
How Operation 'Midnight Hammer' fell: Mission was built on deception and surprise... with not a shot fired back
The 'Invisible Defenders' rolled from aircraft hangers into the muggy Missouri air at the start of a mission destined for the annals of military aviation.
Assembled were nine of the most expensive and advanced aircraft in the world, the B-2 Stealth Bomber, eerily futuristic in appearance and destined to reshape the Middle East.
Even at Whiteman Air Force Base in the US Mid-West the details of the mission were a closely guarded secret.
The bombers slipped into the clammy darkness above Whiteman at just after midnight local time on Saturday at the start of a 37-hour mission that would surprise the world.
Today, that world is adjusting to the implications of Operation Midnight Hammer, a mission marking the end of a 45-year stand-off between the United States and Iran. A vast amount of detail has yet to be released, but the mission was planned and rehearsed years in advance for precisely the situation the US is now confronted by.
Under the wings of each of the B-2s were two of the biggest conventional bombs ever produced, the GBU-57, or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) as it is known in military vernacular.
Initially, the fleet flew in a triangular formation across the night sky and over the great plains and lakes of America's interior.
But then came the first of many deceptions – intended to keep the world guessing about Donald Trump's intentions – when a pair of B-2s split from the 'strike package' and headed west towards the Pacific.
Their destination was not Iran but Guam, a US island territory in Pacific Micronesia and home to the Andersen Air Force Base, 4,000 miles from Iran.
Keen watchers of the sky, particularly in these turbulent times, soon picked up on their movements and reports spread. Their intended destination was reported on international wire services and made the Trump-friendly Fox News headlines.
That focus allowed the remaining seven-strong team to head to their real target – the nuclear facilities run by the Tehran regime. Operating under virtual radio silence, they flew undetected for 18 hours, aided by refuelling tankers in the sky to keep them on their way.
General Dan Caine, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained to the world's press yesterday: 'As part of a plan to maintain tactical surprise, part of the package proceeded to the west and into the Pacific as a decoy. This deception effort was known only to an extremely small number of planners and key leaders here in Washington DC and in Tampa [the headquarters of US Central Command].
'The main strike package proceeded quietly to the east with minimal communications.
'Throughout the 18-hour flight into the target area the aircraft completed multiple in-flight refuellings.'
Senior US officials, including the Commander-in-Chief himself, were buoyed by the success of the sleight of hand as they gathered in the White House War Room.
There the US President, whose second term is likely to be shaped by the fallout from yesterday's operation, was joined by leading lieutenants, such as Vice-President JD Vance and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth.
A notable absentee was National Security Director Tulsi Gabbard, who became persona non grata after she backed a US intelligence report that concluded that Iran, contrary to Israel's claims, was not on the cusp of developing a nuclear missile.
Reportedly, President Trump has scarcely spoken to her since.
She is likely to have been among the majority of US officials who were entirely unaware that Midnight Hammer was taking place.
It was America's most classified mission of recent times. Very few officers in the Pentagon knew of its existence, let alone the operational details.
According to reports, the UK was told of the mission before the bombs dropped, but President Trump's decision to launch it from mainland United States, rather than the joint UK-US base at Diego Garcia, was telling.
Seemingly, he was determined to deliver an 'America First' mission to convince isolationist sceptics in his Make America Great Again (MAGA) support base that he had made the right call.
That determination dictated that the United States provided every one of the 125 combat aircraft involved, every precision-guided missile, every cruise missile and every naval vessel.
The seven remaining B-2s continued towards Iran, shielded by an echelon of fighter jets. But the US's opening salvo would be fired not from any of these aircraft but a US nuclear submarine in the Arabian Sea.
At just before 10pm GMT the as-yet unnamed US submarine fired more than two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles.
Their purpose was to neutralise Iranian defence systems protecting nuclear enrichment facilities at Isfahan. When these sites had been destroyed, the B-2 group entered Iranian airspace.
The stealth jet squadron slipped into enemy skies, moving into attack formation at 'high altitude and high speed', with lighter, more mobile F-22 fighter jets sweeping in front of the B-2s to shield them from any surface-to-air or air-to-air fire.
There was none. Not a single shot was fired at any of the aircraft or warships involved in Midnight Hammer from the beginning of the operation to its end.
Soon they were on top of their main target, the Fordow nuclear plant buried in a mountain south of Tehran and protected with reinforced concrete. The first bunker-busters struck vulnerable positions at the facility such as ventilation shafts. According to US commanders, all 14 GBU-57s struck their intended targets.
Smoking craters picked up on satellite images yesterday looked almost like pin-pricks on the rocky landscape, showing the accuracy of the strikes. The huge blast effects desired by the Americans will have occurred deep beneath the surface.
Finally, it appears a further volley of Tomahawk cruise missiles launched by US Navy vessels to protect the B-2s and F-22s as they began their long journey home.
The aircraft left Iranian airspace just 25 minutes later and headed home, seemingly without the regime having a clue that they were there. Then, and only then, did the White House inform Congress of the military action. This could prove controversial in the US, particularly as no exceptions were made for senior Republicans in both houses.
Even ultra-loyal Trump lawmakers had to wait. As the US had not declared war on Iran, the bombing mission did not need Congress's prior approval. Gen Caine said yesterday that initial assessments indicated that 'all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction'.
President Trump boasted that they had been 'completely and totally obliterated' and that no other military in the world could have accomplished the mission.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
34 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump agitates for regime change to ‘make Iran great again'
Donald Trump has appeared to agitate for new leadership in Iran. The US president on Sunday suggested a 'regime change' would take place if its leaders were 'unable to make Iran great again'. His comments came just hours after vice president JD Vance and defence secretary Pete Hegseth stressed that Washington was not seeking to topple the Iranian government following US air strikes on its nuclear facilities this weekend. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change?' Mr Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. Referencing his 'Maga' (Make America Great Again) movement, he added: 'MIGA!!!' Since striking Iran in the early hours of Sunday, Mr Trump has pressed the country not to retaliate and urged it to return to the negotiating table immediately. At a press conference at the Pentagon on Sunday morning, Mr Hegseth declared: 'This mission was not, has not been, about regime change.' 'We don't want a regime change,' Mr Vance said a short time later. 'We do not want to protract this.' He added: 'We want to end the nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here.' Senior US officials have warned that forcing out Iran's government would leave a power vacuum and result in another protracted American war in the Middle East. Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the UN, said on Sunday that Israel would like to see regime change in Iran but would not seek to engineer it. 'That's for the Iranian people to decide, not us,' he said. Also on Sunday, John Bolton, Mr Trump's former national security adviser, claimed Iran was 'on the verge' of regime change following the US attacks and said the president would be forced to use 'brutal force' if Tehran retaliated. Mr Trump previously vetoed an Israeli plan to kill Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, American officials revealed last week. In the early hours of Sunday the US launched strikes on Iran, hitting three nuclear bases at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Mr Trump described the action as 'a spectacular military success' that had 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities. He said in an earlier Truth Social post: 'We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the 'bomb' right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!) but, as usual, and despite all of the praise and accolades received, this 'lightweight' Congressman is against what was so brilliantly achieved last night.' Israeli officials on Sunday said they believe Iran's heavily-fortified nuclear site at Fordow sustained serious damage from the strikes but had not been completely destroyed. A US official told the New York Times it had been taken 'off the table'. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, issued a more conservative assessment than the president on Sunday. He said Iran's nuclear capabilities had been 'degraded' and 'set back from a technical standpoint', but stopped short of saying they had been outright destroyed. On Sunday, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, claimed Israel was 'close' to wiping out Iran's nuclear programme and ballistic missiles. He vowed not to be dragged into a 'war of attrition with Iran', saying: 'When we achieve our objectives, the fighting will stop.'


Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Mahmoud Khalil sparks outrage days after being released from ICE detention amid calls for him to be deported
Pro-Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil has sparked fury by returning to the frontlines of a protest just two days after he was released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention. The Columbia University student, who was swept up in an ICE arrest on March 8 and threatened with deportation, vowed not to be silenced by the Trump administration, even as they continue to seek a legal avenue to expel him from the United States. Khalil arrived back in New York on Saturday, hours after a federal judge ruled his detention was unconstitutional and demanded he be freed to return home to his wife and newborn baby, who was born while he was incarcerated. The 30-year-old Palestinian, who was born in a Syrian refugee camp, wore a shirt which read 'Lift the siege on Gaza ' as he celebrated his temporary victory. He clutched his wife Noor Abdalla's hand and threw his arms up in victory as the crowd cheered, thanking his supporters, legal team and protestors who had the 'courage' to continue to protest in the face of ICE deportations. Khalil told the crowd Columbia 'would do anything and everything it can to ensure that the words ''free Palestine'' are not uttered anywhere near it. But while we are here, Free, Free Palestine.' He said that while the administration had tried to paint him as 'violent', he argued he is simply 'a Palestinian who refused to stay silent while watching a genocide.' He went on to say 'genocide... is being funded by the US government.' His comments have sparked mass backlash from pro-MAGA loyalists on social media, who questioned why he opted to return to a protest and throw his freedom back in the administration's face. Others questioned why he wasn't spending time with his newborn child, given he missed the birth while he was detained. 'He's not a citizen. Why is he being allowed to continue terrorizing American students?' one critic asked. 'Mahmoud Khalil 's green card should be revoked permanently. He doesn't belong in the US when his whole purpose is to stir up discontent and rage. No other country would put up with this behavior from a foreigner with a green card,' another wrote. 'Apparently spending quality time with his 3 mo old baby wasn't high on his priority list—inciting violence against Jewish people came first,' a third added. Speaking to the New York Times after his release, Khalil warned President Trump that the actions of his ICE agents had done little to deter him. 'I don't think what happened to me would stop me [from protesting],' he said. 'If anything, it's actually reinforced my belief that what we're doing is right.' Khalil compared his arrest to the actions of government agents in Syria who acted outside of the scope of the law, noting: 'That's literally what made me flee.' After arriving back in New York, Khalil had said: 'If they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine. 'I just want to go back and continue the work I was already doing, advocating for Palestinian rights, a speech that should actually be celebrated rather than punished.' But Khalil made a name for himself when he arrived on Columbia's campus in 2023 as he tried to organize guest speakers to discuss the so called apartheid in Israel on campus and led the pro-Palestinian movement. By 2024, he was acting as a negotiator between the University and protestors who had set up an encampment on campus in solidarity with Palestinians suffering in Gaza. Despite securing a green card in November 2024, Khalil was arrested by plain clothes ICE agents on March 8 while returning home with his wife from dinner with friends. Agents initially said his student visa had been canceled, but when it was noted that Khalil did not need a student visa, Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealed he had been identified as a foreign policy threat. Khalil was transferred to a detention facility in Louisiana, and spent a total of 104 days incarcerated while a team of high powered lawyers worked tirelessly to secure his freedom. Now, authorities are challenging his release and seeking ways to secure his deportation. Assistant Homeland Security secretary Tricia McLaughlin said: 'This is yet another example of how out of control members of the judicial branch are undermining national security. 'Their conduct not only denies the result of the 2024 election, it also does great harm to our constitutional system by undermining public confidence in the courts.'


Times
42 minutes ago
- Times
Times letters: Britain and the tinderbox in the Middle East
Write to letters@ Sir, Sir Keir Starmer has called on Iran to 'return to the negotiating table' after the US bombed its nuclear sites. But treating Iran as a legitimate negotiating partner while it refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist only reinforces Tehran's rejectionist stance. History provides a clear road map: recognition leads to peace. Of the 164 countries that now recognise Israel, none are engaged in active warfare with it. Egypt's recognition in 1979 ended decades of conflict. Jordan's recognition in 1994 transformed enemies into sometime partners. The Abraham Accords demonstrated that recognition can unlock prosperity and co-operation even without resolving every regional grievance. Regional issues need and deserve resolution but they cannot be resolved in an environment where a significant power actively works towards the destruction of Israel. Negotiations remain preferable to conflict, but Israel needs to be involved in these talks as a recognised sovereign state. Without recognition and meaningful bilateral negotiations between Israel and Iran, the present situation will continue as a zero-sum game, which Israel simply cannot afford to lose. Tony Morcowitz Brighton and Hove Sir, When Sir Keir Starmer announced the Chagos Islands giveaway, he said that surrendering sovereignty was necessary because the UK had to be seen to uphold international law. Now he has gone on to publish statements in support of the US bombing of Iran. He is publicly supporting a flagrant breach of international law forbidding unprovoked attacks on other nations and, indeed, is speaking in defiance of advice from his attorney-general warning that any attack on Iran could be illegal. The government asserted that the international-law principles embodied by the Chagos deal would earn Britain respect in the 'global south', but in light of the UK's support for Israeli-American actions against Iran, all that the rest of the world will now observe is that Britain's commitment to international law is equivocal and inconsistent. Robert Frazer Salford Sir, International events emphasise the paucity of the UK's air defences, in particular the capability to counter attacks by ballistic missiles. Should the situation deteriorate to the extent that we are threatened, this will be critical, with Britain's best anti-missile defence platforms being six Type 45 destroyers, one of which is deployed with HMS Queen Elizabeth. Other Type 45s may or may not be available, with a number in refit, but ship-based systems are insufficient to defend the entire nation. Recent announcements on defence, from the strategic defence review through to promises to raise spending by a few percentage points in future, will do nothing to repair our non-existent integrated air defence. The government needs to act now and procure anti-ballistic systems. Group Captain Michael Norris St Austell, Cornwall Sir, In the raid on RAF Brize Norton (news, Jun 21), one of the engines on the Voyager aircraft was so badly damaged by the red paint sprayed on it by Palestine Action activists that it is said that the tanker is out of action and a new engine will cost £25 million. Surely this is nonsense: our planes are so vulnerable than an enemy would only have to drop paint over them to make them useless in war time? Brian RJ Simpson Gosport, Hants Sir, My father, Michael Beetham, was station commander of RAF Khormaksar in Aden, Yemen, in the mid-1960s, during a period of heightened tensions. As a small boy, I watched as he set off in the evenings to drive around the perimeter fence in his Land Rover. Sometimes he took me with him. He would stop and talk to personnel and inspect fences. He went on to be the longest-serving Chief of the Air Staff since Lord Trenchard, founder of the RAF. I wonder who carries out such checks these days at bases like Brize Norton? Alex Beetham Woodditton, Cambs Sir, There are many reasons why the House of Lords may not survive in its present form. Hubris is certainly one. For unnamed peers to tell The Times that they will use 'black arts' to 'kill off' the assisted dying bill and employ 'every means possible' to prevent it becoming law is hubris of the highest order (news, Jun 21). The Lords can and should seek to improve the bill through its scrutiny. That is indeed its role. But to seek fundamentally to thwart the will of the elected Commons is not. It is not just the future of the bill that will be at stake in this regard. So too will the future of an unelected second chamber. Sir Leigh Lewis Watford Sir, In just three days the concept of laws being based on Judeo-Christian principles has been removed by the House of Commons. Aborting a full-term unborn child will no longer be a criminal offence and assisting someone to kill themselves was approved. MPs have replaced a morality based on respect for life by a culture of death. Neither these changes were in the Labour Party manifesto and the House of Lords should therefore not feel constrained in refusing to endorse them. Nicholas Bennett Minister of health for Wales, 1990-92; Bromley, Kent Sir, I am horrified by the moral ambiguity demonstrated by the government. After endless debate, the third reading of the assisted dying bill has narrowly been passed, a compassionate piece of legislation that will give terminally ill people more control over their lives. By contrast, after only two hours' debate the government has amended abortion regulations to allow women to have a termination at any stage of their pregnancy, without fear of prosecution. The 24-week limit for legal abortion was set to protect viable foetuses. This amendment sanctions the murder of babies capable of leading independent lives. I hope there is sufficient wisdom among the members of the House of Lords to persuade the Commons to rethink the unethical decision they have made. Frances MacDonald Stratford-upon-Avon Sir, The reports that HS2 may now cost £100 billion came in the same week that Nice concluded the known benefits of the new Alzheimer's drugs lecanemab and donanemab do not justify the expense of funding them through the public healthcare system (news, Jun 19; letter, Jun 21). Given that the government is likely to have to make stark choices in its next budget, the choice of either cutting 30 minutes off journey times between London to Birmingham or extending the meaningful lives of thousands of people each year could not be starker. If Rachel Reeves's repeated statements that her decisions reflect the choice of the people are true, then let's ask them directly which they'd rather have. Dr Barry Johnson Sheffield Sir, Settle to Carlisle is now seen as one of the world's greatest railway journeys. However, the line started out in difficulty and there are some interesting comparisons to be made with HS2. The estimate to build the line was £2 million, but the challenges of building a route through the Pennines resulted in the cost and time to completion doubling. The line opened to freight traffic 150 years ago (passengers a year later). The final cost was about £500 million in today's money, and it took five years to build. Admittedly it is only 72 miles long (compared with 120 miles for HS2) and the hundreds of boys employed were paid half a crown (12.5p) per day. The railway today is a magnificent reminder of the vision of the Midland Railway Company, which sponsored it, and the tenacity and ingenuity of those who overcame the challenges of a hostile environment to build it. I wonder if in 150 years HS2 will be as popular — assuming of course that it is completed. Dr Bryan Gray Hunsonby, Cumbria Sir, It is nothing short of insanity that elite rugby union players are about to embark on a tour to Australia with the British & Irish Lions after another very lengthy domestic season, when there is clear evidence showing a dose-response relationship between head impacts and neurodegenerative disease. The longer and more intensely one plays contact or collision sports, the higher the risk of brain damage. The Lions tour — a gruelling and commercially driven tournament — is being promoted as a pinnacle of achievement. Where is the duty of care to players? Where are the safeguards and transparent risk disclosures? Rugby cannot continue to ignore the realities of repeated brain trauma in pursuit of nostalgia and profit. It must start putting welfare above spectacle. Alix Popham Ret'd professional rugby union player; Welsh international, 33 caps; Newport Sir, You report that the late Queen did indeed carry cash, for betting on the races (news, Jun 21). As a young journalist at The Sun in the Eighties I was sent to report on the Derby. The press box was next to the royal box and we all saw Her Majesty dash down to the front to watch a winner triumph. I was designated to ask her: 'Ma'am, did you have a bet on the winning horse?' I leaned over from the box to be faced by the back of Prince Philip, who was chatting to the Queen. My first attempt was ignored and feeling embarrassed and slightly annoyed I tried again. Philip drifted off and so I repeated the question. 'Did I what?' she replied frostily. Red-faced and sweating I stumbled through it again, when she graced me with a beautiful smile and said: 'Oh no, my dear, I never bet!' The next year a barrier was erected between the two boxes so that she would not be approached again. Muriel Freeman (née Burden) South Shields Sir, Car horns don't need to be loud to be effective (letters, Jun 17-21). When I was living in Bath in the early 1970s I drove an MGB, which I had bought from a friend. He had fitted a trio of strident air horns, but I discovered that if I pressed the button very gently the horns would emit a gasping or panting sound. Being very immature at the time I occasionally made this happen while waiting as a pretty girl crossed the road. This sometimes produced an amused response, but not always. One of the recipients of this attention, a particularly pretty girl, subsequently recognised me when we met at a party and she ticked me off for my uncouth behaviour, which I never repeated. In October we will have been married for 50 years. Richard Le Masurier Milford-on-Sea, Hants Sir, My husband was lucky enough to get ten birthday cards from me last year (letters, 18, 19 & 21). After forgetting to buy one for him I simply added 'and Wendy' to the cards he had received from other people. Wendy Rayner Huddersfield Sir, Dominic Sandbrook's article on class and how to define a gentleman (comment, Jun 21) reminded me of an events notice I saw when stationed in the British Army of the Rhine with the King's Own Scottish Borderers in the mid-60s. Those invited to a Minden Day dance were: 'Officers and their Ladies, NCOs and their Wives, and Other Ranks and their Women-Folk.' Bill Wells Wisbech, Cambs Sir, I've always felt rather proud of the fact that the Yiddish word 'mensch' means much the same as 'gentleman' but without any class implications — or gender implications either; a woman can be a mensch too. Or not, as the case may be. Margaret Lesser Bowdon, Greater Manchester Sir, Mark Twain, as is so often the case, hit the nail on the head. A gentleman, he said, is someone who knows how to play the banjo and doesn't. Dr David Bogod Nottingham Write to letters@