America is barreling towards authoritarianism at such a breakneck pace that it should alarm every single one of us. But instead of meeting this moment with courage and integrity, the corporate media has utterly capitulated, stuffing money in Trump's pockets, spiking stories that might offend the regime, and firing journalists who refuse to go along and get along. That is not journalism. That’s complicity.
Our model of reader-funded journalism has survived for one reason only: people like you. Please help us with a gift of $8, $13, $27, $75, or whatever amount you can afford, which will help keep Common Dreams strong now and into the future.
Why Your Support Matters Now
Our model of reader-funded journalism has survived for one reason only: people like you. Please help us with a gift of $8, $13, $27, $75, or whatever amount you can afford, which will help keep Common Dreams strong now and into the future.
A man reads a newspaper as second round of indirect negotiations between Iran and the US in Geneva is widely covered in Iranian newspapers on February 17, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.
(Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Peace Campaigners Demand Congress Stop Trump From Waging ‘Devastating’ War on Iran
"Like the votes before the Iraq War, this could be one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions in a generation."
Anti-war groups are turning up the pressure on Congress to support a war powers resolution that would limit President Donald Trump's ability to wage war against Iran.
Amid reports that the US is rapidly mobilizing military hardware to the Middle East, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) announced on Wednesday that they'd attempt to force a House vote on a resolution that would prohibit Trump from striking Iran without congressional authorization.
According to a Thursday conversation between Drop Site News journalist Jeremy Scahill and Robert Malley, a former senior US Middle East envoy and lead negotiator of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Trump's intention to launch a US attack on Iran is nearly a forgone conclusion at this point.
"Part of the strategy being discussed within the administration," said Scahill, based on sources and conversations over recent months, is that Trump and his team are putting an "ultimatum on the table," but there's actually not a belief that a real negotiation over terms is taking place.
"It's not actually playing out in public this way," said Scahill, "but what I understand is that Trump's people are basically saying to the Iranians: 'We're not just going to deal with the nuclear [issues] here. This has to involve ballistic missile capacity. It has to involve your alliances with armed resistance groups [in places like Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and Gaza.]'"
"The Iranians have said these are red lines and they're not going to accept this," he continued. "So it seems like what's happening is that Trump is issuing an ultimatum, they know there is almost zero chance the Iranians are going to take it, and then they're going to bomb them. That's really what I'm hearing from inside sources."
Iran's response to Trump's bombing of three nuclear sites in June was measured, but Iranian officials have signaled they are not going to hold back in the event of a broader US strike.
Fouad Isadi, an Iranian professor with knowledge of the government's inner workings, told Scahill last month that in the event of a large-scale strike by Trump, the military was planning a retaliatory strike aimed at killing at least 500 US soldiers.
"We could see the Iranians really hit hard in a way that blows the Americans away on a psychological level and that Trump hasn't had to deal with before," Scahill said on Thursday. "I assume that President Trump's response would be even more enraged and even more brutal than anything one could imagine."
With hope for a deal between Trump and Iran dimming, anti-war groups are saying that Congress may be the only thing standing in the way of a massive conflict.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) urged Americans to contact their members of Congress to oppose what they called an "Israel First War on Iran," noting the heavy involvement of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in pressuring President Donald Trump to pursue an aggressive, uncompromising posture toward Iran.
“We call on all Americans to tell their members of Congress to oppose another US regime change war; we call on the media to ask the tough questions it failed to ask in the march to the Iraq invasion; and we call on the Trump administration to put American interests first—not the interests of Netanyahu’s rogue, warmongering government," CAIR wrote in a statement published Thursday.
The Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker group, told its followers to bombard Congress with messages, warning that "strikes on Iran risk widespread civilian suffering inside Iran and could ignite a catastrophic regional war."
Alix Fraser, vice president of the anti-corruption group Issue One, said Trump's threats to carry out "unilateral military action" against Iran "is not an isolated incident but part of a broader troubling pattern."
"Without consulting Congress, the administration is practicing gunboat diplomacy and has gone so far with it as to bring about regime change in Venezuela," Fraser said. "Rep. Khanna’s and Rep. Massie’s bipartisan war powers Resolution is a good first step, but the problem of Congress ceding its war powers goes back decades."
Medea Benjamin, founder of the anti-war women's group CodePink, said that "regardless of how you feel about Iran’s government, another war in the Middle East would be devastating and avoidable," and put US troops "at grave risk of retaliation."
"We've seen this before in Iraq. We can't let history repeat itself," she said. "The people of Iran, whether they like their government or detest it, are terrified of a US attack."
"Congress must act now," she added. "Like the votes before the Iraq War, this could be one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions in a generation."
The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets.
That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done.
Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good.
Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support.
That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you.
Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams?
Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most.
- Craig Brown, Co-founder
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Anti-war groups are turning up the pressure on Congress to support a war powers resolution that would limit President Donald Trump's ability to wage war against Iran.
Amid reports that the US is rapidly mobilizing military hardware to the Middle East, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) announced on Wednesday that they'd attempt to force a House vote on a resolution that would prohibit Trump from striking Iran without congressional authorization.
According to a Thursday conversation between Drop Site News journalist Jeremy Scahill and Robert Malley, a former senior US Middle East envoy and lead negotiator of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Trump's intention to launch a US attack on Iran is nearly a forgone conclusion at this point.
"Part of the strategy being discussed within the administration," said Scahill, based on sources and conversations over recent months, is that Trump and his team are putting an "ultimatum on the table," but there's actually not a belief that a real negotiation over terms is taking place.
"It's not actually playing out in public this way," said Scahill, "but what I understand is that Trump's people are basically saying to the Iranians: 'We're not just going to deal with the nuclear [issues] here. This has to involve ballistic missile capacity. It has to involve your alliances with armed resistance groups [in places like Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and Gaza.]'"
"The Iranians have said these are red lines and they're not going to accept this," he continued. "So it seems like what's happening is that Trump is issuing an ultimatum, they know there is almost zero chance the Iranians are going to take it, and then they're going to bomb them. That's really what I'm hearing from inside sources."
Iran's response to Trump's bombing of three nuclear sites in June was measured, but Iranian officials have signaled they are not going to hold back in the event of a broader US strike.
Fouad Isadi, an Iranian professor with knowledge of the government's inner workings, told Scahill last month that in the event of a large-scale strike by Trump, the military was planning a retaliatory strike aimed at killing at least 500 US soldiers.
"We could see the Iranians really hit hard in a way that blows the Americans away on a psychological level and that Trump hasn't had to deal with before," Scahill said on Thursday. "I assume that President Trump's response would be even more enraged and even more brutal than anything one could imagine."
With hope for a deal between Trump and Iran dimming, anti-war groups are saying that Congress may be the only thing standing in the way of a massive conflict.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) urged Americans to contact their members of Congress to oppose what they called an "Israel First War on Iran," noting the heavy involvement of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in pressuring President Donald Trump to pursue an aggressive, uncompromising posture toward Iran.
“We call on all Americans to tell their members of Congress to oppose another US regime change war; we call on the media to ask the tough questions it failed to ask in the march to the Iraq invasion; and we call on the Trump administration to put American interests first—not the interests of Netanyahu’s rogue, warmongering government," CAIR wrote in a statement published Thursday.
The Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker group, told its followers to bombard Congress with messages, warning that "strikes on Iran risk widespread civilian suffering inside Iran and could ignite a catastrophic regional war."
Alix Fraser, vice president of the anti-corruption group Issue One, said Trump's threats to carry out "unilateral military action" against Iran "is not an isolated incident but part of a broader troubling pattern."
"Without consulting Congress, the administration is practicing gunboat diplomacy and has gone so far with it as to bring about regime change in Venezuela," Fraser said. "Rep. Khanna’s and Rep. Massie’s bipartisan war powers Resolution is a good first step, but the problem of Congress ceding its war powers goes back decades."
Medea Benjamin, founder of the anti-war women's group CodePink, said that "regardless of how you feel about Iran’s government, another war in the Middle East would be devastating and avoidable," and put US troops "at grave risk of retaliation."
"We've seen this before in Iraq. We can't let history repeat itself," she said. "The people of Iran, whether they like their government or detest it, are terrified of a US attack."
"Congress must act now," she added. "Like the votes before the Iraq War, this could be one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions in a generation."
Stephen Prager is a staff writer for Common Dreams.
Anti-war groups are turning up the pressure on Congress to support a war powers resolution that would limit President Donald Trump's ability to wage war against Iran.
Amid reports that the US is rapidly mobilizing military hardware to the Middle East, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) announced on Wednesday that they'd attempt to force a House vote on a resolution that would prohibit Trump from striking Iran without congressional authorization.
According to a Thursday conversation between Drop Site News journalist Jeremy Scahill and Robert Malley, a former senior US Middle East envoy and lead negotiator of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Trump's intention to launch a US attack on Iran is nearly a forgone conclusion at this point.
"Part of the strategy being discussed within the administration," said Scahill, based on sources and conversations over recent months, is that Trump and his team are putting an "ultimatum on the table," but there's actually not a belief that a real negotiation over terms is taking place.
"It's not actually playing out in public this way," said Scahill, "but what I understand is that Trump's people are basically saying to the Iranians: 'We're not just going to deal with the nuclear [issues] here. This has to involve ballistic missile capacity. It has to involve your alliances with armed resistance groups [in places like Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and Gaza.]'"
"The Iranians have said these are red lines and they're not going to accept this," he continued. "So it seems like what's happening is that Trump is issuing an ultimatum, they know there is almost zero chance the Iranians are going to take it, and then they're going to bomb them. That's really what I'm hearing from inside sources."
Iran's response to Trump's bombing of three nuclear sites in June was measured, but Iranian officials have signaled they are not going to hold back in the event of a broader US strike.
Fouad Isadi, an Iranian professor with knowledge of the government's inner workings, told Scahill last month that in the event of a large-scale strike by Trump, the military was planning a retaliatory strike aimed at killing at least 500 US soldiers.
"We could see the Iranians really hit hard in a way that blows the Americans away on a psychological level and that Trump hasn't had to deal with before," Scahill said on Thursday. "I assume that President Trump's response would be even more enraged and even more brutal than anything one could imagine."
With hope for a deal between Trump and Iran dimming, anti-war groups are saying that Congress may be the only thing standing in the way of a massive conflict.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) urged Americans to contact their members of Congress to oppose what they called an "Israel First War on Iran," noting the heavy involvement of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in pressuring President Donald Trump to pursue an aggressive, uncompromising posture toward Iran.
“We call on all Americans to tell their members of Congress to oppose another US regime change war; we call on the media to ask the tough questions it failed to ask in the march to the Iraq invasion; and we call on the Trump administration to put American interests first—not the interests of Netanyahu’s rogue, warmongering government," CAIR wrote in a statement published Thursday.
The Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker group, told its followers to bombard Congress with messages, warning that "strikes on Iran risk widespread civilian suffering inside Iran and could ignite a catastrophic regional war."
Alix Fraser, vice president of the anti-corruption group Issue One, said Trump's threats to carry out "unilateral military action" against Iran "is not an isolated incident but part of a broader troubling pattern."
"Without consulting Congress, the administration is practicing gunboat diplomacy and has gone so far with it as to bring about regime change in Venezuela," Fraser said. "Rep. Khanna’s and Rep. Massie’s bipartisan war powers Resolution is a good first step, but the problem of Congress ceding its war powers goes back decades."
Medea Benjamin, founder of the anti-war women's group CodePink, said that "regardless of how you feel about Iran’s government, another war in the Middle East would be devastating and avoidable," and put US troops "at grave risk of retaliation."
"We've seen this before in Iraq. We can't let history repeat itself," she said. "The people of Iran, whether they like their government or detest it, are terrified of a US attack."
"Congress must act now," she added. "Like the votes before the Iraq War, this could be one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions in a generation."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
