USA Today
Why is the US at war with Iran? Answering key questions about the conflict
How did Iranian Americans react to US attacks?
How did Trump justify attacking Iran without Congress approval?
What economic consequences are linked to the Iran war
How did Iranian Americans react to US attacks?
Based on your interests
How many U.S. service members were killed in the Iran operation?
Terry Collins
Sarah D. Wire
Josh Meyer
Zachary Schermele
Ashley Pōkiʻi Lewis
Nikol Mudrová
Kim Hjelmgaard
USA TODAY
March 3, 2026Updated March 4, 2026, 12:06 p.m. ET
A new and geopolitically complex war between the United States and Iran is escalating and as the number of American service members killed since the initial attack on Feb. 28 grows, many people are asking: Why are we involved? What is really happening? And what comes next?
To help make sense of the rapidly evolving conflict, we invited readers to send in their questions and asked USA TODAY journalists to break down the answers.
Here are some of the questions you asked USA TODAY:
Q: Why is the US attacking Iran?
The United States and Israel began strikes on Iran early on Saturday, Feb. 28, in a campaign that killed the nation's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and dozens of top officials and hit more than 1,250 targets inside the country. President Donald Trump said the strikes were intended to eliminate "imminent threats" from Iran and prevent the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
The war, which Trump said could last for weeks, plunged the Middle East into a conflict that the president said would end a security threat to the United States and give Iranians a chance to topple their rulers. Congressional Democrats are questioning whether Iran posed an imminent threat and are seeking a vote on the operation amid concerns it could spiral into an extended regional war.
Q: What are the chances of attacks in the states, or that this becomes a world war?
Experts say that a true “world war” with numerous warring nations is extremely unlikely in the near term, even with the U.S.-Israel war against Iran underway. What is more likely is a prolonged, messy regional war in which allies of Iran join the fight, and Iran’s military strikes against U.S. allies in the region lead to escalation.
The risk of attacks inside the United States is elevated, especially given Iran’s use of proxy terrorist groups and criminal organizations with footholds on U.S. soil, including Lebanese Hezbollah. However, authorities say they are on the lookout for any suspicious activity. After Trump announced that he and his administration were behind the 2020 assassination of Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani, the FBI disrupted several plots against Trump and his former national security adviser, John Bolton, in the United States.
What is more likely is that Iran and its proxies will launch cyberattacks at the United States, including efforts to hack into and disrupt critical U.S. infrastructure like water treatment facilities.
Q: How is it that the United States destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities last June, and, in a matter of months, they've become such a serious threat?
While previous military actions in June 2025 targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, authorities say the current threat stems from the regime's efforts to rebuild those sites – and from its refusal to negotiate on its massive ballistic missile program.
Trump and senior administration officials justified the Feb. 28 airstrikes by saying the country remained on the verge of developing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States. Veteran Tehran watchers discount that and say last year’s attacks virtually destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities, at least in the short run, though its ballistic missile arsenal remains very potent.
A senior U.S. official said intelligence revealed Iran was actively rebuilding three nuclear sites that were previously bombed. And while Iran previously said it had halted uranium enrichment, experts say its ballistic missile program remained a "key pillar" of its defense strategy that it refused to abandon.
Q: Why did Israel need to attack Iran, drawing the United States into a war?
Israel and Iran have long been regional foes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has wanted to attack the country for decades.
Trump's second term in office provided the ideal opportunity for Netanyahu to pressure the United States to support a larger war, especially after a previous round of strikes last year kneecapped Iran's nuclear facilities and as the country's proxies, such as Hezbollah, have been weakened.
As Iran has built up its defense capabilities, Netanyahu said Israel was facing an existential threat. House Speaker Mike Johnson said Netanyahu was determined to protect his country, and if the United States didn't join with Israel, Iran still would have struck American forces. "The consequences of inaction on our part could have been devastating," Johnson said on March 3.
Q: How was Trump able to attack Iran without the support of Congress?
It's complicated. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war, a power last officially exercised in 1942 for World War II. Since then, presidents have often acted under the War Powers Act of 1973 or their authority as commander in chief to engage in military actions without formal Congressional approval.
Every president since Gerald Ford has used the resolution to initiate or justify military actions in conflicts, including Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq and drone strikes in the Middle East.
Q: Was a nuclear power plant hit?
Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said March 2 that there was no indication that any of Iran’s nuclear installations, including the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, the Tehran Research Reactor or other nuclear fuel cycle facilities had been damaged.
The Natanz nuclear enrichment facility in Iran has suffered “some recent damage” at the entrance of buildings to the underground fuel enrichment plant, the agency said in a Mar. 3 social media post. The facility was severely damaged by the United States and Israeli strikes last year.
“No radiological consequence (is) expected and no additional impact detected at (the facility) itself,” the agency said.
Q: Who is responsible for bombing the school in Tehran? Was it mistakenly hit because an outdated map showed it inside the military complex?
So far, neither Israel nor the United States has confirmed or denied any role in the attack on the school; however, the Pentagon has indicated it will at least look into the issue of civilian deaths stemming from the Feb. 28 attack. The search for the dead in the apparent U.S. or Israeli missile strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh all-girls’ elementary school in Iran officially ended Sunday, March 1. But the questions surrounding the attack that killed at least 175 people have just begun, as international condemnation and calls for investigations – and accountability – have escalated.
International Federation for Human Rights, one of the world’s oldest human rights organizations, based in Paris, said in a March 2 statement: “All alleged violations − including indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, deliberate targeting of civilians or civilian infrastructure, and attacks on medical facilities and schools − must be promptly, independently, and transparently investigated.”
“Where evidence of war crimes or other serious violations is found,” it added, “those responsible, regardless of rank or official capacity, must be held accountable in accordance with international law.”
Q: How will the Iran war impact Americans?
There have been casualties and will likely be more: six U.S. service members have been killed in action since the attacks started so far. The direct military attack on Iran by the United States and its allies can have broader adverse impacts for the United States, which include immediate military risks, economic instability and threats to Americans.
Oil prices are spiking and gas prices will likely climb in the wake of the war. Higher gas prices could also raise the costs of goods and other materials Americans rely on – costs businesses would need to shoulder and could potentially pass on to consumers, said Shikha Jain, from North America at Simon-Kucher, a commercial strategy consulting firm. If the war is short, American consumers may see higher prices at the gas pump for a few weeks, but if it drags on or escalates, American consumers may see skyrocketing energy costs that could push the U.S. economy toward stagflation, according to Wayne Winegarden, a senior fellow in economics at the Pacific Research Institute.
Q: Who's leading Iran now and what's next there?
Iran formed a three-man leadership council on March 1 to assume power until Khamenei’s successor is selected. Those key figures are Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Ayatollah Alireza Arafi and Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, head of Iran's judiciary.
It's unclear how long Iran's succession plan will take to play out. Arafi, however, is a potential candidate to succeed Khamenei, according to Alex Vantanka, a senior fellow specializing in Iranian politics for the Middle East Institute. Arafi is also a member of Iran's Guardian Council, an Islamic legal authority that reviews Iran’s laws and policies to ensure they conform to Islamic principles. Arafi's rise to power came soon after Khamenei became Iran’s supreme leader in 1989, Vantanka said.
"He is somebody whom Khamenei shaped, groomed, and rose year after year from obscurity, putting this guy in various important positions of power," Vantanka said. "He could very well be the next supreme leader, no doubt about it."
Q: What is the exit plan for the United States in this Iran war?
As of March 3, there is no publicly articulated exit plan to end the war, or even to define the parameters of a cease-fire, either by the United States and Israel – or Iran. No one is spelling out specific steps that they'd want to play out before they'd be prepared to end the hostilities.
Complicating the scenario is the fact that the Trump administration has given conflicting answers as to why it is at war with Iran in the first place. Those include stopping Tehran’s alleged nuclear weapons program and crippling its ballistic missile capability before it builds missiles that could reach the United States.
Trump has also warned that he wants regime change in Iran. And he has warned of a potentially prolonged, multi-week engagement – or something potentially even longer than that. “Whatever the time is, it's OK, whatever it takes," he said, saying they were running "substantially" ahead of the original projection of a campaign that would last four or five weeks.
Q: How will the war in Iran impact the Ukraine-Russia war?
Perhaps the most obvious impact is a political-diplomatic one. The war effectively takes some of the focus off American efforts to reach a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. In short, the United States may become too distracted with Iran to make progress or commit time to negotiations on ending Russia's full-scale war in Ukraine, which recently entered its fifth year.
More concretely, as some European officials and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have pointed out, if the war in Iran drags on, it could have a material impact on U.S.-made weapons Ukraine needs to fight back against Russia. The Pentagon may, when push comes to shove, prioritize its stocks of some weapons for the battlefield in Iran.
There is also a flip side to the weapons issue. Iran has been supplying Russia with its Shahed drones. They have become a central part of its military campaign against Ukraine. It's unclear whether Iran's production of these drones will be affected by the U.S and Israeli strikes on its territory. However, if they are, it could mean Russia will have reduced access to a key part of its arsenal.
Q: What does NATO have to say about the United States attacking Iran without having a discussion and consensus?
The leader of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) praised U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran and the killing of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, but said NATO would not be involved.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said in a televised statement that Iran posed a threat to both Israel and Europe.
“We are all better off with him gone and with the nuclear and ballistic capability being beaten and degraded as it is,” Rutte said.
Q: Why did Trump break the nuclear treaty with Iran?
During Barack Obama's presidency in 2015, Iran and the United States, the U.K., France, China, Russia, Germany and the European Union agreed to ensure a peaceful nuclear program, and Iran agreed to limit its enrichment and uranium stockpiles in exchange for relief from many sanctions. In May 2018, Trump terminated U.S. participation in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, with Iran and re-imposed energy, petrochemical and financial sanctions lifted under the deal. At the time, he said, “The Iran Deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.”
Trump said that Iran in 2015 was not honest about its nuclear weapons activity, that the deal didn’t address the threat of Iran’s missile program and did not include a strong enough mechanism for inspections and verification. He also said that it gave the regime a cash windfall that it used on a military buildup and to fund terrorism proxies like Hamas.
President Joe Biden tried to revive U.S. participation during his term, but talks soon fizzled. The Trump administration was talking with Iran about a new deal before the 2026 strikes began.
Q: Why are Democrats, in large part, united in their opposition to this Iran incursion?
The Democratic opposition to the war falls into a few camps.
First, many believe there was no imminent danger to the United States, a prerequisite by law for the country to go to war without congressional approval. On those grounds, they opposed the war because they said it was illegal.
Secondly, many are worried the war will broadly destabilize the Middle East. They think Trump was mistakenly emboldened by his intervention in Venezuela. But the Middle East is a far trickier place, and a prolonged regional war there carries a specific set of dangers that are arguably greater.
No comments:
Post a Comment