Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Friday publicly challenged Vice President JD Vance’s assertion that the ongoing U.S. military confrontation with Iran does not constitute a “war,” invoking the deaths of 19 American service members and what he described as thousands of other people killed across the region since fighting began in late February. Sanders’ post on X came roughly 24 hours after Vance told reporters at a White House press briefing that he “wouldn’t call it a war,” a remark that has drawn sustained criticism from Democratic lawmakers as the conflict stretches past the six-month mark with no publicly stated end date.
Sanders: “Please Explain That to the Families”
Sanders posted the statement on X at 2:42 p.m. on Sept. 4, responding directly to a video clip of Vance’s exchange with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins. The senator’s post read in its entirety:
“JD Vance said what’s happening in Iran is not a ‘war.’ Please explain that to the families of the 19 U.S. service members who lost their lives or the thousands of people who have been killed across the region.”
The Vance Exchange That Prompted the Response
Sanders’ post was a direct reply to a clip captioned: “COLLINS: Will this war be over by the midterm elections? JD VANCE: I wouldn’t call it a war.” The exchange took place during a White House press briefing on Sept. 3, Vance’s first appearance at the podium since former press secretary Karoline Leavitt departed the administration last month. Asked whether the conflict would be resolved before the Nov. 3 midterm elections, Vance told reporters, “I wouldn’t call it a war. Right now, there is no active shooting. I recognize there have been places where this has flared up.” He said “major combat operations lasted for about six weeks,” during which the U.S. “destroyed their nuclear facilities with Midnight Hammer” and, through Operation Epic Fury, “destroyed their defense industrial base for producing weapons and also a lot of their conventional military.”
Vance Declined to Set Any Timeline for an End
Pressed further by Collins on when the fighting might conclude, Vance said the more relevant question was “when will the Iranians stop shooting at ships,” adding, “I don’t know the answer to that question. You would have to ask the Iranians.” He said the administration would not “depend on the Iranians behaving responsibly or negotiating in good faith,” and that setting any fixed deadline — whether three days or three months — would be “irresponsible” given continued Iranian attacks on commercial shipping. “The United States is the only country with the capability to ensure that those oil and gas ships get to market,” Vance said. “It would be irresponsible for us to write out our strategy and our timeline for an Iranian nation that simply cannot honor its commitments and cannot stop shooting at commercial ships.”
Sanders Has Opposed the Conflict Since Its Opening Hours
Sanders’ latest statement extends a position he staked out on the day the conflict began. On Feb. 28, hours after the U.S. and Israel launched what the Trump administration named Operation Epic Fury, Sanders released a statement calling the strikes “an illegal, premeditated and unconstitutional war,” accusing President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “gambling with American lives and treasure.” Sanders argued that “the U.S. Constitution is clear. It is the Congress that declares war, not a president acting unilaterally,” and called on the Senate to “reconvene immediately and vote on a pending War Powers Resolution,” which he said he would support.
Bipartisan War Powers Resolution Failed in March
The Senate did take up a bipartisan War Powers Resolution, led by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.), on March 4. The measure, which would have ended U.S. military participation in hostilities against Iran absent congressional authorization, was blocked by Senate Republicans. Fellow Vermont Sen. Peter Welch, who voted for the resolution, said afterward there was “absolutely no coherent rationale that the president has offered for the end game of this war against Iran.”
Casualty Reporting Has Been a Recurring Flashpoint
The number of American service members killed cited in Sanders’ post reflects a toll that has grown steadily since the conflict’s start. Department of Defense casualty announcements tracked through mid-March put the death toll at a minimum of 13, including six service members killed in a March 1 drone strike on a command center in Port Shuaiba, Kuwait, and six others who died when a refueling aircraft crashed in Iraq on March 12. Additional deaths, including that of Army Sgt. Benjamin N. Pennington, who died of wounds on March 8 after an enemy attack on Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, have continued to be added to the Pentagon’s count in the months since.
Civilian Death Toll Also Cited by Other Lawmakers
Sanders’ reference to “thousands” of people killed across the region aligns with figures cited by other members of Congress in recent months. A group of more than 40 Senate Democrats, led by Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Kaine and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), wrote to the Pentagon in March citing data from the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency showing more than 1,245 civilians killed and over 12,000 injured in Iran as of March 10. That letter followed a Feb. 28 strike on a girls’ elementary school near Minab, Iran, which senators including Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) said had killed at least 175 people, “most of whom were school children.”
Vance Has Long Argued the U.S. Is Not “At War” With Iran
Friday’s dispute is not the first time Vance has drawn a distinction between military strikes on Iran and a formal state of war. In June 2025, following the original strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites under Operation Midnight Hammer, Vance told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “we’re not at war with Iran. We’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program.” Months earlier, in February 2026, Vance told The Washington Post there was “no chance” the U.S. would be drawn into a prolonged Middle East war, saying, “I think we all prefer the diplomatic option, but it really depends on what the Iranians do and what they say.” Strikes on Iran began days later.
Combat Has Continued Intermittently for More Than Six Months
The conflict Vance downplayed on Thursday has not followed the short timeline officials initially suggested. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared in an April 8 Pentagon briefing that the U.S. and Israel had achieved “every single objective on plan, on schedule,” but a ceasefire negotiated by Vance in the following months collapsed after roughly two weeks, and strikes resumed in the days before his Sept. 3 briefing, including U.S. strikes on Iranian positions near the Strait of Hormuz. Vance acknowledged during the briefing that the administration was investigating reports that a recent U.S. strike had killed four people at a wedding celebration near the strait, without ruling out that civilians had been killed.
Oil Markets and Shipping Remain Disrupted
The economic consequences of the continued fighting have also drawn scrutiny. Brent crude traded above $91.50 a barrel on Sept. 3, up nearly 9% for the week, following renewed strikes and Iranian retaliatory action against Jordan and Bahrain. The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s most recent Short-Term Energy Outlook, published Aug. 11, estimated that crude and petroleum liquids transported through the Strait of Hormuz averaged 4.9 million barrels per day in the second quarter of 2026, down from 21.6 million barrels per day in the final quarter of 2025, before the conflict began.
IAEA Says It Cannot Verify Iran’s Nuclear Material
Independent confirmation of the strikes’ effect on Iran’s nuclear program has remained elusive. According to a February 2026 IAEA Board of Governors report, the agency’s last confirmed estimate, from June 2025, placed Iran’s total enriched uranium stockpile near 9,875 kilograms. The IAEA has said it cannot verify the current location, status or chemical form of that material after Iran suspended the agency’s site access and removed monitoring equipment. A Congressional Research Service brief prepared for lawmakers similarly noted that “the extent to which these attacks… affected Iran’s ability to produce nuclear weapons is unclear.”
Sanders Has a History of Opposing Iran-Related Military Escalation
Sanders’ Friday statement builds on a long-running record of opposition to U.S. military action against Iran. In January, he introduced the “No War Against Iran Act” alongside Sens. Peter Welch, Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), which sought to bar Pentagon funding for military action against Iran absent congressional authorization. At the time, Sanders said, “The American people are sick and tired of endless wars,” adding that “we must never forget that under our Constitution, Congress has the responsibility for making war — not the president.”
No Immediate Response From Vance’s Office
Neither Vance’s office nor the White House had issued a public response to Sanders’ Friday post as of publication. The exchange adds to a broader pattern of Democratic criticism directed at Vance and the Trump administration’s handling of the Iran conflict as the Nov. 3 midterm elections approach, with lawmakers including Sanders, Welch and Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) repeatedly pressing the administration to define its objectives and provide Congress a role in authorizing continued military action.