Senator Rand Paul has voiced strong opposition to President Donald Trump’s recent threats of military action against Iran, cautioning that such intervention could backfire and potentially undermine the ongoing protest movement in the Middle Eastern nation.

Speaking on ABC’s “This Week,” the Kentucky Republican expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of potential U.S. military strikes against Iran, where widespread protests have erupted in recent weeks over economic hardships and government policies.

“I don’t think I have ever heard a president say they may take military action to protect protesters,” Paul said. “We wish freedom and liberation the best across the world, but I don’t think it’s the job of the American government to be involved with every freedom movement around the world.”

Paul raised practical concerns about how U.S. forces could effectively target Iranian authorities without harming civilians. “How do you drop a bomb in the middle of a crowd or a protest and protect the people there?” he questioned.

The senator warned that military intervention could inadvertently strengthen the Iranian regime by unifying citizens against foreign aggression. “If you bomb the government, do you then rally people to their flag who are upset with the Ayatollah, but then say, ‘Well, gosh, we can’t have a foreign government invading or bombing our country?'” Paul explained. “It tends to have people rally to the cause.”

Iran has been experiencing intensifying protests in recent weeks, with demonstrations shifting from economic grievances to broader demands for regime change. Reports suggest thousands have been arrested, while monitoring groups have struggled to confirm casualties due to internet blackouts imposed by Iranian authorities. The Associated Press has reported that more than 500 people have been killed.

Trump has taken an increasingly confrontational stance toward Iran’s leadership. On Friday, he warned Iranian leaders that they “better not start shooting, because we’ll start shooting, too.” The former president later wrote on Truth Social: “Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before. The USA stands ready to help!!!”

Paul emphasized that presidential military action requires congressional approval, referencing constitutional limitations on executive power. “There is this sticking point of the Constitution that we won’t let presidents bomb countries just when they feel like it,” Paul said. “They’re supposed to ask the people, through the Congress, for permission.”

This is not the first time Paul has opposed Trump’s military interventions. The senator recently helped advance a Senate resolution aimed at limiting Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela following U.S. military strikes intended to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

“I think bombing a capital and removing the head of state is, by all definitions, war,” Paul told reporters last week. He questioned whether such precedent gives the president “carte blanche” to “invade a foreign country and remove people that we’ve accused of a crime.”

Paul has also criticized the administration’s strikes on vessels near Venezuela allegedly carrying narco-terrorists, raising concerns about due process violations and the risk of harming innocent civilians. He previously cited Coast Guard statistics indicating that a significant percentage of boats boarded on suspicion of drug trafficking are ultimately found to be innocent.

The senator’s opposition highlights growing tension within Republican ranks over foreign policy approaches, particularly regarding military intervention and the constitutional balance of war powers between the executive and legislative branches.