logo
Donald Trump Defends US Strikes On Iran, Says Nuclear Facilities "Fully Obliterated"

Donald Trump Defends US Strikes On Iran, Says Nuclear Facilities "Fully Obliterated"

NDTV11 hours ago

Hague:
President Donald Trump on Wednesday rejected an early intelligence assessment that U.S. strikes inflicted only a marginal setback on Iran's nuclear program, insisting that his country's spies did not have the full picture and defending his own swift conclusion that American bombs and missiles delivered a crushing blow.
"This was a devastating attack, and it knocked them for a loop," Trump said as his administration scrambled to support his claims, made only hours after the attack, that Iranian nuclear facilities were "completely and fully obliterated."
Trump said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other military officials would hold an "interesting and irrefutable" news conference Thursday morning to "fight for the Dignity of our Great American Pilots" who carried out the mission.
He wrote on social media that "these Patriots were very upset" by "Fake News" reports about the limited impact of the strikes.
The issue dominated Trump's attendance at NATO's annual summit in the Netherlands, which was otherwise focused on European security. The White House highlighted an Israeli statement that Iran's nuclear efforts were delayed by years, much longer than the few months determined by American intelligence. A spokesperson for the Iranian foreign ministry also said the facilities have suffered significant damage.
But those comments fell short of Trump's hyperbole and did little to suggest that U.S. strikes had eliminated the threat of Iran developing a nuclear weapon.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking in an interview with Politico, limited his own assessment to saying Iran was "much further away from a nuclear weapon today than they were before the president took this bold action."
Drawing reliable conclusions about the impact of the U.S. strikes remains difficult, especially only days after they took place. That makes the issue a breeding ground for competing claims that could determine how American voters view Trump's risky decision to join Israel's attacks on Iran.
Jeffrey Lewis, a professor of nonproliferation at the Middlebury Institute, said Trump was trying to have it both ways.
"If it's too early to know, why is Trump saying it's obliterated?" he said. "Either it's too early to know, or you know."
What's Next?
Also at stake are Trump's next steps in the Middle East, where diplomatic efforts could be required to prevent Iran from rebuilding its nuclear program.
Trump said U.S. and Iranian officials would meet soon, resuming a dialogue that was interrupted by nearly two weeks of war, even as he suggested that negotiations were no longer necessary.
"I don't care if I have an agreement or not," Trump said, because Iran was too badly damaged to even consider rebuilding its program. "They're not going to be doing it anyway. They've had it."
Iran maintains that its atomic ambitions are for peaceful purposes, while U.S. and Israeli leaders have described the country's nuclear program as the precursor to obtaining a nuclear weapon.
The episode has triggered some of Trump's long-standing vendettas against leaks and intelligence officials, whom he has often viewed as a part of a "deep state" dedicated to undermining his agenda. He also lashed out at media outlets that reported on the classified assessment, describing them as "scum" and "disgusting."
The intelligence assessment was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, which is part of the Pentagon. Out of all the country's spy services, it's usually "the fastest on the draw" to produce preliminary results, said Frank Montoya, a former counterintelligence leader.
"They have to respond quickly to what the war fighters are looking for, but those preliminary assessments are still based on information that's out there," Montoya said.
Leon Panetta, who held top national security roles under President Barack Obama, said it's too soon to have a more complete understanding of the strikes' impact.
"Bottom line is, that's going to take an extended period of time, at least a number of weeks, before we have a full assessment of the damage done by the attack," Panetta said.
However, Trump administration officials have been chiming in with their own statements emphasizing the damage done by the American mission.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe said there's "a body of credible intelligence" showing "several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years."
Trump Vs. The Media
Trump said questioning the effectiveness of the strikes was disrespectful to the military, which flew stealth bombers halfway around the world to attack with weapons designed to penetrate deep underground.
The reports, he said, were "very unfair to the pilots, who risked their lives for our country."
He described the American attack as a definitive conclusion to what he's dubbed "the 12-day war," much like the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki heralded the end of World War II.
"That ended that war," he said. "This ended the war."
During a news conference at the NATO summit, Trump briefly ceded the stage to Hegseth, who also lashed out at the media.
"There's a reason the president calls out the fake news for what it is," he said. Hegseth said reporters were using a leaked intelligence assessment to politically damage Trump.
"They want to spin it to try to make him look bad," he said.
Trump pointed to satellite photos that showed the area around the nuclear facilities was "burned black," and he said that underground tunnels where uranium was enriched and stored were "all collapsed." He also suggested that Israel had sources on the ground in Iran, saying "they have guys that go in there after the hit" to evaluate the damage.
The bombing "rendered the enrichment facility inoperable," according to a statement distributed by the White House and the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The American strikes, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran's military nuclear program, have "set back Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years," the Israel Atomic Energy Commission said.
In addition, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told Al Jazeera that there was significant damage from U.S. bombers.
"Our nuclear installations have been badly damaged, that's for sure," he said.
Where's The Uranium?
One critical question is whether enriched uranium, which could be developed into fuel for a nuclear bomb, was moved out of facilities before the U.S. strikes.
"I believe they didn't have a chance to get anything out, because we acted fast," Trump said. He added that "it's very hard to move that kind of material, and very dangerous."
In the wake of the leak, the White House going forward intends to try to limit the sharing of classified documents with Congress, according to a senior White House official.
The official, who was not authorized to comment publicly on the matter and spoke on the condition of anonymity, did not provide detail on how the administration would go about limiting the flow of classified information to lawmakers.
The move, first reported by Axios, seems certain to be challenged by members of Congress.
Classified briefings for lawmakers, originally scheduled for Tuesday, are now expected to take place Thursday and Friday.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

India urges merit-based visa process as US mandates 5-year social media disclosure
India urges merit-based visa process as US mandates 5-year social media disclosure

India Today

time14 minutes ago

  • India Today

India urges merit-based visa process as US mandates 5-year social media disclosure

The Indian government has responded to recent US visa requirements mandating that applicants disclose all social media platforms they have used over the past five years. The response came after a series of advisories from the US Embassy in India outlining the tightening of visa regulations, citing national security US Embassy in India issued a fresh advisory on June 26, 2025, informing that all visa applicants must provide usernames or handles for every social media platform used in the past five years when filling out the DS-160 form. Failure to do so, the embassy warned, could result in visa denial and ineligibility for future are required to declare that the information in their application is true and complete before submission. On June 23, the embassy further requested that F, M, or J category visa seekers, primarily students and exchange visitors, switch their social media accounts to the public to help authorities verify their identity and admissibility under US every visa adjudication as a 'national security decision', the US has been using all available data for screening digital posters shared by the embassy reiterated the message, stating that 'The United States requires visa applicants to provide social media identifiers on visa forms' and that 'all available information is used in screening and vetting.'INDIA CALLS FOR FAIR TREATMENTReacting to the new developments, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at a press briefing in New Delhi that visa and immigration matters fall under the sovereign rights of each he added that India has taken note of the updated US guidelines and believes that 'all visa applications of Indian nationals should be treated on the basis of merit.'He assured that India remains in close engagement with the US on all matters related to mobility and consular services to safeguard the legitimate interests of Indian CONTEXT OF VISA ENFORCEMENTThe stricter visa scrutiny comes against the backdrop of a broader immigration crackdown in Los Angeles, as part of enforcement measures under the Trump administration. On June 24, the embassy stated that individuals violating immigration laws could face detention, deportation, and long-term visa advisories earlier this month, the US Embassy stressed that a visa is 'a privilege, not a right', warning that even legal visa holders can have their visas revoked for breaking US laws or using illegal June 16, the embassy added that new visa restrictions had been introduced for foreign government officials and violators, asserting that the US 'will not tolerate' illegal or mass immigration, nor the misuse of its visa system.(With PTI inputs)- Ends

Iran's Supreme leader Khamenei was Israel's top target during recent conflict
Iran's Supreme leader Khamenei was Israel's top target during recent conflict

Hindustan Times

time16 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Iran's Supreme leader Khamenei was Israel's top target during recent conflict

Israel had plans to assassinate Iran's top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during the recent 12-day war, but the right moment never came, according to the country's defense minister. Defense Minister Israel Katz, who had openly threatened to kill Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, he confirmed those efforts in a televised interview.(AP) The Israeli military had been actively searching for Khamenei during the conflict, which ended earlier this week after a cease-fire was brokered with help from US President Donald Trump. Defense Minister Israel Katz, who had openly threatened to kill Khamenei, confirmed those efforts in a televised interview. 'I estimate that if Khamenei had been in our sights, we would have taken him out,' he said. 'But Khamenei understood this, went underground to very great depths and broke off contacts with the commanders who replaced those commanders who were eliminated, so it wasn't realistic in the end,' he added. Donald Trump threatened Ayatollah Ali Khamenei President Donald Trump also threatened Khamenei's life during the war, he wrote on X (formerly known as Twitter) on June 17: 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there — We are not going to take him out (Kill!), at least not for now.' Also Read: Inside 'Operation Narnia,' the Daring Attack Israel Feared It Couldn't Pull Off Khamenei became Israel's top target last week after an Iranian missile hit a hospital in Beersheba, injuring around 80 people and destroying several parts of the facility. After that strike, Katz warned that 'Khamenei will pay for his crimes,' and said future operations would 'shake' the foundations of Iran's regime, as cited by New York Post report. Ayatollah disappeared on June 13 The ayatollah disappeared from the public eye once Israeli airstrikes began on June 13. He remained out of sight for days, reappearing Thursday with bold claims that Iran had come out on top against both Israel and the United States. 'The Islamic Republic was victorious and, in retaliation, delivered a hand slap to America's face,' Khamenei said, despite the serious damage inflicted on Iran's military and infrastructure. He also dismissed reports from the US and UN about the effectiveness of American airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Washington confirmed it had used deep-penetrating bombs to target nuclear sites, but Khamenei downplayed the outcome. 'US couldn't achieve much…': Khamenei 'US hit nuclear sites but couldn't achieve much,' Khamenei said during a televised speech. He also took aim at former President Trump, saying, 'US President Trump needed to do showmanship,' marking his first public comments since the cease-fire started on Tuesday, as cited by Daily Mail report. So far, the cease-fire has held. Meanwhile, American and Qatari officials are trying to pull Iran back into negotiations over its nuclear program.

China benefits from being on the sidelines of the Iran-Israel war. Here's why
China benefits from being on the sidelines of the Iran-Israel war. Here's why

Indian Express

time17 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

China benefits from being on the sidelines of the Iran-Israel war. Here's why

The Middle East is reeling from Israel's strikes on Iranian soil, followed by Donald Trump's surprising bombing of Iran's nuclear sites. China's stance so far has been articulate, but its actions conspicuously restrained, revealing a strategic calculus that prioritises long-term interests over short-term posturing. Beijing's stance concerning this escalating conflict — marked by clear signalling, selective support for Iran, and a steadfast restraint in military intervention — offers a window into China's broader foreign strategy: One that seeks to project influence without entanglement, capitalise on its rival's missteps, and safeguard material benefits in a volatile setting. China's response to the crisis has been swift and unequivocal in its condemnation of Israel and, more implicitly, the United States. On June 14, the Chinese envoy to the UN decried Israel's attacks as a violation of 'Iran's sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity'. President Xi Jinping, in a June 19 statement, warned that further escalation would bring 'greater losses', urging an immediate ceasefire. Through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), China helped put together a condemnation of Israel's strikes, a move that drew a refusal from India, an SCO member adopting a differentiated view towards Israel. These statements, stronger than Beijing's response to last fall's Iran-Israel clashes, signal an escalation of rhetorical stance. Yet, for all its verbal firepower, China has offered little material aid — no weapons, no troops. This gap between rhetoric and action has frustrated some in Tehran, where analysts like Andrea Ghiselli note that Iran craves 'concrete help, like anti-aircraft systems or fighter jets.' Western observers, too, have seized on China's inaction, framing it as evidence of Beijing's limited clout in the Middle East. They argue that China's absence underscores the widening gap between its great power aspirations and its inability to shape fast-moving crises. Such critiques, however, miss the point: China's restraint is not a weakness, but a deliberate choice, rooted in a strategic discipline that has allowed it to outgrow its major rival for decades. Beijing's approach reflects a fundamental disillusionment with military intervention as leverage, a lesson drawn from the USSR's collapse and America's quagmires in Afghanistan and Iraq. Oriana Skylar Mastro, a former Pentagon strategist, sees the US's renewed entanglement as a blunder, diverting attention from the Asia-Pacific and depleting US resources without clear strategic gains. The war in Afghanistan, which cost the equivalent of 10 Belt and Road Initiatives, stands as a cautionary tale for Beijing. Why, then, would China replicate America's mistakes by diving into the Iranian quagmire? Instead, Beijing has chosen to support Iran through non-military means: Purchasing a large portion of Iran's oil, brokering the 2023 Iran-Saudi reconciliation, and signing a 25-year cooperation agreement in 2021. These efforts have kept Iran afloat amid US sanctions, proving more impactful than any military adventure. For sure, China's economic stakes in the region are immense. Half of its oil imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz, and its investments span Iran's energy sector and Saudi Arabia's infrastructure. A wider conflict could disrupt these flows, threatening China's core economic interests. Yet, Beijing's diversified energy ties give it flexibility. Analysts from Fitch Ratings suggest that even a total loss of Iranian oil exports could be offset by spare capacity from OPEC-plus producers. Meanwhile, China's push for energy independence, with renewables now accounting for 56 per cent of its power plant capacity, reduces its long-term vulnerability to geostrategic crisis. Western media and policy circles, eager to paint Iran as China's Achilles' heel, have exaggerated the extent and depth of China's partnership with Iran, branding the relationship as an 'Axis of Upheaval'. They advocate for expanded US sanctions on Chinese refineries and banks involved in Iranian oil purchases, hoping to force China into a corner: Either double down on Iran and alienate Arab partners or abandon Tehran and lose face. But China has deftly avoided this trap. Its non-confrontational approach allows it to 'hedge its bets', maintaining ties across rivalries. By condemning Israel's actions without committing resources, China preserves much of its economic leverage and diplomatic credibility in the region. The conflict even presents China with unexpected opportunities. Iran's outdated air defences, exposed by Israel's dominance, could open new markets for Chinese defence technology. Pakistan's recent accord, using Chinese J-10C fighter jets and air defence systems, has piqued interest in Tehran, which may revisit arms deals with Beijing for the first time since 2005. Such sales would bolster China's defence industry without requiring direct involvement in the conflict — a low-risk, high-reward prospect. China's strategic restraint extends beyond Iran. Its non-interference policy, applied consistently in conflicts like Russia-Ukraine and India-Pakistan, reflects a broader aversion to foreign entanglements. Even as Western critics decry China's 'rhetorical but not material' support, Beijing sees no contradiction. This stance frustrates those who expect China's behaviour to mirror America's interventionist model, yet it aligns with China's long-term goal: To develop without the burdens of global policing. For Beijing, the conflict could be a distraction that serves its interests. After all, a contained Middle East war keeps the US preoccupied, easing pressure in the Indo-Pacific. China, therefore, benefits from America's overextension. The US pivot to Asia, perpetually delayed by crises elsewhere, largely remains a pipedream. By staying on the sidelines, China avoids the fate of the USSR, whose global military overextension led to economic collapse. Many anti-West enthusiasts from the global south may clamour for Beijing to take a more active role, but their expectations align uncomfortably with the Western hawks' desire to 'drag' China into the conflict. Such a move would undermine the very strategy — economic focus, diplomatic agility, and military restraint — that has fuelled China's rise. Beijing's loud condemnations and quiet pragmatism are not signs of indecision but of confidence in a winning formula. As the US burns through resources and goodwill, China watches, calculates, and waits, secure in the knowledge that restraint is its greatest asset. In the end, China's approach to the Iran-Israel-US episode is neither altruistic nor timid. It is strategic patience, designed to maximise benefits while minimising risk. The writer is among China's new generation of India watchers

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store