President Trump's war in Iran is not illegal (or immoral) as many political pundits will have the US population believe. Are those pundits suppressing information or ignorant of information? Trump has all the credibility he has needed to wage war in Iran under the War Powers Act (1973). The Act has both an assessment of legality and a time limit: "Armed forces cannot remain engaged for more than 60 days without congressional authorization or a declaration of war, with an additional 30-day withdrawal period allowed for safe disengagement."

The Democratic politicians suppressed the War Powers Act information during the entire actual period of the war with Iran. Not until Trump's ceasefire and subsequent negotiations for peace reached the 60-day limit of the Act did the liberal political pundits and politicians cite the time limit of the Act, all the while suppressing the legality of Trump's Iranian War.

Where was the outcry from the Democratic pundits when President Obama used the same War Powers Act to depose Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddifi? Obama waged war on Gaddafi in 2011 for humanitarian reasons. The Arab Spring uprisings challenged the four-decade rule of Gaddafi. As the uprisings spread to Libya, Gaddafi pledged to show no mercy to his opponents, threatening mass violence against the civilian population. Hence, Obama's military action against Gaddafi via the Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

Notice how when House Minority leader Hakeem Jeffries was questioned on Obama's war to depose Gaddafi, in comparison to Trump's war to depose Iran's dictator regime, Jeffries summed up incredulously: "That was then, this is now." Partisan politics for sure.

President Trump's military action in Iran has much greater significance and credibility than Obama's military action in Libya. Iran is the world's largest source of state-sponsored terrorism. Since 1979, Iran and its proxies in the Middle East have killed around 1,000 Americans abroad. This is besides the fact that an Iranian official recently admitted to U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff they were very close to attaining nuclear warhead capabilities. Trump is the first U.S. president to not bluff about Iran never possessing nuclear weapons.

Trump's war with Iran is neither illegal nor immoral. The Constitution doesn't have a justified-war definition. But the Catholic Catechism does. Catechism Paragraph # 2309:

1. "The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave and certain." Iran's ayatollahs are serious when they lead in chanting "Death to America" and have succeeded in killing around 1,000 Americans abroad.

2. "All other means of putting an end to it (hostilities) must have shown to be impractical or ineffective." For 47 years, no U.S. president could broker peace or compliance from Iran.

3. "There must be serious prospects of success." The evidence of having decimated Iran's navy and air force, while ruling Iranian airspace indicates the actual warfare's end is in sight.

4. "The use of arms must not produce evil and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated." The gravity of Iran's known evil is a bigger threat to the USA than even China is at this point in time.

President Trump could soon be opening a new world order—the capturing of President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela on federal charges of drug-trafficking into the U.S., the bombing and obliterating of Iran's theocratic regime because of its murderous terrorism inflicted on American citizens and forces abroad and the potential neutralizing of Cuba's one-party system, the Communist Party of Cuba. As Commander in Chief, Trump has broad authority over military operations. The Founding Fathers adopted the term "Commander in Chief" to ensure civilian control over the military and prevent the concentration of power seen in monarchies or military dictatorships.

As president, Trump is not exactly utilizing the Monroe Doctrine (1823) to preserve American sovereignty in our hemisphere. His recent efforts outside America can be called the Donroe Doctrine. There are parallels to President James Monroe's doctrine in what Trump has undertaken to protect American interests here and abroad. The original intent of Monroe's doctrine (it wasn't named after him until 1850) was to prevent further intervention (colonization) by Western Europe into the political affairs of the Americas (North and South) while promising U.S. non-intervention into European affairs—because at the time Western Europe was still colonizing the Americas and threatening the western continental expansion of the United States.

As president, Monroe asserted that the New World and the Old World were to remain distinctly separate spheres of influence. This is not much different from Trump's aggression against the Venezuelan, Iranian, and Cuban dictatorships. Although not exactly New World versus Old World, it can be seen what Trump's point for military action amounts to. These autocratic rulers are hell-bent on the demise (death) of America by a "thousand cuts" without ceasing 'till successful. It's the Christian worldview mentality of the Western World that riles these autocrats. Include China, North Korea, and somewhat Russia as co-haters of our Christian-worldview mentality.