In a recent guest opinion in the Loveland Reporter Herald (“Not the America I Know” 6/18/25) I concluded that America is facing a troubling moment of doubt due to the chaotic and unsound leadership of Donald J. Trump. It is with profound regret that yet another moment occurred several weeks later because of King Trump’s unilateral decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities at the Fordo Uranium Enrichment Plant, the Natanz Nuclear Facility, and the Natanz Nuclear Technology Center. The midnight attack was carried out by Tomahawk missiles fired from a submarine and seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers that dropped 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs. The attack, according to the president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear bomb-making capacity, a claim widely challenged by international experts.

This daring, surprise attack raised troubling questions. The first and perhaps foremost is constitutional: the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 says Congress shall have power to declare war. Was the bombardment an act of war? It was certainly a violation of a nation’s sovereignty. But the president made it clear that the United States carried out a “targeted” objective and did not seek a wider conflict. Nonetheless, the question remains — was the attack tantamount to an act of war? And, if so, what authority did the president have to act without Congressional approval?

The United States has formally declared war against foreign nations in five separate wars, each upon prior request by the president of the United States. Four of those five declarations came after hostilities had begun. U.S. military engagements since World War II, notably the Korean War and the Vietnam conflict, did not commence with a declaration of war, but President Truman declared the U.S. involvement in Korea as a “police action” carried out under the auspices of the United Nations. The Vietnam conflict with roots in the 1950s and the Cold War was given joint Congressional approval with the passage of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in August 1964 following an attack by North Vietnamese torpedo boats on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin.

A second troubling question is: Will the attack on Iran result in military adventurism by the Trump administration? The enthusiastic response to the bombing by President Trump suggests he may be likely to engage in similar war-like behavior across the globe when it suits him. And then there’s the question of using tactical nuclear weapons. These weapons are designed to be used in a very target-specific manner, but they are risky and may lead to nuclear escalation.

This takes us to the third question: where do we go from here? Trump appeares to believe that a one-shot effort on Iran’s nuclear weapon-making capacity would be sufficient. What if it wasn’t? Will it be necessary to force Iran into submission? Now we know the answer to this question—the U.S. and Israel are waging a full-scale frontal war on Iran. Such steps will surely result in widening the Middle East conflict, with no predictable outcome. Do you know what the objectives of the war are? Or, how long it will take the U.S. and Israel to destroy Iran? A few days? Weeks? Months? Years? Of course, you don’t—neither does the President or his Secretary of War Pete Hegseth or four-star Pentagon generals or anyone else. We are adrift in a dangerous world. Aimless drifting invites escalation and miscalculation.

Escalation is already occurring with reports of a growing number of countries (Turkey has shot down two incoming Iranian missiles) engaged in combat. Now we learn that Russian intelligence on the location of U.S military assets—installations, aircraft, war ships—is shared with Iran. Miscalculation hovers over both the U.S. and Iran, with each side miscalculating their public and military support to sustain the war. There is certainly little evidence to suggest there is public support in the U.S. for the war; indeed, there is much evidence to the contrary. Foreign policy experts suggest the Iranian public is fully conditioned to sustained resistance. The selection of Mojtaba Khamenei (the Ayatollah’s son) as Iran’s supreme leader, despite President Trump’s declaration that he is unacceptable, suggests more of the same in Iran. But is it so? We just don’t know.