Following the extensive military action against Tehran, critical questions are surfacing in Washington that extend beyond the military aspects of the strikes. These inquiries delve into the essence of the U.S. decision-making process and its political and constitutional limits, amidst fears of a situation that might replicate the Iraq War scenario of 2003 under various pretexts. There is concern that the current dynamics could spiral into a broader military conflict if not contained.

Al Jazeera's correspondent in Washington, Anas Al-Sabbar, points out that an American official’s confirmation of U.S. participation in joint strikes with Israel marks a significant shift. Washington is no longer merely providing defensive support; rather, it is directly involved in the offensive operations. Historically, U.S. administrations have framed their role in prior escalations as defensive, focused on protecting Israel and intercepting potential Iranian retaliations through naval systems in the Mediterranean. The recent statement indicates a clear operational engagement that deviates from past narratives.

Furthermore, the nature of this participation remains ambiguous and requires official clarification, especially concerning the scale and duration of involvement. The U.S. official specifically mentioned that these attacks aim to 'dismantle the Iranian security apparatus' and that they will be extensive in scope. This development arises in the context of statements by Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, who described the commencement of an offensive that could have significant regional implications, fueling anxieties about escalating tensions in the Middle East.