A report by Axios on Tuesday detailed that Congress members are torn over which course of action the US should take following the death of three American soldiers in a US military base in Jordan last week.

This comes as US President Joe Biden recently announced that the US "shall respond," yet how exactly it will do so and the extent of US involvement is up to debate. 

Some Republicans harshly criticized Biden for limiting US actions to targeting resistance groups, and advocated instead for direct aggressions on the Axis of Resistance forces, with some going as far as suggesting nuking Iran.

This idea was however met with mixed response by several lawmakers, including Republicans. 

"My concern here is that people will say things in the 24-hour news environment and then recognize they have a 20-year commitment on the back-end that they aren't prepared to fully execute on," said Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa).

Read more: Iran strongly denies baseless US claims of involvement in Jordan op.

Dismissing calls for an attack on Iran from fellow Republicans, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) told Axios: "Same guys, same note, different place. They play the same song over and over again."

Even hawkish lawmakers like Rep. Michael McCaul stop short of endorsing an attack inside Iran. Instead, he advocates for US forces to go after IRGC forces in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, all while not discarding the option of hitting Iran directly. 

More Intel required

Certain lawmakers have refrained from commenting until they receive more intelligence on the resistance operation on Tower 22, with both House and Senate members requesting briefings from the administration.

The House Intelligence Committee is scheduled for a pre-planned briefing on the Middle East and Ukraine, which is anticipated to cover details of the Jordan attack.

The briefing, set for Tuesday afternoon, will be presented by Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines and CIA Director William Burns.

This disagreement over the administration's response is embedded within a larger discussion on presidential war powers, raising questions about whether President Biden should seek congressional authorization for an expanding campaign of airstrikes.

Read more: Resistance groups respond independently to Gaza genocide: Iran

Some lawmakers, like Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), advocate for a clear congressional vote on deploying troops or launching missiles into Iran.

"I might lose the vote, but this body ought to vote straight up or down: Are we going to be putting our troops in harm's way? Are we going to fire a missile into Iran?" he said.

Others point out to a time limit to the president's authority for such strikes and that it's nearing the point where Congress should be involved, as argued by Rep.Jason Crow (D-Colo.).

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) takes a different stance, arguing against seeking congressional approval.

"This is not war, we're not declaring war. These are tactical strikes. ... All presidents need the ability to protect our military abroad without coming to a place that can't pass a bill anymore," he said.