Senate Republicans are counseling President TrumpDonald John TrumpBusiness, ballots and battling opioids: Why the Universal Postal Union benefits the US Sanders supporters cry foul over Working Families endorsement of Warren California poll: Biden, Sanders lead Democratic field; Harris takes fifth MORE to further analyze the attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities before responding, suggesting a wariness for U.S. military action against Iran.

“We’re not anywhere near that point,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim RischJames (Jim) Elroy RischTrump at a pivotal crossroads on Iran Overnight Defense: Trump says he doesn’t want war with Iran | Pentagon chief calls attack on Saudi oil facilities ‘unprecedented’ | Administration weighs response | 17th US service member killed in Afghanistan this year Bolton exit provokes questions about Trump shift on Iran MORE (R-Idaho) said Tuesday when asked if he’d support a military strike. “We’re still in the analysis situation. The briefing book that’s been put together lays out the facts, and it’s only after the facts are looked at, analyzed, conclusions reached that decisions will be made.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The comments Tuesday came as the Trump administration provided senators a briefing book on the attacks to review inside a secure room in the Senate basement and as Vice President Pence briefed Republicans on the situation at their weekly caucus lunch.

Senators also expect a closed-door briefing as soon as Wednesday, though it has not been officially announced.

Trump over the weekend raised the prospect of a U.S. military response to attacks on Saudi oil infrastructure by tweeting that the United States was “locked and loaded” and only waiting for more information from the Saudis. He appeared to step back on Monday, telling reporters that he would “certainly like to avoid” war.

Saturday’s attacks on the Khurais oil field and Abqaiq oil processing plant have shut off half of the kingdom’s oil exports, or 5 percent of the world’s supply.

Administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump heads to California Pence says US is ‘locked and loaded’ to defend allies US-Iran next moves — Déjà vu of Obama administration mistakes? MORE, have directly blamed Iran despite the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen taking responsibility.

Trump on Monday refrained from definitively blaming Iran, but said it was “certainly looking” like Iran was responsible.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford told reporters traveling with him in London on Tuesday that the attack was not consistent with previous Houthi attacks in its complexity and precision.

U.S. Central Command is providing the Saudis with forensic expertise as they investigate, said Dunford, who downplayed the possibility of quick military action.

“The president has made it clear he is not looking to go to war,” Dunford said, according to The Washington Post. “Having said that, what we saw was an unacceptable act of aggression. There are a number of ways to deal with that.”

Pompeo departed Tuesday for a trip to Saudi Arabia to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the State Department said. The two are set to discuss the attack and “coordinate efforts to counter Iranian aggression in the region.”

Pence in an address at the Heritage Foundation echoed Trump’s “locked and loaded” remark.

“In the wake of this unprovoked attack, I promise you, we’re ready,” he said. “We’re locked and loaded, and we’re ready to defend the interests of our allies. Make no mistake about it.”

Pence’s message to Republican senators later Tuesday was the need for the United States to “restore deterrence,” but he did not discuss military options, Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamWe’ve lost sight of the real scandal The Hill’s Morning Report – What is Trump’s next move on Iran? The Memo: Times correction gives GOP lifeline in latest Kavanaugh controversy MORE (R-S.C.) told reporters afterward.

Graham has been advocating for a strike on Iranian oil refineries as a reciprocal response, arguing that Trump’s decision to call off a strike in June after Iran shot down a U.S. drone because of concerns about casualties was interpreted by Tehran as weakness.

“Now it’s time to punch them in the face,” Graham said Tuesday. “I’m all for the analysis. Who likes war? Nobody. But you know, that’s what happened in the ’20s and ’30s, nobody wanted to do a damn thing about aggressive behavior coming from evil people. The Iranian regime is pure evil, and their aggressive behavior has no limits.”

Graham added the response should be a “regional approach,” while sidestepping a question on whether the United States should take the lead by saying he would see what Pompeo and military leaders suggest.

Sen. Marco RubioMarco Antonio RubioCalifornia poll: Biden, Sanders lead Democratic field; Harris takes fifth The 13 Republicans needed to pass gun-control legislation GOP group’s ad calls on Graham to push for election security: ‘Are you still trying?’ MORE (R-Fla.), meanwhile, said he would “potentially” support a U.S. military response.

“It depends about whether it’s part of an overall coherent strategy going forward,” Rubio continued. “I certainly support defending our assets in the region.”

Other Republicans were less inclined to back military action, even as they said the intelligence they reviewed shows Iran was most likely or definitely behind Saturday’s attacks.

“That’d be a good question for Saudi Arabia whether they’re at war with Iran, but they didn’t attack us,” said Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulRand Paul: Almost every mass shooter ‘is sending off signals’ Liz Cheney says world is more stable, ‘safer’ under Trump Sunday shows preview: Democratic candidates make the rounds after debate MORE (R-Ky.), an isolationist who has been fighting hawkish Republicans recently over who aligns more with Trump.

Paul stressed the situation should be thoroughly investigated to determine whether responsibility lies with the Iranian government or a proxy group that acts more independently.

“There’s a lot of questions to ask, and I think we need to see how the investigation goes. Even Saudi Arabia says they’re still investigating it,” he added.

Sen. Ron JohnsonRonald (Ron) Harold JohnsonDemocratic senator warns O’Rourke AR-15 pledge could haunt party for years Conservatives offer stark warning to Trump, GOP on background checks Hillicon Valley: Google to promote original reporting | Senators demand answers from Amazon on worker treatment | Lawmakers weigh response to ransomware attacks MORE (R-Wis.) said that while the intelligence is “pretty convincing” that Iran is responsible, “let’s verify that and then we’ll talk” about a response. Still, he added later the United States “certainly can’t take” military action “off the table.”

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James InhofeJames (Jim) Mountain InhofeIs the Senate ready to protect American interests in space? Republicans grumble over Trump shifting military funds to wall Gun debate to shape 2020 races MORE (R-Okla.) said he thinks Iran “did it,” but he wasn’t ready to support military action ahead of Trump making a decision on how to respond.

Sen. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyThe Hill’s Morning Report – Trump takes 2020 roadshow to New Mexico The 13 Republicans needed to pass gun-control legislation Bolton returns to political group after exiting administration MORE (R-Utah), who said Iran was “very likely” behind the attack, argued it should be Saudi Arabia’s responsibility to respond.

“The right military response would come from Saudi Arabia,” Romney said. “If we were to play a role, I hope it would be a nonkinetic role. I do not think our military should be involved in kinetic activity at this stage, but look to Saudi Arabia to defend their own nation.”