Steve Bannon, a prominent figure in the MAGA movement and a close ally of former President Donald Trump, voiced his concerns on Monday about the potential for U.S. military involvement in Iran. This comes after Trump hinted at supporting regime change in the country, a significant pivot from prior administration statements. Bannon discussed these topics extensively during an episode of his podcast, "Bannon's War Room."

While Bannon commended Trump for the recent strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, he criticized the ongoing narrative of regime change. He argued that such a move contradicts the "America First" policy, which advocates for minimal foreign intervention. Bannon's comments highlighted a growing divide within the GOP, contrasting with figures like Senator Lindsey Graham who support more aggressive actions abroad.

Trump stirred controversy with a social media post on Sunday evening, where he suggested that if the current Iranian regime couldn't "MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN," a regime change might be warranted. This statement came after some of his senior officials had denied that regime change was an objective, leading to confusion and speculation about the administration's true goals.

Bannon praised the execution of the strike but expressed unease about the lack of immediate clarity on its success. He speculated this ambiguity could serve as a pretext for deploying U.S. troops to Iran. "What's that going to lead us to, folks? 'Hey, do we need the 75th Ranger Battalion to go in and find it?' Oh, it's coming. It's coming,” Bannon remarked, alluding to potential military escalation.

Furthermore, Bannon labeled the strike as possibly a "psy-op," suggesting that the administration's public goal of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities might be a facade for deeper military involvement. He firmly stated that if regime change is the ultimate objective, it should be pursued by Israel independently, without U.S. intervention.

Adding to the complexity, Bannon expressed disappointment with the Pentagon's handling of the post-strike narrative. He criticized military leadership for not immediately providing a damage assessment, which he believed could have shaped public perception and supported the administration's position more effectively.

As tensions continue to rise, Bannon's comments reflect a broader debate within American politics about the role of the U.S. in international conflicts, and whether an "America First" approach can coexist with the geopolitical realities of modern global relations.