Washington ? Still reeling from the fallout of authorizing the Iraq war five years ago, congressional Democrats are determined to put themselves early on record as opposing military action in Iran.

In recent days, many Democrats have gone to great lengths to denounce President Bush’s strategy on Iran, including his decision to label Tehran’s Quds military force as a terrorist group and his statement that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to “World War III.”

Democrats also are jumping on Bush’s latest war spending request as proof that the White House is considering airstrikes on Iran’s underground uranium enrichment facilities. Bush wants $88 million to continue developing a “bunker-busting” bomb designed to destroy deeply buried targets such as those in Iran.

And in case there were doubts about the Democrats’ position, Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin introduced legislation Thursday that would require Bush to seek Congress’ blessing before taking any military action in Iran.

Standing behind him are liberal anti-war groups, which have expanded their focus on Iraq to include a drumbeat of protests against a potential war with neighboring Iran.

“Every day now, it seems that the confrontational rhetoric between the United States and Iran escalates,” said Sen. Robert Byrd, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

“President Bush needs to understand that the Congress will not be kept out of the loop while his administration plots another march to war,” said Byrd, D-W.Va.

Regardless of Bush’s intentions, denouncing a war before any shots are fired offers political benefits for Democrats. Democrats have proved unable to pass veto-proof legislation that would order troops home from Iraq and are looking for other ways to retain the support of a war-weary public.

Bush administration officials say the latest penalties against the Iranian military – the first targeting the armed forces of another country – are part of a diplomatic strategy and not a prelude to war.

“While the president doesn’t take any options off the table, we do have economic ways that we can go after this. And we’re doing precisely that,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Several leading Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Tom Lantos, say they support the financial punishment. But others, including Byrd, said it seems to portend more aggressive steps.

The White House also has played down its latest spending request to continue development of a bomb that can destroy hardened concrete bunkers and tunnels deep underground.

Included in Bush’s $196 billion request for war spending in 2008 is $83.5 million to continue development of a 30,000-pound conventional bomb called the massive ordnance penetrator and $4.2 million to modify the B-2 bomber to carry it. According to White House budget documents, the request is in response to an “urgent operational need from theater commanders.”