President Donald Trump may have united Republicans behind military action against Iran, but his push to formalize peace is proving far more divisive.As details of a memorandum of understanding emerge, GOP hawks are questioning whether the administration gave up too much, while Trump allies argue the president achieved a historic objective that crippled Iran's military capabilities without dragging the U.S.into another prolonged war.The disagreement is about more than Iran.
It has exposed a growing divide inside the GOP over what Trump's "America First" foreign policy should look like in practice — and what victory should mean once a military campaign ends.At its core, the debate centers on competing visions of American power.One camp views military success as leverage to extract maximum concessions from adversaries and secure lasting strategic gains.
The other sees it as a tool to neutralize threats and end conflicts before they become another Iraq or Afghanistan.Trump's Iran agreement has forced those competing philosophies into a rare public collision.That divide is already playing out among some of the party's most prominent national security voices.TOP SENATE REPUBLICAN RIPS INTO TRUMP'S IRAN DEAL, SAYS $300 BILLION MAKES OBAMA DEAL LOOK LIKE 'A PITTANCE'The administration's memorandum of understanding with Tehran has exposed a divide among Republicans over what constitutes victory after the military campaign against Iran.
(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)The deal's fiercest Republican critics argue Trump is giving away leverage at the very moment Iran is most vulnerable.Sen.
Bill Cassidy, R-La., has blasted the agreement on X as the "worst foreign policy blunder in decades," while Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen.Roger Wicker, R-Miss., has warned it appears "out of step" with the goals of the military campaign.Sen.
Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has questioned the concessions offered to Tehran and former U.N.Ambassador and former South Carolina Gov.
Nikki ...