As Donald Trump considers a direct intervention in Israel’s conflict with Iran, another war has broken out in Washington between conservative hawks, calling for immediate US strikes on uranium enrichment facilities, and Maga isolationists, who are demanding Trump stick to his campaign pledge not to involve the US in new overseas wars.

At stake is whether the US could target the mountain redoubt that is home to the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, a key uranium enrichment site hidden 80 to 90 metres underground that cannot be targeted directly by Israeli jets – although they can attack some of the infrastructure that allows the plant to operate.

A direct strike would require the US Air Force’s 30,000-pound class GBU-57/B massive ordinance penetrators and the US B-2 Stealth Bombers capable of carrying them, making Washington’s sign-on a key goal for Israeli officials.

“Mr Trump posted on social media Sunday that ‘we can easily get a deal done’ to end the war,” read a Wall Street Journal editorial this week. “But that prospect will be more likely if he helps Israel finish the military job.

“If Mr Trump won’t help on Fordow, Israel will need more time to achieve its strategic goals,” it went on. “A neutral US means a longer war.”

Over the weekend, the US began to move airborne refuelling tankers to Europe and ordered a second carrier group, the USS Nimitz, to the Middle East, part of preparations experts say would be necessary for the strike. The US does not currently have B-2 bombers stationed in the region. A deployment of six stealth bombers returned from the Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean to the US in May.

“Trump’s assembling the forces necessary to do the Fordow strike,” wrote Daniel Shapiro, a former Pentagon official for Middle Eastern affairs and ex-ambassador to Israel. “Tankers, fighters, and the second carrier. Doesn’t mean he has made the decision to do it but he’s giving himself the option. Can that be leveraged to get a major Iranian concession that pre-empts the need for it?”

Senior White House officials have told US media that the refuelling tankers and other assets have been sent to Europe to station them closer to the Middle East and to give Trump “more options”.

As US forces head to the region, Trump increased pressure on the Iranian government to cut a deal. On Monday, he posted that Iran “should have signed the deal I told them to sign” and reiterated that “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON”.

“Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” he added, referring to a city of about 10 million people.

Other US officials have sought to dampen speculation that the US is planning for an offensive strike on Iran.

“Over the weekend, I directed the deployment of additional capabilities to the United States Central Command Area of Responsibility,” said the secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, in a statement. “Protecting US forces is our top priority and these deployments are intended to enhance our defensive posture in there region.”

Reports have suggested that Trump is seeking last-minute talks this week between Iran and his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

But the escalating conflict – and America’s possible role in it – has already led to a schism among vocal Trump supporters.

Some of Trump’s most powerful allies, including his vice-president, JD Vance, have called for the US to restrain itself from sending its troops to fight wars overseas. Powerful pundits like Tucker Carlson have condemned the potential for US involvement in a war in Iran.

Speaking on a podcast, Carlson called out fellow media personalities as “warmongers” and said that description “would include anyone who’s calling Donald Trump today to demand airstrikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran”.

Trump took to social media to shout down Carlson, an influential ally and media personality who played an important role in popularising his America First platform.

“Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON,” Trump shot back.

The schism among Trump officials also runs through the Pentagon. Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary of defense for policy, is among the most prominent of a group of “prioritisers” who had hoped to focus US resources away from Europe and the Middle East towards the growing threat from China. The Pentagon has denied there are any disagreements on policy within the department.

Those close to the group have said that traditional republicans such as Senator Tom Cotton, as well as senior Pentagon officials like Centcom Gen Michael Erik Kurilla, have continued to impress upon Trump the need for a more hawkish Iran policy.

Kurilla was seen as especially influential in pushing for “Operation Rough Rider”, the seven-week US campaign against the Houthis that was abruptly concluded after burning through more than $1bn, thousands of bombs and missiles, seven UAVs that were shot down and two fighter jets that sank after falling off carriers.

Asked last week by the House armed services chair, Mike Rogers, whether US Central Command (Centcom) was prepared to “respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran”, Kurilla responded: “Yes … I have provided the secretary of defense and the president a wide range of options.”

With Trump rushing back to Washington from a G7 meeting in Canada to an emergency national security council meeting, the potential for a strike against Iran appeared as high as at any time since the beginning of the crisis.

“What’s happening here is some of the isolationist movement led by Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon are distressed we may be helping the Israelis defeat the Iranians,” Mitch McConnell, the former Senate Republican leader, told CNN. “I would say it’s been kind of a bad week for the isolationists.”