Explosions boom across Tehran as Israel targets Iran's nuclear program
Israel attacked Iran's capital early Friday, with explosions booming across Tehran.
An Israeli military official says that his country targeted Iranian nuclear sites, without identifying them.
Article content
The official spoke to journalists on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing operation, which is also targeting military sites.
Article content
The attack comes as tensions have reached new heights over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program. The Board of Governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency for the first time in 20 years on Thursday censured Iran over it not working with its inspectors. Iran immediately announced it would establish a third enrichment site in the country and swap out some centrifuges for more-advanced ones.
Article content
Article content
Israel for years has warned it will not allow Iran to build a nuclear weapon, something Tehran insists it doesn't want — though official there have repeatedly warned it could. The U.S. has been preparing for something to happen, already pulling some diplomats from Iraq's capital and offering voluntary evacuations for the families of U.S. troops in the wider Middle East.
Article content
Article content
It wasn't immediately clear what had been hit, though smoke could be rising from Chitgar, a neighborhood in western Tehran.
Article content
Benchmark Brent crude spiked on the attack, rising over 2%.
Article content
As the explosions in Tehran started, President Donald Trump was on the lawn of the White House mingling with members of Congress. It was unclear if he had been informed but the president continued shaking hands and posing for pictures for several minutes.
Article content
Article content
Video from Tehran during Israel's preemptive attack. pic.twitter.com/Rc6i5PJ5xb
— Major Anthony Jones (@majorbrainpain) June 13, 2025
Article content
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
10 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
The great theatre of Donald Trump's U.S. military parade
With armed forces on the streets of cities on both U.S. coasts this weekend, the country is marching into a new American era faster than at the standard military rate of 120 steps per minute. The Saturday evening military parade through Washington to mark the 250th anniversary of the United States Army realizes one of President Donald Trump's fondest hopes: a bravura procession occurring, by coincidence if not by cosmic convergence, on the minor but evocative holiday of Flag Day and on the day he turns 79 years old. It comes as the Marines he has dispatched to Los Angeles continue to patrol the streets, in an uninvited effort to keep the peace that California government officials insist they can achieve themselves. The Army, once commanded by George Washington, and Marines, celebrated in their lyrical hymn for their bravery from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, have special purchase in American sentiment. As a result, their presence in two of the country's most distinctive cities − one of the hard reality of politics, the other of the dreams and mythology stirred by the movie industry − provokes unusually strong feelings. Like almost everything else in a land riven by divisions and disputes, the twin mobilizations have provoked a civilian battle, in part because there are more American troops deployed in Los Angeles than in Syria and Iraq combined, in part because massive displays of military personnel and firepower in American streets are not part of the country's tradition. The President's supporters see the Washington parade as an expression of his power and will, an affirmation of his command of both capital and country in his effort, as the sentiment often is expressed, but not universally embraced, to return the country to its founding values. Mr. Trump's opponents see it as a pair of needless assertions of executive excess in direct contradiction to the republican principles of those very founders. With arrays of helicopters, tanks and other battle vehicles, there will be great theatre in Saturday night's procession, a marked contrast with the drama on the streets of Los Angeles. But at the centre of these stereo spectacles is the President himself, playing his constitutional role of commander in chief in a fashion that provokes debate about whether he does so in a way that is in conflict with the constitutional principles his predecessors have respected. In truth, politics, the presidency, and the military are more intertwined than commonly acknowledged − ties that Mr. Trump, who attended a military academy in his high-school years but received deferments from service during the Vietnam War, seems determined to reinforce. The country traditionally has honoured military service, and for a generation in the middle of the 20th century, it was regarded almost as an indispensable requirement for high elected office. A dozen presidents, including George Washington, Ulysses Grant and Dwight Eisenhower, were generals. Several more, including Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor, Theodore Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy, burnished their images or made their names in battle. Overall, 31 presidents had military service, and most presidents from the Civil War to the end of the 19th century were veterans of that bloody conflict. But four of the past five presidents had no military record; the only exception was George W. Bush, who served in the Texas Air National Guard. But for all that military service − for all the ubiquitous rote 'thank-you-for-your-service' greetings to Americans in uniform today − there has been a skepticism about great shows of military strength, much the way wealthy members of the country's establishment often have been wary of displaying their riches. Opinion: For Trump, the L.A. protests are an opportunity to wield power and spread fear Eisenhower, a five-star general before becoming president, brushed aside as unseemly suggestions that the country conduct a military parade during the Cold War. He thought it indecorous and, because the United States was the predominant superpower, redundant. 'The notion of putting tanks on the street as a symbol of our power is unseemly,' former Republican senator William Cohen of Maine, a onetime defence secretary, said in an interview. 'Nations run by autocrats do that. We haven't. I'm happy to celebrate the people, Black and white, who have served in the Army. But it's overload to put tanks on the street.' It's also expensive. For years, deep, unsightly ruts remained in the streets of Washington created by heavy vehicles in the parade to commemorate the end of the 1991 Gulf War. Estimates put the cost of the road repairs alone for this procession at US$16-million. Large demonstrations of military power have been undertaken by the old Soviet Union, China and North Korea, often to smug ridicule in the West. 'These parades are designed in North Korea to reinforce the army's loyalty to the leader and to praise the leader,' said George Lopez, a Notre Dame University international-relations scholar who was part of the United Nations panel of experts monitoring Pyongyang's violation of sanctions growing out of its nuclear program. 'This isn't something we do,' he said. 'We aren't having legions of people returning from a conflict right now. It's unclear to whom we are sending the message that we are powerful.' Trump friends and foes alike believe the message of the march of thousands of troops in period uniforms from the Revolutionary War to today (plus one dog, a Blue Heeler named Doc Holliday) is to the American people. 'This has nothing to do with patriotism and everything to do with Donald Trump getting his wish to politicize our military in order to advance his personal political agenda,' said Democratic Representative Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, who had four tours of Marine Corps duty in Iraq. 'For anyone who doesn't know, troops hate marching in parades.'
The Market Online
28 minutes ago
- The Market Online
@ the Bell: Middle East tensions rattle TSX as oil prices surge
Canada's main stock index fell on Friday as investors sought refuge in safer assets amid escalating conflict in the Middle East. The drop followed Israel's extensive airstrikes on Iran, which targeted nuclear and missile facilities to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions. In response, Iran launched a barrage of 100 drones. The rising geopolitical tensions in the oil-rich region drove crude oil prices sharply higher. US markets were on track for gains on the week before Friday's selloff. President Donald Trump, decided to rile Iran in a social media post demanding it come to a nuclear deal 'before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire', he wrote. Protests are planned across the US this weekend as Americans aren't happy about more than $45 million of their tax dollars going toward his birthday parade, for some reason. Who said Friday the 13th was unlucky? The Canadian dollar traded for 73.59 cents US compared to 73.50 cents US on Thursday. US crude futures traded US$5.41 higher at US$73.45 a barrel, and the Brent contract rose US$5.27 to US$74.63 a barrel. The price of gold was up US$53.44 to US$3,432.89. In world markets, the Nikkei was down 338.84 points to ¥37,834.25, the Hang Seng was down 142.82 points to HK$23,892.56 the FTSE was down 34.29 points to ₤8,850.63, and the DAX was down 255.22 points to €23,516.23. The material provided in this article is for information only and should not be treated as investment advice. For full disclaimer information, please click here.
Globe and Mail
44 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Israel's attack on Iran puts a leader addicted to war in the spotlight
For more than 600 days now, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has waged war. First on Hamas, then on Hezbollah and the Houthis, now on Iran, with occasional airstrikes targeting the new government in Syria carried out seemingly at whim. Many of the military operations Mr. Netanyahu has ordered since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel were understandable to many at the outset, even as the act of launching a war is and should be the most serious order a commander-in-chief can give. Hamas knew retribution was coming when its fighters marauded across southern Israel, killing more than 1,200 people and taking 251 others back to Gaza as hostages. Hezbollah and the Houthis similarly earned Israel's wrath by repeatedly launching rockets and drones at Israel in the chaotic aftermath of Oct. 7. Iran's nuclear program, and the possibility that it could one day develop weapons of mass destruction, was a concern far beyond the Middle East. And yet, taken together – and put in the context of Mr. Netanyahu's political and legal troubles – they paint an unflattering picture of a leader addicted to war. Doug Saunders: How Trump's weakness and Netanyahu's self-interest exploded in Iran If the wars stop, Mr. Netanyahu's right-wing nationalist coalition likely falls apart. A deeply divisive figure after 15 years in power, his re-election prospects look bleak, even as he has repeatedly defied past predictions of political doom. If Mr. Netanyahu is not in the prime minister's chair, he would almost certainly be back in court facing corruption allegations that could see him jailed for up to 10 years. There's also an International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest, in connection with alleged war crimes the Israeli military has committed in Gaza, not to mention questions about what he knew about Hamas's plans – and what actions he did and didn't take – in advance of the Oct. 7 attack. And so, the wars go on. Neither mass protests in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, nor mounting pressure from nearly all of Israel's increasingly unsettled allies (Donald Trump's White House being the giant exception), has convinced Mr. Netanyahu to accept the deal that's been on the table for months: end the war in Gaza in exchange for Hamas releasing all its remaining hostages. Freeing the hostages, remember, was the reason Israel launched its war on Gaza more than 20 months ago. Instead, Mr. Netanyahu keeps resorting to war – a tool that has thus far failed to bring home the 53 Israelis still missing in Gaza, many of whom are believed to already be dead. Instead of a ceasefire that would allow the Palestinians to properly count their own casualties (the estimated death toll compiled by Gaza's Ministry of Health is an appalling 55,000 people), Mr. Netanyahu has ordered a broadening of Israel's war aims. Rather than handing over Gaza to some kind of Arab or international force, as has been repeatedly proposed since very early in the war, Mr. Netanyahu wants Israel to once more take control of the strip, which it withdrew its soldiers and settlers from in 2005. The fate of Gaza's 2.1 million inhabitants seems to be of little concern to Mr. Netanyahu, who has gleefully seized on Mr. Trump's unworkable suggestion that the Gazans could be given new homes elsewhere. That's called forced displacement, a war crime. Opinion: Canada's decision to sanction two far-right Israeli ministers sends a signal: enough is enough Anyone who criticizes Mr. Netanyahu and his wars is slapped with the allegation that they're somehow anti-Semitic or supporting Hamas. When Canada, Britain and France warned last month that they would be forced to take unspecified actions – which we now see includes Canadian and British sanctions against far-right members of Mr. Netanyahu's cabinet, and potential French recognition of a Palestinian state – if Israel didn't change course in Gaza, Mr. Netanyahu turned his rhetorical fire on some of his country's staunchest allies, accusing them of 'emboldening Hamas to continue fighting forever.' And now, Iran. Friday's attack on the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, and the assassinations of many of Iran's top generals and scientists, had clearly been meticulously plotted for years by Israel's military and its Mossad intelligence service. The timing of the strike also had the helpful cover of an International Atomic Energy Agency report, published Thursday, that found Tehran was no longer in compliance with its non-proliferation obligations. But there remains no evidence suggesting Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon – let alone threatening anyone with it – next week, next month or next year. Indeed, Mr. Netanyahu's order to attack came one day after it was announced that Mr. Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, would hold face-to-face talks in Oman on Sunday with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. In other words, the door to a negotiated solution to the Iran nuclear issue (another one, after Mr. Netanyahu encouraged Mr. Trump to walk away from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action back in 2018) was very much still in play. But a negotiated solution that kept the peace and saw sanctions lifted off the Iranian economy was never what Mr. Netanyahu wanted. Speaking on a stage in Paris to a conference of civil society groups hoping to breathe life into the long-dormant Israeli-Palestinian peace process, former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert said Mr. Netanyahu was acting out 'his lifelong desire … to show how strong and powerful and Churchillian he is in fighting against Iran and destroying their nuclear program.' Mr. Olmert – who, unlike Mr. Netanyahu, resigned as prime minister when he was charged with corruption back in 2009 – has a special disdain for the man who succeeded him, and who has held on to the prime minister's post for 15 of the past 16 years. Mr. Olmert was in Paris this week trying to revive the two-state peace plan that he and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas were largely in agreement on before Mr. Olmert was forced from office. It's a plan to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip that Mr. Netanyahu has never shown serious interest in pursuing. Instead, he has expanded Israel's illegal settlement blocks as life has gotten steadily worse, and more violent, for Palestinians living in the occupied areas. Nobody at the hopeful talks in Paris – which were overshadowed by Mr. Netanyahu's decision to launch another war of unpredictable length – could envision any kind of peace process so long as Hamas holds sway in Gaza and Mr. Netanyahu remains in his office in Jerusalem. 'It's very hard for non-Israelis to understand,' said Eran Etzion, a former deputy head of Israel's National Security Council who was also in Paris for the two-state peace conference. 'But you need to think about Israel now – about Netanyahu and Netanyahu's regime – like you think about Putin and Putin's regime.' Mr. Etzion's comparison was carefully chosen. Russian President Vladimir Putin is a ruler who fears what might happen to him if and when he leaves office – and who has proven willing to drag his population into one war after another to avoid having that day come to pass.
