When Japanese and Norwegian oil tankers were reportedly attacked in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday, Republican foreign policy hawks eager for any excuse to start another war were champing at the bit to attack Iran.

Naturally, leading the pack was Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark.

The U.S. should launch a “retaliatory strike” on Iran, Cotton said on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, that would unleash “the fire and the fury of the military.”

This stance is not new for the Iraq War veteran. Cotton has wanted war with Iran (and everyone else ) since he became a senator in 2015.

He’s uncautiously optimistic: How long would it take to win a war with Iran? Just a few days , Cotton said in 2015. On PBS’ “Firing Line” in May, host Margaret Hoover asked Cotton, “Could we win a war with Iran?”

“Yes,” he replied immediately.

“That didn’t take you a second,” she replied.

“Two strikes,” responded Cotton. “The first strike and the last strike,” is all it would take to win, the senator insisted.

That’s pretty confident.

Iran is three times the size of Iraq. Obviously, if Cotton will recall since he was there, the conflict we started with the invasion of Iraq in 2003 took more than a few days to wrap up. Not surprisingly, the same club of neoconservative hawks the senator belongs to also predicted an expeditious war back then. “Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that,” then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld insisted in 2002.

Dumbfoundingly, Cotton, unlike most Americans including veterans , believes not only that the Iraq War was not a mistake , but that it “was a just and noble war” we should be proud of.

The cliché exists for a reason: Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Cotton is hellbent on repeating it.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., on the other hand, does not want another Iraq-style war.

Japanese and Norwegian vessels were attacked. If these nations aren’t calling for war, neither should the U.S. We can’t afford another #ForeverWar. — Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) June 16, 2019

The first two brief sentences from Gaetz are revelatory: The countries whose tankers were actually attacked aren’t seeking retaliation. Also, Japan wants proof from the U.S. that Iran was behind the attacks, which has yet to be convincingly presented. Additionally, the owner of the Japanese tanker disagrees with the U.S. version of the account, and it’s his ship.

After Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared last week, almost immediately, that Iran was behind the attack, the American Conservative’s Barbara Boland reported , “[Pompeo] did not cite specific evidence as to why the U.S. believes Iran, or its proxies, are responsible for the attacks.”

Like Cotton, the hawkish Pompeo has wanted war with Iran for a long time . Some even wondered if this could be another “Gulf of Tonkin,” the 1964 “false flag” incident that ginned up support for escalating the Vietnam War.

The government lying about attacks or data to get the U.S. into war is not unprecedented . President Trump even once claimed former President George W. Bush “ lied ” America into Iraq.

Which brings us to the most important part of Gaetz’s tweet: “We can’t afford another #ForeverWar.”

No, we can’t. While Cotton is eager to “ shoot first and ask questions later ” by starting a conflict based on questionable data that the senator is also certain will be short and sweet, Gaetz fears another conflict like Iraq and Afghanistan that will last forever .

Cotton fully trusts his government’s competence and efficiency in foreign affairs despite its terrible track record. Gaetz questions all of it, precisely because of that record.

There’s no question which Republican is taking the conservative approach here.

There’s also no question who is actually putting “America First.”

“The examples of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya — just to name a few — teach us that it is an illusion to think that just beyond the life of every dictator lies a peaceful democracy, rather than generations of anarchy, violence, terrorism, and chaos,” Gaetz said in a foreign policy address in May. “Freedom cannot be America’s gift to the world, purchased with the blood of U.S. service members alone.”

Directly challenging the Washington foreign policy establishment that has more often been in line with the reflexively aggressive thinking of leaders such as Cotton, Gaetz continued, “Real morality and real toughness is standing up to the pro-war special interests and globalist power brokers. Real morality is affirming forever that the blood of American troops is not for sale.”

Both Gaetz and Cotton claim to be allies of Trump and advocates of his agenda. But on foreign policy, it is the Florida congressman who hews more closely to the anti-Iraq War, “America First” rhetoric of Trump, while Cotton wants to return Republicans to same Bush-Cheney policies the president once railed against. There is reason to be concerned Cotton could get his way.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates once said anyone who wants to repeat what the U.S. did in Iraq needs to “have his head examined.”

Headcase Cotton is raring for war with no questions asked, apparently, and seemingly little concern for what it might do to the country.

“America First” Matt Gaetz offers something more thoughtful and inherently conservative : “There are always places we could invade, people we could rescue, nations we could build. A clear-eyed look at the threats we face, proves that peace through strength also means strength through peace.”

Pray for peace.

Jack Hunter (@jackhunter74) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. He is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Sen. Rand Paul.