of the nation that has led to U.S. citizens being mistreated or physically harmed. And who knows – perhaps if the Trump administration had gone to the United Nations and provided the reasoning for the replacement of the current Iranian government, maybe some traditional allies would have provided some support for this regime change initiative in Iran.

My immediate concern with this military action is that we’ve already witnessed the deaths of three American soldiers and apparently a girls school in Iran was hit, killing 153 people including children (per the BBC). I’m also aware per CNN (and The Times of Israel) of a bomb shelter and synagogue in Israel that took a direct hit killing nine Israelis. So, we are already witnessing deaths that would not have occurred if the U.S. and Israel had not initiated this campaign. I want to be clear that I realize there would have been a small chance that the Iranian government would have left the nation peacefully, but I do think diplomacy had to be given more of an opportunity by the Trump administration.

In closing, we are where we are, and the hope is that the leadership that is left in Iran concedes defeat to the U.S. Perhaps the United Nations can help and collaborate with the U.S. to implement a democratic government in Iran with Iranians standing up to take over their government and nation, as a friend to the U.S. and Israel. The alternative scenario involves an unstable Iran that (God forbid) mirrors what happened after the U.S. defeated Saddam Hussein in Iraq. As we’ve seen, few nations can match the overwhelming military might of the United States, but the ability of militant, insurgent groups with allegiance to the previous government (or who simply just hate the West) to commit sustained acts of violence, could lead to a very unpredictable environment for the future of Iran. As many Americans and foreign policy experts have pointed out, the U.S. does not have a very good track record of nation-building, particularly in the Middle East. Only time will tell. I hope and pray for the safety of our troops and for the safety of all civilians from the United States, Iran and Israel. My further hope is that Iran becomes a beacon of Persian democracy, beginning a transition to free societies in a Middle East that has too long kept its people, particularly its women, in darkness.