The Iran war has put the US in a difficult position, but Trump has made the most of it.

When it comes to the war with Iran and the subsequent peace deal, there are four distinct reactions in the United States.

There are those who supported the war and now support the peace. There are those who supported the war and are not satisfied with the peace. There are those who were against the war and are now against the peace. And there are those who were against the war and are now for the peace.

This last group is the largest and most important because it represents the vast bulk of the American people who have consistently voiced their displeasure with another Middle East war but are applauding any peace deal that will offer them relief at the gas pump and at the grocery store.

The smallest group is the first, which is largely contained to the White House communications team and President Donald Trump.

The third group is made up of congressional Democrats who are united only in their opposition to whatever the president does.

The second group, of course, is congressional Republicans who cheered loudly when the bombs started dropping but have jeered quietly while examining the details of the memorandum of understanding and seeing nothing that gives them hope that this will lead to a better place than President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with the Iranian regime in 2015.

This only becomes problematic for Trump and his administration if he decides that Congress does have a role in approving whatever more permanent agreement emerges after a couple of months more of negotiations.

It is hard to say with a straight face that what the president achieved here was that much better than what Obama achieved in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

But we did learn several things during this exercise, which might be useful for the future.

First, we learned that taking out the Iranian regime and replacing it with something more friendly to both Israel and the US is impossible to do without boots on the ground. It became pretty clear early on that the American people had no interest in any attacks involving ground troops, even on Kharg Island.

Second, we learned that when push comes to shove, the Americans and the Israelis have the will and ability to take out the Iranian leadership and are not bound by laws that typically frown upon the assassinations of foreign leaders.

Third, we learned that the Iranians have plenty of assets at their disposal that can make life uncomfortable for the global economy and for their neighbours in the Middle East.  Attacking them comes at a cost.

Fourth, we learned that Israel can’t be trusted when it comes to its promises for a short and sweet war. There is no such thing as a short and sweet war, not in the Middle East. Things are always more complicated than they seem.

Fifth, we learned that our allies won’t support us when we attack another country. In wars of choice, NATO is not “gonna play”.

Sixth, we learned that the Iranians are impossible to negotiate with, and so it is important to understand that no agreement is really completely settled with them. The president has retained the right to bomb Iran if it doesn’t keep up its end of the bargain, and I think he has to make clear that he is not bluffing on this point.

Seventh, we learned that Trump knows when to fold a bad hand and he is more than willing to ditch his friends in Israel to achieve his objectives.

Eighth, we learned that there can be no revolution in the streets of Tehran if the US and Israel are jointly bombing those streets. We strengthened the regime when we started a war with it. The best way to compel change is by tightening the economic screws, not by killing Iran’s leadership.

Which leads me to the ninth thing we learned. Leave yourself somebody to negotiate with if you are going to try to decapitate the regime. One of the unexpected challenges of this negotiation was finding a partner willing and able to speak for the Iranian people.

Finally, we learned that the only group that truly has the interests of the American people in mind are the American people. They have been consistent during this whole operation and have been more than happy to make their views known. They didn’t want this war in the first place, and now they want it finished, once and for all. They want gas prices to go down. They want their daily lives to be more affordable. They want to stop the loss of blood and the waste of treasure.

The Democrats have been intellectually incoherent throughout this entire episode. They acknowledged the Iranian regime has not only been at war with the US and Israel but also its own people. They appreciated that the regime continued to produce nuclear material that could have been weaponised against our homeland. They admitted that the JCPOA was fatally flawed, but they didn’t want Trump to do anything about it because they neither like nor trust him.

The Republicans have been intellectually consistent but out of step with their own voters.  They applauded this war but refused to acknowledge that the American people were not with them when it came to the ultimate goal of regime change. The voters weren’t in favour of a full invasion, and this included the president’s most passionate supporters. And when it comes to the memorandum of understanding, these Republican war hawks would rather continue the war than support an imperfect peace.

It will fall to the president and his team to make the case for this imperfect peace. It might not be pretty, but it could lead to a more affordable and growing economy just as voters go to the polls in November.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.