
Did Trump pull back from a wider war with Iran? Inside the scrapped plan to strike more nuclear sites beyond Operation Midnight Hammer
Operation Midnight
Hammer. It was described by President Donald Trump as a decisive blow to Iran's nuclear programme. But intelligence gathered since tells a more complicated story.
Only one of the three main targets, the Fordow facility, suffered heavy damage. According to a US intelligence assessment reported by NBC News, strikes on
Natanz
and
Isfahan
were far less effective. Both sites could potentially restart uranium enrichment within months.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
MBA
Product Management
Digital Marketing
Operations Management
Project Management
Data Analytics
Others
Degree
Management
Healthcare
Public Policy
healthcare
Data Science
PGDM
Technology
CXO
others
Finance
Artificial Intelligence
Design Thinking
MCA
Data Science
Cybersecurity
Leadership
Skills you'll gain:
Analytical Skills
Financial Literacy
Leadership and Management Skills
Strategic Thinking
Duration:
24 Months
Vellore Institute of Technology
VIT Online MBA
Starts on
Aug 14, 2024
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Financial Management
Team Leadership & Collaboration
Financial Reporting & Analysis
Advocacy Strategies for Leadership
Duration:
18 Months
UMass Global
Master of Business Administration (MBA)
Starts on
May 13, 2024
Get Details
Despite this, Trump has stood by his original statement. 'Iran's key enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,' he said, shortly after the strike.
Pentagon
spokesperson Sean Parnell backed him, stating, 'There is no doubt about that.'
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Dolly Parton, 79, Takes off Her Makeup and Leaves Us Without Words
The Noodle Box
Undo
A broader strike that never happened
The
US Central Command
had prepared a much larger, longer campaign. The plan included targeting three additional sites and launching a wave of attacks over several weeks. It also aimed to dismantle Iran's air defences and missile capabilities.
But Trump turned it down.
Live Events
'We were willing to go all the way in our options, but the president did not want to,' a source familiar with the planning told NBC News.
The proposed campaign, if carried out, would likely have led to higher casualties and drawn the US deeper into conflict with Iran. Trump, according to officials, preferred to avoid escalation and stick with a one-night strike instead.
ET has not been able to independently verify these claims and the report is based on an earlier NBC News report.
Operation Midnight Hammar
On 22 June, B-2 stealth bombers struck Fordow using the GBU-57 — a 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb, deployed in combat for the first time. Tomahawk missiles were used against Isfahan, and Natanz was also targeted with bunker busters.
Fordow, carved deep into a mountain, was the main success. Intelligence suggests Iran's ability to enrich uranium there has been set back by as much as two years.
But the same can't be said for Natanz and Isfahan. The latter's structures were too deep to reach, and only surface targets were hit. At Natanz, some infrastructure survived the blasts. Both sites may be able to resume operations within a few months.
White House responds
Despite internal assessments showing limited damage to two of the three sites, official statements have held a different line.
White House
spokesperson Anna Kelly told NBC News: 'As the President has said and experts have verified, Operation Midnight Hammer totally obliterated Iran's nuclear capabilities.'
Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell added: 'The credibility of the
Fake News Media
is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities: destroyed, in the dirt, and will take years to recover.'
Trump himself doubled down on social media, writing, 'Monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran... Bullseye!!!'
Intelligence still evolving
The initial assessment by the
Defence Intelligence Agency
had suggested Iran's nuclear programme was only set back by a few months. But more recent intelligence now points to deeper damage at Fordow.
CIA
Director John Ratcliffe briefed lawmakers in late June, stating the Natanz metal conversion facility was destroyed and would take 'years to rebuild.'
Ratcliffe also said enriched uranium at Isfahan and Fordow was buried deep enough that Iran would struggle to access it. The US has seen no signs yet that Iran is attempting to recover buried materials.
A senior Israeli official agreed that some uranium remains buried but called it 'effectively unreachable.' Israel has also warned it is monitoring and will strike again if it believes Iran is trying to dig it out.
Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is civilian in nature. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi acknowledged the damage at Fordow but denied that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. In an interview with NBC News, given just before the strikes, he repeated Iran's position that it is not building a bomb.
Tehran's stance remains unchanged. But according to officials, Iran had enough fissile material for up to ten bombs before the June strikes. That estimate came from US officials and UN inspectors.
The limited damage at Natanz and Isfahan has prompted discussions in Washington and Tel Aviv about possible follow-up strikes. Some officials argue that if Iran resumes work or refuses to negotiate, further military action could be needed.
Asked in late June whether he would consider another strike if Iran restarts enrichment, Trump responded: 'Sure. Without question. Absolutely.'
Iran's air defence systems were heavily targeted during Operation Midnight Hammer, and US officials believe it would be nearly impossible for Iran to defend against another strike in the near future.
'It was made clear that Iran no longer has any more [air defences], so the idea that they can easily rebuild anything is ludicrous,' a White House official told NBC.
This flashpoint didn't appear out of nowhere. In 2018, Trump pulled the US out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a nuclear deal agreed under Barack Obama. That agreement had imposed strict curbs on Iran's enrichment in exchange for lifting sanctions.
After leaving the deal, Trump reimposed economic pressure. Iran, in turn, ramped up its enrichment activity. Before the June strike, intelligence showed Iran had breached limits and built up material for several bombs.
Attempts to restart diplomacy between Washington and Tehran failed. Meanwhile, Israel had already begun taking matters into its own hands with earlier targeted strikes.
The all-in plan that was shelved
General Erik Kurilla, head of US Central Command, had drawn up what officials referred to as an 'all-in' plan. It involved six targets, multiple waves of strikes and attacks on Iran's missile systems.
'It would be a protracted air campaign,' a person familiar with the plan told NBC News.
Trump was briefed on it. But he rejected it. The risk of escalation, retaliation, and a drawn-out conflict went against the instincts that had defined much of his foreign policy.
Some within his administration supported the more aggressive approach. Others believed the limited operation would be enough to alter Tehran's calculus.
While Fordow lies crippled, Natanz and Isfahan may not stay idle for long. Officials warn that if Iran begins repair work or resumes enrichment, the US and Israel might act again.
The message from Washington is clear: the strikes changed the equation. But the outcome is not final. As intelligence assessments continue and diplomatic channels remain stalled, the situation remains fragile.
The US believes it has set Iran back. Whether that's enough, though, may soon be tested.
Hashtags

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


India Today
8 minutes ago
- India Today
Under Trump, US to exit Unesco again, two years after rejoining
The United States will leave the United Nations' (UN) culture and education agency Unesco as President Donald Trump continues to pull his country out of international institutions he has long criticised, two European diplomats White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business move is a blow to the Paris-based agency, founded after World War Two to promote peace through international cooperation in education, science, and culture. The New York Post also reported on the US withdrawal, citing a White House Trump took similar steps during his first term, quitting the World Health Organisation (WHO), the UN Human Rights Council, a global climate change accord and the Iran nuclear Biden reversed those decisions after taking office in 2021, returning the US to Unesco, the WHO and the climate Trump now back in the White House, the US is once again pulling out of these global bodies. He has already decided to withdraw the US from the WHO and halt funding to the Palestinian relief agency UNRWA as part of a review of the US' participation in UN agencies, due to be concluded in is best known for designating World Heritage Sites, including the Grand Canyon in the United States and the ancient city of Palmyra in United States initially joined Unesco at its founding in 1945 but withdrew for the first time in 1984 in protest against alleged financial mismanagement and perceived anti-US bias, returning almost 20 years later in 2003 under President George W. Bush, who then said the agency had undertaken needed full name is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural United States provides about 8% of Unesco's total budget, down from about 20% at the time Trump first pulled the United States out of the agency.- Ends IN THIS STORY#Donald Trump#White House
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
8 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump faces an Asia test: Deadline nearing, White House eyes trade deals India, Japan among others
With multiple deals still in flux and the August 1 deadline fast approaching, Trump's trade agenda in Asia is nearing a critical test. While Washington seeks to extract concessions, its approach has sparked concern among partners read more The United States' aggressive tariff push under President Donald Trump is entering a decisive phase, as key trade partners across Asia scramble to negotiate last-minute deals before a looming August 1 deadline. From New Delhi to Tokyo, pressure is mounting on negotiators to deliver outcomes that will spare their countries from steep tariff hikes, while Washington also eyes curbs on Chinese transshipments through regional allies. India's trade team, led by chief negotiator Rajesh Agrawal, recently concluded its fifth round of talks in Washington, with the American delegation expected to visit New Delhi next in a last-ditch effort to secure a breakthrough. 'An interim deal before August 1 looks difficult, though virtual discussions are ongoing,' an Indian government source told Reuters, signalling limited progress so far. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The key sticking points include India's refusal to open its agriculture and dairy markets, and US reluctance to cut tariffs on Indian steel, aluminium and autos. While both sides are said to be considering deferring contentious issues to a later phase, no formal commitments have been made. A formal tariff notice has yet to be issued by Washington, adding to the uncertainty. Trump had threatened in April to impose a 26 per cent tariff on Indian imports, but paused implementation to allow negotiations. Marcos Jr heads to the White House Meanwhile, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr of the Philippines is scheduled to meet Trump this evening (Tuesday) in a bilateral engagement that officials say could include trade talks and defence cooperation. While Manila has not faced the same level of tariff threats as other Asian nations, the meeting is expected to underscore the US pivot to the Indo-Pacific, and Manila's alignment with Washington in regional security matters could play into trade goodwill. Japan's top negotiator in Washington In another critical development, Japan's chief trade negotiator Ryosei Akazawa met US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in Washington on Monday evening for more than two hours. Japan's cabinet secretariat described the discussions as 'frank, in-depth' and said they were aimed at achieving a 'mutually beneficial agreement'. Akazawa is in Washington for an eighth round of talks, but no concrete results have emerged since negotiations began in April. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba is under added pressure following his coalition's election setback on Sunday. Without a deal, tariffs on Japanese exports to the US will rise to 25 per cent on August 1, up from a baseline of 10 per cent and an initial offer of 24 per cent. Loopholes used by China come under scrutiny A parallel challenge for the Trump administration is curbing trade practices it claims are being used by China to circumvent US tariffs. According to Bloomberg Economics, China has increasingly routed goods to the US via third countries such as Vietnam and Mexico. The share of China's value-added manufacturing channelled this way surged to 22 per cent in 2023 from 14 per cent in 2017. 'Trade flows via third countries are substantial and have helped cushion the blow from existing US tariffs,' Bloomberg Economics analysts Chang Shu, Rana Sajedi and David Qu wrote. 'Tighter controls on these shipments would increase the damage from the trade war and could erode growth opportunities in the long term.' Analysts estimate that targeting such transshipments could affect up to 70 per cent of China's exports to the US and dent more than 2.1 per cent of China's GDP. Malaysia and Vietnam weigh their options Malaysia, meanwhile, is pushing for a reduced tariff rate closer to those offered to Indonesia and Vietnam, but is resisting US demands on electric vehicles, foreign ownership and subsidy cuts. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has made it clear that the government has drawn a 'red line' on policies favouring Malays and indigenous people. Vietnam too has faced turbulence in its dealings with Washington. Officials in Hanoi were reportedly blindsided in early July by a US announcement that it had agreed to a 20 per cent tariff rate. Negotiators are still working to finalise the terms of that deal, according to recent statements from Vietnamese officials. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
8 minutes ago
- First Post
Can you now legally bet on the next US president and make money?
Polymarket, the world's largest crypto-based prediction platform, is re-entering the US legally after acquiring a licensed derivatives exchange. With federal investigations dropped and regulators signalling approval, Americans may now be able to bet on political outcomes — like the next US President — through a regulated framework read more A member of the media uses phone as a screen displays the presidential debate, as Republican presidential nominee, former US President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee, US Vice President Kamala Harris attend a presidential debate hosted by ABC in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. File Image/Reuters The popular crypto-based prediction market Polymarket has announced its return to the United States after years of operating offshore. The decentralised prediction market gained notoriety during the 2024 US presidential election. This shift comes after the platform acquired a federally regulated derivatives exchange, paving the way for legally sanctioned event-based trading, including bets on political outcomes. After years of operating from offshore jurisdictions due to regulatory pressure, Polymarket's strategic acquisition of QCX, a registered options exchange based in Florida and Delaware, signals its entry into the US regulatory framework. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This move comes on the heels of the closure of two major investigations into the platform by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — clearing longstanding legal hurdles that had previously kept the company out of the American market. How the Polymarket model works Founded in 2020 by Shayne Coplan, Polymarket enables users to stake digital assets on the outcome of real-world events. Its design is decentralised and non-custodial, meaning the platform does not retain user funds or profit from trades. All transactions are conducted using cryptocurrency and executed through smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain, ensuring transparency and automation without intermediaries. The platform operates by posing binary questions about future events, such as election outcomes, sports results, or geopolitical developments. Users buy and sell shares in each outcome, with market prices adjusting in real time based on trading activity. A correct prediction yields a profit, while an incorrect one leads to a loss — creating a financial incentive for users to speculate based on genuine beliefs rather than guesswork. By November last year, Polymarket had seen over $6 billion in global prediction trading, according to company statements. This included more than $3.3 billion wagered specifically on the 2024 US presidential race between Republican candidate Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris. That cycle marked Polymarket's most active period to date, with political forecasting dominating user engagement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why Polymarket was under the lens in the US Despite its growing popularity, Polymarket had been effectively off-limits to users in the US since 2022, after federal regulators determined that it had been operating without proper authorisation. The CFTC concluded that Polymarket was offering binary options contracts without necessary approvals and required the platform to restrict access to American users. At that time, Polymarket agreed to geoblock users in the United States. This enforcement action was followed by further scrutiny from both the CFTC and DOJ, which investigated whether Polymarket had allowed US residents to continue using the platform indirectly. In late 2023, the FBI raided founder Shayne Coplan's residence in New York City and seized his laptop. However, no charges were brought, and both investigations were officially closed this year. Polymarket's acquisition of QCX and QC Clearing, collectively referred to as QCEX, was made public just days after the inquiries were dropped. The $112 million deal provides Polymarket with a regulated US entity through which it can legally offer its prediction services, including political betting, to American users. 'Laying the foundation to bring Polymarket home — re-entering the US as a fully regulated and compliant platform that will allow Americans to trade their opinions,' Coplan announced after the acquisition was finalised. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What we know about QCX Little was known publicly about QCX prior to the acquisition, but the exchange had received its license from the CFTC early this month, following an application that was first submitted in June 2022. QCX is officially categorised as a Designated Contract Market, meaning it can legally facilitate trading in futures and options contracts, including event-based derivatives. The company is headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida, and operates alongside QC Clearing, its affiliated clearinghouse. Together, these entities provide the legal and infrastructural foundation for Polymarket's US expansion. 'Shayne has built a cultural phenomenon in Polymarket,' said Sergei Dobrovolskii, founder of QCEX. 'I am excited to bring our companies together and leverage our licences, technology, and expertise in the retail trading sector to help Polymarket reach its full potential.' What happened during the 2024 US election The 2024 US presidential election was a watershed moment for prediction markets. Polymarket alone processed billions of dollars in bets on the election, while its rival Kalshi claimed to have handled around $1 billion. Polymarket markets were widely cited in political analysis, especially after they predicted notable shifts before they occurred. Following the June 27, 2024 presidential debate, Polymarket projected a 70 per cent chance that Joe Biden would exit the race, up from just 20 per cent days earlier. Biden formally withdrew weeks later. In early August, Polymarket odds placed Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro at 68 per cent as Harris's likely running mate, while Minnesota Governor Tim Walz trailed at 23 per cent. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The next day, Harris announced Walz as her pick. Such data-driven forecasts helped bolster Polymarket's reputation. High-profile figures took notice: Nate Silver, founder of FiveThirtyEight, joined Polymarket as an advisor in 2024. The platform also formed a partnership with Elon Musk's X, integrating its Grok chatbot to provide users with real-time, contextual insights into current events. However, not all attention was positive. As Trump's odds surged on Polymarket in October 2024, some observers questioned whether these market shifts reflected genuine public sentiment. Investigations later revealed that four massive bets totalling $30 million had likely influenced the price trajectory. Polymarket launched a formal inquiry and ultimately concluded that the activity stemmed from a single French trader acting independently. The trader reportedly won $85 million upon Trump's election victory. The company found no evidence of coordinated manipulation or political interference. How Trump 2.0 paved the way for Polymarket's US comeback Polymarket's US comeback is happening in a dramatically different regulatory environment than just a few months ago. During the Biden administration, federal agencies were highly active in pursuing enforcement actions against crypto firms. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and CFTC launched hundreds of cases, keeping prediction markets like Polymarket operating offshore. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The change in political leadership has shifted the landscape. Donald Trump's second term has been accompanied by a warmer posture toward cryptocurrency and related industries. His campaign received substantial backing from crypto advocacy groups, and Donald Trump Jr now serves as an advisor to Kalshi, one of Polymarket's direct competitors. While past administrations approached crypto betting platforms with scepticism, current regulators have signalled openness to prediction markets, provided they operate within licensed and regulated frameworks. For the first time, Americans may now be able to legally wager on the outcome of the next presidential election — provided they do so on platforms operating under federally approved exchanges like QCX. Also Watch: With inputs from agencies