President Trump is reportedly growing frustrated with the limits of military options against Iran, sources familiar with the matter said. Officials say limited strikes may not achieve decisive results and could risk a broader conflict in the Middle East. Unlike previous targeted actions, such as the removal of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, any strike on Tehran is unlikely to be a single, decisive move. Military planners have warned that limited action could escalate into a prolonged engagement, drawing the U.S. deeper into regional conflict. In response to media reports, Mr. Trump denied that General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opposed a military strike. He said Caine "would like not to see war, but if a decision is made, it will be easily won." The president added that Caine knows "how to WIN" and would lead if ordered to act. A senior military official told sources that planners are providing unbiased advice. The White House referred media inquiries to Mr. Trump’s statements on social media. At the center of Trump’s frustration is a desire for a strong military move that could reshape diplomatic negotiations. He has sought options for a forceful strike that could pressure Iran into talks favorable to Washington. Military advisors caution, however, that such an outcome cannot be guaranteed. In private briefings, Caine has highlighted the risks of a sustained campaign. Potential consequences include retaliation by Iran and allied proxies against U.S. forces and allies. He warned that a conflict could become extended, requiring additional American troops and resources. Special envoy Steve Witkoff noted that Trump is "curious" why Iran has not yet capitulated. He questioned why Iran has not accepted U.S. pressure despite American naval and military presence in the region. The U.S. has recently strengthened its military posture across the Persian Gulf. The USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group is moving into range of Iranian territory, joining the USS Abraham Lincoln group and regional aircraft squadrons. Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems have been reinforced to protect U.S. personnel and allies. Pentagon officials say the deployments are defensive and meant to deter escalation. Yet, the scale of the buildup signals that any strike would likely provoke retaliation. This could include missile attacks, maritime harassment in the Strait of Hormuz, or proxy attacks in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere. The tension inside the White House reflects a clash between political goals and military reality. While Trump seeks a dramatic show of force to strengthen his negotiating position, commanders stress that wars rarely follow plans. Even targeted strikes can have unpredictable outcomes. For now, the U.S. continues to build up military assets while refining contingency plans. Whether this posture leads to a limited strike or remains purely deterrent depends on Tehran’s next actions and Washington’s willingness to assume risk.