From The New York Times:

That Mr. Trump declared the Iranian nuclear program “obliterated” by the strike in June — a claim belied by both U.S. intelligence and this new attack — underscores how little regard Mr. Trump has for his duty to tell the truth when committing American armed forces to battle. It also shows how little faith American citizens should place in his assurances about the goals and results of his growing list of military adventures.

Two things can be true at once: Iran’s leadership is genuinely awful, and it is not the United States’ legal or moral prerogative to remove them by force. Sovereignty isn’t a courtesy we extend to governments we like. It’s the foundational principle of international law, and unilaterally deciding to bomb a country into regime change violates it regardless of how “evil” that regime is.

The case for this attack has never cleared that bar. The stated justifications – to the extent they exist at all – range from strategically dubious to shifting like sand to justify the argument of the day. Whether the bombing campaign succeeds or fails, the cascading consequences – regional destabilization, retaliatory escalation, a power vacuum with no clear successor – are problems the U.S. has neither the plan nor the capacity to manage. This is a war of choice, launched without legal authority, against a country that did not attack us.

Opposing it doesn’t require sympathy for the Iranian regime. It requires recognizing that “they’re bad” has never been a sufficient justification for war.