WASHINGTON — Worries swirled this week on Capitol Hill over arming foreign fighters and entering into another war in the Middle East.

But Congress set aside deep misgivings about the Obama administration’s new offensive against the Islamic State and was poised Thursday to quickly approve one of its key provisions — equipping and training Syrian rebels as an opposition force.

The authority to send support to the fighters was passed 273-156 Wednesday evening by the House as part of a temporary federal budget bill that will fund the military through December. The Senate was expected to pass the budget and Syria measure late Thursday, after Stars and Stripes’ deadline.

The rally to war was a striking shift from one year ago, when Congress rejected an administration plan to intervene in Syria and polls showed the public was weary from over a decade of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. In recent weeks, the Islamic State’s quick advance through Iraq and its beheading of two American journalists galvanized support in both chambers and across party lines for striking the group.

“Their ideology is really straightforward — they want to destroy us,” Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, said Thursday. “This threat exists and we have to confront it.”

Still, doubt over the Obama plan dominated Hill hearings and debates.

“We know the Free Syrian Army cannot take on ISIL,” said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, using an alternative name for the Islamist group. “You talk multi-year operations — we are talking decades, if that is going to be our salvation.”

Corker said there is a growing belief that the fight against the Islamic State could take 10 years. President Barack Obama has said it will likely take several years.

Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, estimated that U.S. involvement could last six years, well past Obama’s second term that ends in 2016.

“This is going to be for the entire duration of his presidency and probably the next president,” he said Thursday.

The legislation authorizes funds already allocated to the Defense Department, and explicitly rules out a ground war, but it does allow the administration to redirect money to the Syrian rebels battling President Bashar al-Assad and the Islamic State after notifying Congress of its plans and progress.

It is attached to a continuing resolution budget bill that will fund the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs disability claims processing and investigations of improper conduct, and stave off furloughs or a shutdown while Congress works to pass annual funding.

Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., said the Syria effort could backfire.

Rebels equipped and trained by the U.S. could attack civilians or cause more violence in the region, she said, citing congressionally approved support for counter-revolution forces in Nicaragua in the 1980s that led to claims of kidnapping, torture and executions.

“This blood will be on our hands when this happens,” she said.

Doubts also began to grow over the Obama administration pledge that no U.S. ground troops will be sent to fight again in Iraq.

The president was elected partly on a promise to wrap up the Iraq war launched in 2003 and withdrew troops in 2011. In May, Obama announced that U.S. forces in Afghanistan — the longest war in the nation’s history — will be reduced to 9,800 at the end of the year.

With U.S. ground troops off the table, the administration has built a war plan that relies on local forces in Syria, the Iraqi army and Kurdish peshmerga, stepped-up U.S. airstrikes and an international coalition of over 50 countries to defeat the Islamic State. But Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told lawmakers Tuesday that he might recommend ground forces to the president if conditions in Iraq change.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., pressed Secretary of State John Kerry on the potential escalation in the war during a hearing Wednesday.

He said local forces in the region may not be reliable enough to take on the Islamic State — Syrian rebels are focused on fighting the Assad regime, the Iraqi army may not be prepared to fight, and Kurdish forces are mainly interested in protecting their own territory in northern Iraq.

“There may come a point where, from what you are saying, that the only thing that may solve this is U.S. combat forces and we are not going to do that and ISIL can stay,” he said.

Kerry again denied that ground forces would be needed, saying he would not comment on Rubio’s theoretical scenarios. His testimony on the Hill was part of an administration effort this week to whip up support for the Iraq and Syria operations — an effort met with a mixed response.

“I don’t know what is going to happen here,” Kerry said. “Let’s start down that road and see what happens.”

Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the administration believes the Syrians, Iraqis and Kurds should lead the fight to free their territory from the Islamic State and that, with support, they can be victorious.

“The Defense Department’s civilian and military leaders are in complete agreement with every component of the president’s strategy,” Hagel said in prepared remarks Thursday to the House Armed Services Committee, “and we strongly believe it offers the best opportunity to degrade and destroy ISIL.”

tritten.travis@stripes.com Twitter: @Travis_Tritten

Migrated