Trump dismisses GOP critics as ‘losers’ over warnings his Iran ceasefire deal is a disastrous error

(SeaPRwire) –   President Donald Trump’s developing agreement to end the Iran war is facing significant opposition from some fellow Republicans who advocate for a more assertive stance against Tehran and believe a crucial opportunity to curb the long-standing Middle East adversary is being missed.

The deal, which the Republican president stated was “largely negotiated,” has prompted various lawmakers, former Cabinet officials, and conservative commentators to question whether the known terms will render the conflict “for naught.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, characterized the president’s decision to engage Iran as the “most consequential” of his second term and urged him not to relent.

“If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime — still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’ — now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,” Cruz posted on the social media platform X on Saturday. This statement followed Trump’s update after discussions with leaders from Israel and other U.S. allies in the region.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who maintains a close relationship with Trump, criticized any agreement that would allow Iran to be perceived as a dominant regional power and retain its capacity to damage oil infrastructure across the Gulf.

Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed doubts about the value of a proposed 60-day ceasefire, calling it a “disaster.”

“Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!” Wicker, R-Miss., stated.

Trump says it will take time to ‘get it right’

Trump, who asserts he only makes favorable deals and dislikes appearing to be at a disadvantage in negotiations, dismissed the criticisms, noting that the deal was “not even fully negotiated yet.”

“So don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about,” he commented on his social media platform.

Trump explained that the agreement he and his representatives are working towards is “THE EXACT OPPOSITE” of the nuclear accord Iran entered into during the Democratic Obama administration, an agreement from which Trump withdrew and has been seeking to replace.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!” Trump declared.

He also confirmed that a U.S. military blockade of Iranian ports would continue “in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.”

Some support for Trump’s approach emerged from Capitol Hill.

GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, often at odds with the president, defended the White House’s strategy.

“War virtually always ends with negotiations,” Paul wrote on X. “Critics of President Trump’s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.”

According to regional officials who spoke with The Associated Press on Sunday, the proposed plan would end the war, with Iran reopening the strait and relinquishing its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, with specific details and timelines to be determined within a subsequent 60-day period.

Critics air objections as details trickle out

Polls indicate that the war, initiated by the United States and Israel’s attack on Iran on February 28, is unpopular with the American public and has cost U.S. taxpayers at least $29 billion as of this month, with thirteen service members killed during the operation.

Trump had initially projected the war would conclude within four to six weeks, but the standoff persists. Iran’s closure of the strait, a vital waterway for approximately 20% of global energy supplies, has disrupted the global economy and led to increased prices for gasoline and other goods.

Mike Pompeo, who served as Secretary of State under Trump’s first term, stated on Saturday that the emerging deal appeared identical to the Obama-era agreement from which Trump had withdrawn.

“Not remotely America First,” Pompeo posted on X, eliciting a strongly worded response from Steven Cheung, the White House director of communications.

John Bolton, a former national security adviser who has become a critic of the president, suggested that the details of the emerging plan seemed to benefit the Iranian government.

“If news reports about the impending Iran deal are correct, the ayatollahs will have won a significant victory,” Bolton wrote on X on Sunday. “They will be back on the road to nuclear weapons, supporting global terrorism and repressing their own people.”

Rubio says a nuclear Iran is ‘not going to happen’

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking to reporters during a diplomatic visit to India on Sunday, asserted that no president had taken a stronger stance against Iran than Trump.

“His commitment to that principle that they’ll never have a nuclear weapon shouldn’t be questioned by anybody,” Rubio stated. “And the idea that somehow this president, given everything he’s already proven he’s willing to do, is going to somehow agree to a deal that ultimately winds up putting Iran in a stronger position when it comes to nuclear ambitions is absurd. That’s just not going to happen.”

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a vocal opponent of Trump who had sponsored legislation to limit the president’s war-making authority against Iran, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that while the terms are not fully disclosed, “if Lindsey Graham and Ted Cuz are crashing out last night, I’d say it’s probably a pretty good deal.”

Massie will be departing Congress in January after facing opposition from Trump and losing his GOP primary last week to a candidate endorsed by Trump.