President Donald Trump’s surprise comments at a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the U.S. would take control of the Gaza Strip and lead its redevelopment, with potential deployments of American troops to the area, were largely met with a mix of bafflement and skepticism from Senate lawmakers on Tuesday.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), an ally of the president and deeply involved in Israel policy issues, suggested the plan would meet resistance from both the U.S.’ Arab allies and American citizens.

“I think that would be an interesting proposal. We’ll see what our Arab friends say about that. I think most South Carolinians would not be excited about sending Americans to take over Gaza,” Graham told Jewish Insider. “I think that might be problematic. But I’ll keep an open mind.”

“That would be a tough place to be stationed as an American, would be Gaza,” he continued.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) appeared open to considering the plan.

“It’s a provocative part of the conversation, but it’s part of the conversation, and that’s where we are,” Fetterman said. “The Palestinians have refused, or they’ve been unwilling to deliver a government that provided security and economic development for themselves. They allowed 10/7 to occur, and now Gaza has to be rebuilt. Where are the people going to live? Where are they going to go? So it’s part of a conversation with where they’re at right now.”

Asked if he wanted to see U.S. troops on the ground, Fetterman replied: “I don’t know what the role [of U.S. forces] is, but they’re obviously a part of it, and I fully support.”

Several Senate Republicans, like Graham, said the proposal was unlikely or unworkable.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) quipped that, “There’s probably a couple of kinks in that slinky, but I’ll have to take a look at the statement.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who is aligned with the party’s more isolationist wing, said that he believes external control of Gaza is needed, but from regional partners.

“I think it’s unlikely that it would be the U.S.,” Paul said. “I think the Arab League or some kind of external body would be good for trying to take over Gaza or orchestrate some sort of stability until they can get a new government. More likely it would be better to have surrounding Arab allies do that.”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), who also favors a more restrictionist approach to foreign policy, said, “I don’t know that I think it’s the best use of United States resources to spend a bunch of money in Gaza. I think maybe I prefer that to be spent in the United States first, but let’s see what happens.”

He rejected the idea of sending U.S. troops to the territory.

Numerous other Senate Republicans, including Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declined to comment, and said they had to examine the comments more closely or reacted with silent bemusement.

“It’s a matter of first impression that I heard about four minutes ago,” Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told JI. “So I’m still processing it.”

Some Republicans later appeared to endorse Trump’s plan in social media statements — suggesting that Republicans may fall in line behind Trump.

“Today, President Trump took bold action in hopes of achieving lasting peace in Gaza,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said in a statement. “We are hopeful this brings much needed stability and security to the region.”

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) said that Trump “ stands with Israel and is committed to ensuring historic and lasting peace. He will eliminate Hamas terrorists and create economic prosperity.”

Other House Republicans also endorsed the proposal, as did Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

“Gaza MUST BE FREE from Hamas,” Rubio said. “As [Trump] shared today, the United States stands ready to lead and Make Gaza Beautiful Again. Our pursuit is one of lasting peace in the region for all people.”

Democrats otherwise reacted with unified opposition to the proposal.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), told about the proposal by JI, reacted with disbelief.

“I’m speechless, that’s insane. I can’t think of a place on Earth that would welcome American troops less and where any positive outcome is less likely,” Coons said.

“Why on Earth would we abandon decades of well-established humanitarian programs around the world and now launch into one of the world’s greatest humanitarian challenges having just laid off exactly the people who are good at reconstruction and hunger and building civil [society],” Coons continued.

He added that he’s met with the leaders of each of the U.S.’ regional partners and that none of them want the U.S. to send troops to Gaza, and that none of them would take in Gazan civilians, as Trump has also suggested.

Coons said that the comments “risk the rest of the world thinking that we are an unbalanced and unreliable partner because our president makes insane proposals.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), a pro-Israel Democrat, said the proposal was “crazy — and you can quote me on that.”

“Crazy, but very seriously, deeply dangerous. It threatens to blow apart the Abraham Accords. All of the progress that we have made, including the brave and costly battle that Israel has waged, would be effectively undercut by this crazy notion,” Blumenthal said. “I’d like to know what Benjamin Netanyahu is thinking at this moment.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) said that he doesn’t think the plan will get support from many Democrats or Republicans on Capitol Hill.

“The United States should not take anybody’s home,” Kaine said. “Number two, us nation-building in the Middle East — if you haven’t learned anything from 2001 to 2025, you haven’t been paying attention. We are very bad at that.”

He said the U.S. needs to avoid further entanglements in the Middle East so it can make the Indopacific its primary focus.

“The notion of ‘Oh boy, the United States can step in and make some real estate deal out of it,’ it is deranged to propose that,” Kaine continued.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) said the proposal would be disastrous to the United States and undercuts claims that Trump was the anti-war candidate in the 2024 election.

“There were a lot of people who sincerely believed that Donald Trump would be good for world peace. And now he is talking about occupying a country in the Middle East,” Schatz said. “We have seen this movie before and it always ends in lives lost and America’s reputation in tatters.”

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said, “It’s an embarrassment,” adding on X that Trump had “totally lost it” and that a U.S. invasion of Gaza would kill thousands of Americans and prompt decades of war.

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said sarcastically, “What could possibly go wrong?”

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), who said he’d been told about Trump’s comments shortly before, said that “a lot of the stuff he says doesn’t make sense.”

Coons also dismissed Trump’s claim during his press conference with Netanyahu that Saudi Arabia is not demanding a Palestinian state as a precondition to normalizing relations with Israel.

“I sat in a room with a bipartisan delegation with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and he said, clearly and repeatedly, we cannot recognize Israel without a path forward for a Palestinian state,” Coons told JI. “Asked and answered, repeatedly.”