Eric Conroy predicted Iran war would end ‘very soon.’ Now he backs more military spending.

CINCINNATI — Republican congressional nominee Eric Conroy predicted last month that the war with Iran was nearing its end, telling Cincinnati radio listeners that he believed it was “coming to a conclusion here very soon, literally.”

Five weeks later, the war was still going. The Pentagon had put its cost at $37.5 billion. Gasoline prices were sharply higher than a year earlier.

And Conroy was praising President Donald Trump’s handling of the conflict and saying he would support additional military spending.

“I really commend the president for what we’re doing,” Conroy said during an Aug. 14 appearance on SiriusXM’s Cuomo Mornings. “I think we’re moving it in the right direction.”

Conroy also described the military campaign as an overdue task that needed to be done and said he would vote for additional military spending.

The comments put the Trump-backed Republican, who is challenging Democratic U.S. Rep. Greg Landsman for Ohio’s 1st Congressional District, on record supporting additional defense spending after months of war and tens of billions of dollars in estimated U.S. costs.

‘Coming to a conclusion here very soon’

Conroy sounded far more optimistic about the war’s timeline during a July 11 interview on 700 WLW.

Host Mike Allen introduced the Iran discussion by pointing to Conroy’s background in the Air Force and CIA. Conroy said Iranian leaders were acting irrationally and praised Trump for “holding firm” as the administration tried to reach a resolution.

He then predicted the conflict was nearing its end.

“I really see this probably coming to a conclusion here very soon, literally,” Conroy said during the July 11 episode of 700WLW Weekends.

Conroy pointed to financial and energy markets as evidence that the conflict would not last much longer.

There had been “a little spike, but not a very big spike,” he said, arguing that markets were looking ahead and did not appear to anticipate a prolonged conflict.

That prediction did not hold.

The U.S. and Israel began bombing Iran on Feb. 28. As of Wednesday, Aug. 19, the conflict was approaching its six-month mark, negotiations remained stalled and uncertainty surrounding the Strait of Hormuz was again pushing oil prices higher.

Reuters reported Wednesday that oil prices had climbed to near a three-week high as shipping through the strait remained sharply constrained and tensions in the region escalated.

The economic picture also looked considerably different from the “little spike” Conroy described in July.

By Aug. 14, U.S. gasoline prices were 29% higher than a year earlier, according to Reuters. Trump that day urged Americans to accept higher gasoline prices as part of the cost of confronting Iran.

$37.5 billion — and a request for more

The war has also become a multibillion-dollar question for the Congress Conroy is seeking to join.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers July 21 that the conflict had cost the United States an estimated $37.5 billion.

The figure included certain anticipated costs through Sept. 30, Reuters reported.

Trump had also asked Congress for nearly $90 billion in additional funding, most of it related to the Iran conflict. The request came as lawmakers in both parties questioned the administration about the duration, cost and objectives of a war Congress never formally authorized.

The debate has repeatedly divided Ohio’s congressional delegation.

Early in the war, Ohio lawmakers split across party lines and within their own parties over Trump’s military strikes. Republican Rep. Warren Davidson broke with much of his party to support congressional limits on the president’s ability to continue military action without authorization.

More recently, Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Husted voted against a July measure that would have forced the withdrawal of U.S. forces, one day after telling CNN that he wanted the war to end.

Conroy would not have had a vote on any of those measures because he is not currently a member of Congress. His Aug. 14 comments, however, offer a preview of how he says he would approach military spending if voters send him to Washington.

Landsman’s position also changed as war dragged on

Conroy’s Democratic opponent was one of just four House Democrats in March to vote against an early War Powers Resolution that would have required Trump to seek congressional authorization to continue military operations.

At the time, Landsman said he supported targeted strikes against Iranian military assets while arguing for a separate deadline on the operation.

As the war continued, his position shifted.

By April, Landsman was publicly calling for the Iran war to end and said he would support another congressional effort to terminate U.S. involvement.

That leaves voters in the Cincinnati-area district with a clear foreign-policy contrast heading into November.

Landsman, after initially supporting limited military action, has moved toward ending U.S. involvement.

Conroy, after predicting in July that the conflict would conclude “very soon,” was still praising Trump’s handling of the war five weeks later — and saying he would vote for more military spending.