House Veterans demand accountability for Trump’s war moves

A group of 12 U.S. House Democrats, each of them military veterans, on Monday, June 23, 2025, came forward to support efforts to limit President Donald Trump’s authority to engage in military action without congressional approval.

The move comes in direct response to Trump’s recent authorization of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, which the lawmakers condemned as unilateral and constitutionally questionable.

The lawmakers, many of whom served in Iraq and Afghanistan, sharply criticized the president’s decision to launch what they described as “preventive airstrikes” on Iran without prior consultation with Congress.

In a letter led by Representative Pat Ryan and sent to Trump on Monday, the veterans warned of the dangers of repeating past mistakes in U.S. military history.

“Twenty years ago, in their rush to appear strong and tough, politicians—on both sides of the aisle—failed to ask the hard questions before entering wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the letter read.

“We refuse to make those same mistakes again.”

Their message comes as several competing War Powers resolutions gain momentum in Washington.

These measures seek to reassert Congress’s constitutional role in authorizing acts of war.

According to Punchbowl News, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is pushing for a vote as early as this week.

While the veteran lawmakers did not endorse a specific version, they affirmed their support for tightening the legal framework that governs presidential use of military force.

One of the most prominent proposals is being advanced by Representative Thomas Massie (Republican of Kentucky) and Representative Ro Khanna (Democrat of California),

Both lawmakers are spearheading a bipartisan resolution to limit further executive military action.

Simultaneously, senior Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, and Intelligence Committees are drafting an alternative resolution.

This resolution is supposedly designed to appeal to members who may find the Massie-Khanna approach too politically charged.

According to aides, lawmakers are free to support both measures.

The urgency behind these efforts has escalated following Trump’s Saturday night airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites.

These were actions that critics argue were taken without informing or receiving approval from Congress.

Many Democrats, from moderates to progressives, have accused the president of overstepping his constitutional authority.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for Trump’s impeachment, describing the strikes as “a grave violation of the Constitution and congressional war powers.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused the president of misleading the American people and significantly raising the risk of a wider conflict.

For the dozen veteran lawmakers, the issue is more than political—it’s personal and principled.

“We all swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution,” they wrote, citing Article I, Section 8, which gives Congress—not the president—the power to declare war.

Their letter demanded transparency from the executive branch.

It called for clear objectives, expected costs, and projections of possible U.S. military casualties before any further escalation.

The signatories include Representatives Gilbert Ray Cisneros Jr., Eugene Vindman, Chris Deluzio, Jimmy Panetta, and Ted Lieu, among others.

While their message conveyed strong opposition to unauthorized military actions, it carefully navigated the broader complexities of Middle East policy.

The lawmakers referred to the Iranian regime as “evil” and reiterated their commitment to Israel’s security, indicating their support for U.S. allies in the region.

However, they also questioned the long-term efficacy of targeted airstrikes.

“While destroying nuclear sites may yield immediate tactical results, it does not guarantee a lasting strategic victory,” they wrote.

They cautioned against over-reliance on military force as a solution to diplomatic and geopolitical challenges.

The War Powers Resolution of 1973, passed in the wake of the Vietnam War, was designed to prevent presidents from unilaterally committing U.S. forces to combat without congressional approval.

However, presidents of both parties have often sidestepped its requirements by citing national security or emergency justifications.

This latest episode has reignited debate over the scope of executive war-making authority and the responsibilities of Congress.

As tensions with Iran remain high and political divisions deepen at home, the question of who holds the power to lead the U.S. into conflict is once again at the forefront of American governance.

For the veterans in Congress, the answer is clear: war must never be waged without full transparency, constitutional adherence, and democratic accountability.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook