World braces for what Iran might do next after US attacks three nuclear sites
Don't miss out on the headlines from World. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Israel has shut down schools and banned gatherings across the country, and American troops are bracing for counter-attacks, as the world waits to see how Iran will respond to today's US strikes.
Iran has already launched missiles at Israel as its Tel Aviv citizens scramble to shelter with reports of some casualties.
President Donald Trump said the US 'successfully' carried out air strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, 'obliterating' the Fordow facility as well as those in Natanz and Isfahan.
After the attacks, Hossein Shariatmadari, a representative of Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the Islamic republic was ready to respond.
'Now it is our turn to, without wasting time, as a first step, fire missiles at the US naval fleet in Bahrain and at the same time close the Strait of Hormuz to American, British, German and French ships,' he said in the Iranian Kayhan newspaper.
Later, an official statement from the Iranian Foreign Minister warned 'the United States has launched a dangerous war' and would be 'fully responsible' for the 'consequences'.
Israeli air defence system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Saturday, June 21, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
Mr Trump told Iran the US was willing to continue its aerial campaign on Iran, including 'greater' future attacks, if it did not comply with peace efforts.
'Any retaliation by Iran against the United States of America will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight,' he said in a late-night post to Truth Social.
As the world waits to see how the Iran will respond, US military leaders are reportedly warning troops to brace for potential retaliatory strikes.
There are more than 40,000 US troops and civilians working for the Pentagon across the Middle East, according to figures from the New York Times, in nations such as Iraq, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emitrates.
US President Donald Trump addresses the nation, alongside US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (R) from the White House in Washington, DC on June 21, 2025, following the announcement that the US bombed nuclear sites in Iran. Picture: Carlos Barria / NewsWire POOL
Experts all agreed that Iran would retaliate against the US and Iran's foreign minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi hinted on social media that nothing was off the table.
He described the US attack as 'outrageous' and one that 'will have everlasting consequences'.
'The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations,' he wrote on X.
'The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behaviour.'
'In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defence, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people.'
This handout satellite image provided by Maxar Technologies shows the Isfahan nuclear enrichment facility in central Iran on June 14, 2025, after it was hit by Israeli strikes. President Donald Trump said June 21, 2025 the US military has carried out a "very successful attack" on three Iranian nuclear sites, including the underground uranium enrichment facility at Fordo. Picture: Satellite image ©2025 Maxar Technologies / AFP
Retired US army officer John Spencer told ABC News that Iran could respond to the conflict via an 'irrational route'.
'It could go with Hezbollah, which still has a lot of capabilities, against Israel, (and where) there are hundred of thousands of American citizens,' he said.
'It could (activate) Shia-backed militia groups in Iraq to attack American bases. It's ballistic program, which is about 50 per cent destroyed, it could make that fatal mistake of launching ballistic missiles at American bases within its range.'
Meanwhile Omar Rahman, from the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told the ABC that Iran had its 'back to the wall' and it's only option was to retaliate to ensure the regime's credibility.
'I think you're going to see some sort of military response here against US assets and military installations in the region,' he said.
'That could be against aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, it could be against any number of the bases and tens of thousands of US soldiers stationed in the region.'
Chillingly, others have warned that the US attack good push Iran to develop a nuclear weapon and this was likely the beginning of the war, rather than the end.
A picture of the destruction at site of an Iranian missile attack in a residential area in Beersheba in southern Israel, on June 20, 2025. Israel and Iran exchanged fire again on June 20, a week into the war between the longtime enemies. (Photo by MAYA LEVIN / AFP)
Israel, meanwhile, is bracing for further Iranian retaliation.
Shortly after Mr Trump confirmed the US strikes, the Israel Defence Force's Home Front Command declared all schools across the country would close, social gatherings were banned and only essential businesses were allowed to operate, effective immediately.
Israeli military spokesman Avichay Adraee, who heads the IDF's Arab media unit, issued an update to security restrictions in Israel.
'It was decided to move all regions of the country to the level of essential work,' he wrote on X.
'The instructions include prohibiting educational activities, gatherings, and work centres, with the exception of essential work areas.'
People sit outside pitched tents as they take shelter at a bus station in Tel Aviv on June 21, 2025 amid fears of an Iranian missile attack. (Photo by AHMAD GHARABLI / AFP)
Around the world some are sounding the alarm that the escalation of the war could result in dire consequences.
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned the US strikes on Iran were a 'dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.'
'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,' he said.
'At this perilous hour, it is critical to avoid a spiral of chaos. There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy. The only hope is peace.'
Originally published as World braces for what Iran will do next
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Self-interested despots and unfettered crimes
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. MIDDLE EAST There is much to dislike about Iran's leaders, but they are hardly alone. Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin are three leaders who come to mind, each with little regard for the inconveniences of traditional statesmanship or democracy. All three have nuclear weapons, and little inclination to exercise self-control in the use of unbridled warfare. One has to ponder what gives this trio of warmongers the right to exist and to pursue their own nuclear ambitions while denying those choices to others. Given their respective track records, there is a massive hypocrisy in any one of the three making claims to the moral high ground. Donald Trump has often claimed he has the power to end wars and yet he admires and supports those who start them. Seldom, in the modern history of mankind, have we seen such a collection of amoral, self-interested despots inflicting such unfettered crimes against humanity. Bob Thomas, Blackburn South Can't leaders see war begets war? After 14 months of weekly protests touting their agenda ″from the mountains to the sea, Palestine would be free″, the pro-Palestine protesters exposed themselves as unreasonable, given their lack of helpful suggestions as to how Israelis could also live in peace without constant fear from neighbouring countries. To some extent, I can understand why the current acting chief of the Israeli Defence Force in an interview on ABC TV 7.30 last Thursday complained about being surrounded by bad neighbours. However, it was hardly a good neighbourly act by Israel to start occupying, then developing the West Bank with apartments, was it? All the while, leaving Palestinians in daily misery. Talk about how not to win friends and influence people, not least the oppressed Palestinian women and children who are clearly used as pawns by Hamas. All the while, the UN has once again shown how useless it is as any kind of international peace-making body. All the while, Israel, too, perhaps encouraged by the current president of the United States, has shown more interest in once and for all destruction of its enemies than the return of the hostages. In some respects, who could blame them, given it was Hamas who escalated the conflict by their action on October 7, 2023? But for there to be peace, we have to ask why so many on both sides of this conflict still think the answer is yet more war. Can they not see war begets war? Do they not remember how good life can be to live in peace? Or perhaps they've never had the chance. Bernadette George, Mildura Obama's nuclear deal stacked in Iran's favour Your correspondent asks why Iran should deal with Israel or the US after Trump dumped the Obama nuclear deal (Letters, 22/6). That deal was stacked in favour of Iran and would have allowed Iran to recommence uranium enrichment this year and remove all restrictions by 2030. Even so, Iran was in serious breach of the agreement when Trump dumped it. It had not come clean about all elements of its nuclear program as required, and wasn't allowing even the limited inspections required by the deal. Now it has been racing towards nuclear weapons and rapidly escalating ballistic missile production, while continuing to use its terror proxies to cause violence across the Middle East. That's why Israel and the US, rightly, attacked. They have made it clear their aim is not regime-change, but to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, and will negotiate to achieve that. However, Iran has shown it is not interested. Shane Shmuel, Elsternwick THE FORUM Votes for the 44 towers ″There are no votes in public housing″: This was a mantra heard in corridors and meeting rooms of Victoria's Office of Housing throughout my almost 20 years' service throughout the '80s and '90s. Despite the trope, both state and federal governments supported its expansion under the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement. Governments understood the transformative power of quality, affordable, secure and well-located housing for low-income families. Just ask the prime minister. In Melbourne, the 44 high-rise towers were and are a crucial part of the public housing palette. They are the welcoming homes of new arrivals to this country, they are the communities that support and nurture generations of low-income families and children. Even Jeff Kennett was convinced they should stay in public ownership despite his policy in 1992 to hand them over to private developers and sell off the remaining public housing stock to existing tenants. Now, at a time when a chasm of inequality has opened in our community, the towers and their communities are under threat from another government which sees no votes in retaining them. To dispose of the towers and their communities when other cheaper, better, less disruptive options for upgrade and renovation have been present ad nauseam to government, is a sacrilege. There are votes in both retaining the 44 towers and public housing more broadly in public hands because when they are gone, the homeless camps, the poverty, and desperate crime on our streets will be a reminder of the failure of governments to do so. Craig Horne, Fitzroy North Chalmers' boosterism Before the May election, Treasurer Jim Chalmers was patting himself on the back about the surpluses Labor had achieved and how responsible Labor had been. He said income tax cuts were a good idea and mocked the Coalition for opposing them. A few months later, he says there is a need for budget repair and that he is canvassing options for tax reform. Some commentators dismissed Chalmers' boosterism before the election: They argued Labor had squandered a revenue bonanza from higher commodity prices and bracket creep. It looks like they were correct. Alun Breward, Malvern East Responsible move In criticising the Labor government for its economic management and policies, columnist Parnell Palme McGuinness (″ Watch Libs blow golden opportunity ″, 22/6) demonstrates how difficult she and other conservative commentators make it for any changes to be made by government. She accuses Labor of ″trashing its own legacy by changing the rules on superannuation″. As she would know, those affected by the changes are a very small minority of very rich taxpayers who have taken advantage of concessional tax rates for superannuation. If the income tax or capital gains or other tax arrangements had a greater benefit, that's where their money would be. It's totally responsible, indeed obligatory, for governments of any colour to review major policies to see that the policy objective for a secure retirement is met. It was never the aim of superannuation to be a major tax minimisation vehicle. Megan Stoyles, Aireys Inlet
7NEWS
2 hours ago
- 7NEWS
B-2 bombers and ‘bunker buster' bombs used in US strikes on Iran
The United States has used its most elite stealth bombers and largest non-nuclear bombs in a massive coordinated strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump confirmed the US had 'completed our very successful attack on the three nuclear sites in Iran', including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan on Saturday (Sunday AEST). Two sources familiar with the operation told CNN the United States used the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), also known as a 'bunker buster,' in its strikes. At least six B-2 Spirit bombers were deployed to attack Iran's deeply buried Fordow nuclear site, dropping the 1.3-ton MOP bomb, a US official told CNN. The official said a dozen MOP bombs were dropped on Fordow alone. The GBU-57A/B is a 30,000-pound (13,600kg) bomb is packed with 6000 pounds of explosives, designed specifically for 'reaching and destroying our adversaries' weapons of mass destruction located in well-protected facilities,' according to a US Air Force fact sheet. The bomb explodes twice — once on impact, and again up to 60 metres underground. The B-2 Spirit is the only aircraft capable of carrying the MOP. Is the US Air Force's most advanced stealth bomber, Separately, Navy submarines launched 30 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs) at nuclear sites in Natanz and Isfahan, the US official said. A B-2 bomber also dropped two MOPs on Natanz, the official told CNN. The specifics of the strike were first reported by The New York Times. The B-2 is known for its flying wing design, radar-evading features and long-range capability. It can carry a 40,000-pound payload and costs around $2 billion per aircraft. Only 20 exist, all based at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan are the backbone of the Iranian nuclear program, according to Western intelligence. Isfahan is a research base. It's believed Iran was working towards the final step of putting weapons grade nuclear material into a war head for a nuclear weapon. Natanz and Fordow are reportedly uranium enrichment facilities where centrifgues processed the radioavtice material. The Fordow site is buried more than 90 metres underground inside a mountain. Saturday's mission is believed to be the first operational use of the MOP bomb.
AU Financial Review
2 hours ago
- AU Financial Review
Iran vows retaliation after Trump ‘obliterates' nuclear ambitions
Canberra | Washington | Iran has vowed to hit back hard against Donald Trump's air raids on the regime's nuclear program and launched a fresh wave of missiles against Israeli cities, as the US president promised more attacks if American interests in the Middle East were targeted. In the most consequential decision of his presidency, Trump defied the advice of allies, including Australia who had advocated for diplomacy, leaving the Middle East at risk of spiralling into further conflict, destabilising global markets and piling pressure on oil prices.
