Republican senators on Tuesday threw their weight behind a US attack against Iran, framing potential intervention as a path to regime change welcomed by protesters, as Democrats urged restraint and warned of backlash in interviews with Iran International.
“Help is on the way,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said. “Regime change is a result of the people not wanting to live in a country where a 16-year-old girl can be killed for not wearing the headscarf.”
“They don’t want to live a country governed by an Ayatollah who’s a religious fanatic,” he added. “I am following the people. They want a new life.”
Graham said the fall of the Islamic Republic would have major regional consequences.
“If this regime falls, it will be a godsend to America,” he said. “The largest state sponsor of terrorism will fall, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the good people of Iran will be in charge.”
Asked about timing, Graham said, “I’ll leave it up to the president, but if you saw his tweet today, I would say soon, because if we let it go much longer, people are going to doubt.”
Senator Markwayne Mullin also warned Tehran to take President Donald Trump’s threats seriously.
“The murderous regime and Iran needs to pay attention to what the president said,” Mullin told Iran International.
“The president made it very clear if you’re killing the innocent or simply protesting that he’ll come to the rescue and the president doesn’t bluff.”
“But it’s always on his timing when we’re ready to go,” Mullin added.
By contrast, Democratic senators urged restraint.
“My heart is broken for the people of Iran who are protesting, understandably, the economic failures and the repression of that regime,” Senator Richard Blumenthal said. “I think we should be very, very careful about any military operation there because it would backfire and actually bolster the regime.”
Senator Dick Durbin also cautioned against US intervention.
“I’m very concerned with the situation in Iran and statements made by President Trump about the demonstrators,” Durbin said. “I think we need to take care to make sure that we don’t overstep our boundaries.”
Referring to the Iraq war, he added: “When I was one of the 23 who voted against the invasion of Iraq, and I still think that that was the right vote, maybe one of the most important votes of my career.”
US forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in a daring, deadly raid over the weekend and launched a surprise attack on Iranian nuclear sites in June.
His maverick military style may visit Iran once again after he twice warned Washington's sworn enemies in the Islamic theocracy against killing protestors, after which over 25 people have been killed.
The question now confronting Washington is whether Donald Trump will stick to pressure and covert tools or move toward a more dramatic confrontation.
Those who follow Trump’s foreign policy decisions see a clear pattern. He favors actions that create leverage without committing the US to open-ended wars.
Drawing on that record, Dr. Mehrzad Boroujerdi, Vice Provost and Dean at Missouri University of Science and Technology and a longtime scholar of Iranian politics, described a president inclined toward targeted operations rather than large deployments.
Trump, he explained, “prefers low risk and no boots on the ground model of a surgical attack.”
In the most extreme versions of surgical-strike planning, even the Supreme Leader appears as a hypothetical target, especially after Trump said during hostilities in June that the United States was well aware of his hiding place.
A broader conflict, Boroujerdi added, would come with serious complications.
“Any type of serious military intervention, meaning boots on the ground, in a place like Iran is going to be politically risky, legally contested and strategically rather complex.”
Is a Venezuela-style scenario possible?
The dramatic operation that removed Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro has raised questions about whether something similar could unfold in Iran.
Alex Vatanka, director of the Iran Program at the Middle East Institute in Washington, pointed to the depth of foreign intelligence penetration in Iran’s security apparatus.
“If we look at the 12 day war we just had in the summer of 2025, clearly Israel, certainly in the United States, I’m sure they have many eyes and ears inside the Iranian regime. Otherwise they could not have done the sort of targeted assassinations that they achieved.”
During the 12-day war, Israeli airstrikes targeted Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, killing senior commanders such as Revolutionary Guards Brigadier General Davoud Sheikhian and several nuclear scientists including Abdolhamid Minouchehr and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi.
That level of access, Vatanka said, creates the possibility of deals inside the ruling elite if they decide the current path is unsustainable.
“That suggests defections. That suggest a good part of an existing regime decides, you know what, going forward things have to change and they might have cut a deal.”
Boroujerdi said Washington may not rely on exiled figures. Instead, it could negotiate with people already in power.
“The Venezuela model definitely shows … that instead of choosing an opposition figure, the Trump administration is quite content with striking a deal for a negotiated transition with the elements of the regime,” he said.
But Iran’s internal structure makes such transitions unpredictable. The Revolutionary Guard dominates key sectors of the economy and the security state.
Eric Mandel, director of the Middle East Political Information Network and a frequent adviser on regional security issues, warned that power might consolidate around them.
“I think the regime change in Iran could be one where the IRGC picks up the pieces because they're the most organized force.”
Prince Reza Pahlavi, the most prominent opposition figure outside Iran and son of the deposed last shah of Iran, has taken the opposite view. In recent interviews and opinion pieces, he argued that Iran does not need foreign intervention or a Venezuela-style operation.
“We don’t need a single boot of your military on the ground in Iran,” he told the Wall Street Journal in an interview published on Monday, saying the Islamic Republic is weakening from within and that a planned transition led by Iranians themselves could prevent chaos. Supporters see him as a potential unifying figure.
Many protest videos from inside Iran feature chants invoking Prince Reza Pahlavi to return.
Do Iranians actually want an attack?
Years of inflation, corruption and repression have pushed some Iranians to consider outside intervention as a price worth paying. Yet analysts caution against assuming most people are calling for war.
Boroujerdi emphasized the economic reality first. In his assessment, “hardly anyone is asking for war because that is going to amount to even worse economic conditions.”
Protesters in Iran have appealed to US President Donald Trump for help, according to videos sent to Iran International on Tuesday, with posts and signs reading 'Trump don't let them kill us.'
US President Donald Trump said on Sunday night aboard Air Force One that the United States was monitoring developments in Iran closely and warned that if Iranian authorities killed protesters, the country would face a strong response.
Meanwhile, the make-up of protests is shifting. Demonstrations are less concentrated among Tehran’s elite and increasingly driven by smaller cities and working-class families, once supporters of the clerical establishment and pillars of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
“Right now, 70 plus cities and towns are protesting. This is a nationwide phenomena … It’s inflation, it’s unemployment, it’s the corruption,” said Vatanka.
Police in Abdanan, in Ilam Province, are seen in footage viewed by Iran International waving and cheering on protesters - an unusual scene in a system built on loyalty to the state.
What happens if there is an attack?
Mandel believes escalation remains possible, especially around Iran’s missile program.
“I think there’s a good chance that there will be a war with Iran,” he said, warning that Tehran could also strike first to distract from domestic crises and attempt to rally nationalist sentiment.
Iran’s newly formed Defense Council warned on Tuesday that the country could respond before an attack if it detected clear signs of a threat. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that he and Trump would not permit Iran to restore its ballistic and nuclear program.
For Iranians already living with inflation, repression and unrest, the question is no longer whether pressure will continue. It is what form it will take, and how high the price will be.
“We see that through interaction between the government and the people, any protests or outstanding issues can, God willing, be resolved, and I am very hopeful that this will happen,” Abbas Araghchi told reporters on the sidelines of a cabinet meeting in Tehran.
At least 36 people have been killed in anti-government demonstrations which began on Dec. 28. US President Donald Trump has vowed to intervene if authorities killed protestors, in comments which have ramped up anticipation about his intentions.
Araghchi appeared to address the comments by saying the unrest was a domestic matter. "Iran’s internal affairs were not the concern of any foreign government," he said.
Relations between Tehran and Washington are at a low ebb and talks between the longtime foes on Iran's disputed nuclear program ended when Israeli launched a surprise military campaign in June capped off by US attacks on Iran nuclear sites.
“Now the conditions are not right for negotiations due to US policies,” Araghchi added.
“Iran has never left the negotiating table,” Araghchi added, sayingTehran had always been ready for talks based on mutual respect and interests.
Israel Hayom reported on Tuesday that Trump had rejected a proposal by his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, to pursue further talks with Tehran and instead chose to increase pressure on Iran.
Meanwhile, protests and strikes continued on Wednesday as shopkeepers shut stores and joined rallies in multiple cities.
Araghchi also said he would travel to Beirut on Thursday, adding that an economic delegation would accompany him and that Iran wanted to expand long-standing ties with Lebanon and its government.