Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) on Monday announced plans to introduce a war powers resolution to prohibit the U.S. from getting involved in the war between Israel and Iran, gaining immediate support from fellow Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). Massie’s announcement came shortly after Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) introduced a similar resolution in the Senate.

The resolution exposes divisions within the MAGA coalition over Israel, with certain loud mouthpieces distancing themselves from President Trump’s support for the U.S. ally. “Everyone is finding out who are real America First/MAGA and who were fake,” wrote Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). “Anyone slobbering for the U.S. to become fully involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/MAGA.”

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson concurred. “Earlier this week, unnamed Washington sources expressed concern over Israel’s ability to fend off Iran’s retaliation, which would inevitably lead to Benjamin Netanyahu ordering the American military to step in and fight on his country’s behalf,” he sneered in a newsletter to subscribers.

But Trump fired back, demonstrating in a single line that he is the undisputed head of the MAGA movement: “Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that, ‘IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!’”

The more one thinks about it, the better that line gets. “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.” This agrees with the terms of a 1970 international treaty, to which all but five countries are a party. It enjoys such universal agreement that even Iran itself pretends not to want one. The statement enjoys similarly high approval among Americans; if any citizens really do think the country that chants “death to America” should obtain the deadliest weapon mankind has ever devised, they sure are quiet about it.

Not only is the statement, “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” self-evident and politically unassailable, but it also cuts right to the heart of the issue. If Iran were not on the cusp of building a nuclear weapon, American airstrikes against them would be a non-issue. For that matter, if Iran were not on the cusp of building a nuclear weapon, there would be no reason for Israel to attack. With this simple statement, Trump has cut right to the heart of the issue while his MAGA critics dance around the edges.

One critic of Trump’s Iran policy may reside within his own administration. In March, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard testified that Iran “is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized a nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.”

Evidently, her boss disagrees. When a reporter asked about Gabbard’s testimony this week, Trump shot back. “I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having it.” Trump’s position accords with what most people can see, while Gabbard’s position accords with what America’s adversaries would like us to believe.

When the president trusts the intelligence assessment of his own eyes more than the intelligence assessment of his intelligence chief, it raises the question: what benefit is the U.S. intelligence community providing? Furthermore, what productive contribution can the head of that intelligence community make?

This week, further confirmation emerged that Gabbard has been effectively sidelined. Five days before the Israeli airstrikes began, Trump “convened senior national security officials” at Camp David “to discuss the Middle East,” reported Fox News’s White House Correspondent Peter Doocy. “DNI Tulsi Gabbard was not invited.”

“So, the president and his entire national-security team gather for a high-stakes meeting, almost certainly knowing that a massive Israeli airstrike against Iran is days away, and the U.S. director of national intelligence isn’t invited?” queried National Review’s Jim Geraghty.

To summarize, far from indulging the isolated voices in his base calling for a Bidenesque abandonment of Israel, President Trump has latched onto the essence of the problem and is pursuing it with the concentration of a hound on a scent. “I have no desire to negotiate with Iran. I expect nothing less than their complete surrender,” Trump told journalists Friday on Air Force One. “The pace of attacks will not slow down. American intervention? I hope the nuclear program is eliminated long before that.”

On the other side of the equation, some voices are urging Trump to join the conflict with Iran for the cause of civilization. “I hope and wish that President Trump’s announcement this morning is a step toward active U.S. involvement in eradicating the evil empire of radical Islam,” said Knesset Member Amit Halevi (Likud) in a Facebook post (translated from Hebrew).

“President Trump declared upon his election that he is a ‘Peace-Maker’ and a worthy candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize,” Halevi explained. “Today, the only path to peace lies in the destruction and elimination of the neo-Nazi ideology of Iran and its proxies — an ideology that has taken over numerous regimes and turned them into instruments for the realization of the violent, totalitarian vision of global subjugation.”

“The Muslim world today stands at a crossroads,” he continued. “One path leads to a fanatical religious belief that demands the imposition of Islam and the denial of freedom to other nations and individuals — an approach that gains strength in light of the success of these evil regimes. The other path is a religious belief rooted in the vision of Abraham, emphasizing the values of charity and honor within Islam and seeking a path of peace and prosperity. We saw a manifestation of this in the Abraham Accords, led by the President.”

“The struggle between Islam and the Western world is not new. Just as in history, so too today: if the forces of the free world deliver a decisive blow and destroy these regimes — first and foremost Iran — they will enable the Muslim world to draw both religious and practical conclusions and seek a better and more moral path for many centuries ahead,” Halevi argued.

“Honorable President Trump, this war is the only path to regional and global peace,” he urged. “We would all prefer to resolve conflicts through peaceful means, but that is not the case here. On the contrary, inaction will inevitably lead — sooner or later — to a third world war, not just in the Middle East, but in Europe as well, and certainly in Macron’s France. Israel has taken the first step, but this is a war for all of civilization — a war for goodness, for justice, for peace.”

With every passing day, Trump’s comments seem to inch closer toward engagement with Iran. “We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran,” he declared on Tuesday. “Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn’t compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured ‘stuff.’ Nobody does it better than the good ol’ USA.”

Technically, the Israeli Air Force — largely equipped with U.S.-made technology and weapons — is actually exercising control of Iranian skies. But Trump’s use of the first-person, plural “we” signals an intent to identify America with Israel’s war effort.

In a similar vein, Trump wrote, “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there — We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.”

Instead of another inconclusive ceasefire, Trump’s strategy with Iran contemplates a more permanent resolution: “a real end,” he told reporters. Another post stated his demand from Iran bluntly: “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” If Trump can achieve that objective without committing American troops to war, he will likely do so. But if not, Trump seems committed to fulfilling his repeated, one-sentence objective: “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”