Why would the US strike Iran and how?
US President Donald Trump's officials say he is considering a number of options when it comes to Iran, including a possible US strike on the country.
Trump initially distanced himself from Israel's surprise attack on Iran on Friday, but in recent days has hinted at greater American involvement, saying he wants something "much bigger" than a ceasefire.
He has also made it clear that the US wants to end Iran's nuclear capability.
A White House statement on Tuesday said: "President Donald J. Trump has never wavered in his stance that Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon — a pledge he has made repeatedly, both in office and on the campaign trail."
The US has also sent more military aircraft and warships to the region.
ITV News looks at why the US might be considering a strike on Iran, what that would involve and what the consequences could be.
Nuclear sites
Trump is said to be warming to the idea of using US assets to disable Iran's nuclear programme, rather settling the issue through talks.
The biggest challenge to achieving that goal is the Fordow nuclear enrichment plant - which appears to have been built specifically to withstand airstrikes.
Fordow is Iran's second enrichment facility after Natanz, its main facility, which already has been targeted by Israeli airstrikes.
Fordow, is smaller than Natanz but in addition to being an estimated 80 meters (260 feet) under rock and soil, the site is reportedly protected by Iranian and Russian surface-to-air missile systems.
Despite those challenges, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the goal of attacking Iran was to eliminate its missile and nuclear programme - and officials say Fordow is key to that plan.
"This entire operation ... really has to be completed with the elimination of Fordow,' Yechiel Leiter, Israel's ambassador to the US, told Fox News on Friday.
Israel doesn't have the massive munition it would take to destroy Fordow, or the aircraft needed to deliver it.
Only the US does.
'Bunker-busting' bombs
Trump is reportedly deliberating whether to use America's GBU-57 "Massive Ordnance Penetrator' guided bombs to destroy Fordow, which is entombed below several hundred feet of concrete in a mountain.
These 30,000 bombs, known as 'bunker busters' were designed to destroy underground sites at the height of concerns a decade ago over Iran's nuclear programme.
The powerful GBU-57 uses its weight and sheer kinetic force to reach deeply buried targets — and then explode.
The US Air Force's B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is the only aircraft that can carry the GBU-57.
There are currently no B-2 bombers in the Middle East region.
If tapped for use, the B-2 bombers would have to make the 30-hour round trip from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, refueling multiple times.
Consequences
Those calling for a US strike, say that a devastating, contained US military strike would destroy Iran's nuclear programme and remove an existential threat to Israel and national security risk for the United States.
However, opponents to the idea point to the probability of an Iranian response; the chaos that would result from a possible downfall of the Iranian regime and the further estabilisation of the entire Middle East region.
Iran's supreme leader on Wednesday warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage" to them, in recorded video aired by state TV.
Earlier that day, a spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry said: "Any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region."
In addition there is a risk of nuclear contamination.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that Iran is producing highly enriched uranium at Fordow, raising the possibility that nuclear material could be released into the area if the GBU-57 A/B were used to hit the facility. However, Israeli strikes at another Iranian nuclear site, Natanz, on a centrifuge site have caused contamination only at the site itself, not the surrounding area, the IAEA has said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
27 minutes ago
- New Statesman
A perilous age
We go to print this week at a moment of deep peril, uncertainty and, it has to be said, shame. In the Middle East, Israel and Iran are engaged in an existential battle for supremacy which, at the time of writing, threatens to spiral out of control, causing unknown death and destruction. In Ukraine, Vladimir Putin's assault continues, and in Gaza, the suffering of millions intensifies even as their fate falls down the global agenda. We do not live in a world bending towards justice, but one being bent out of shape by those with power. While all this was happening, the leaders of what was once thought of as 'the West' looked on in Canada, paralysed in the face of the spectacle unfolding. Is there even such a thing as the G7 any more, you wonder? What we have, it seems, is an increasingly incongruous G6 – a gathering of half a dozen mid-sized powers, once loyal to the US, but now seemingly powerless to do much about anything. As the likes of Keir Starmer and Mark Carney put their names to another communiqué, the strongmen of the world did as they pleased. Naturally, much of this week's magazine is devoted to the unfolding crisis and the new world we now seem to have entered. Lawrence Freedman provides a masterly account of the grand strategy – and grand gamble – behind Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to attack Tehran, as well as the possible consequences in the days and weeks ahead. Freddie Hayward, our US correspondent, reports on the fractious world of Maga, where some of Trump's most ardent supporters are now watching with alarm as the one-time candidate of peace finds himself drawn ever closer to another foreign war. Katie Stallard reports from Washington and the strange spectacle of Trump's birthday parade, considering what it reveals about the uncertainty of the world now. In this world of strongmen, the personalities of those in power is crucial: what they believe and why. For this reason, we have delved into the personal history of Netanyahu, a pariah figure in much of the world today (justly) who, nevertheless, looks set to remake the Middle East to Israel's advantage through raw military power and violence. Ami Dror, who was the head of Netanyahu's secret service security detail between 1996 and 1999, provides a startling insider account of the prime minister who became a warlord. And Israeli-American journalist Joshua Leifer explains why Netanyahu has been waiting for this showdown with Iran for most of his adult life. At home, meanwhile, the government continues to flail, subcontracting its most difficult decisions to others. The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, recently completed the government's latest U-turn by announcing that there would be a national inquiry into the euphemistically named 'grooming gangs' scandal. As Hannah Barnes writes, it beggars belief that after months of obfuscation, the government has finally been forced into this position by the findings of Louise Casey. I have sat in meetings with some of the most senior Labour officials in this government who have spoken passionately about the moral stain of what happened in Rotherham and elsewhere, raging against the Labour councils which failed to act. And yet still nothing happened until someone else outside the government ordered them to change course. Voters – and, I suspect, New Statesman readers – want a government that knows what it stands for and is prepared to set it out in clear, unambiguous terms. From the protection of young girls in Britain to the rights of Palestinians in Gaza, Britain expects a government that leads, not one that follows. It's not all doom and gloom though. In the New Society, Tina Brown takes a look at Princess Diana's contested legacy, Zoë Huxford explores modern Britain through Alexander McQueen's most famous shows, and Kate Mossman meets a growling Brian Cox. Not a big fan of the prime minister, it seems. Enjoy the issue, and please do get in touch to let us know what you think. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe [See also: Kemi Badenoch sinks further into the mire] Related
Metro
30 minutes ago
- Metro
US 'Doomsday Plane' spotted near DC: Everything to know about the Boeing E-4B
A US Air Force E-4B aircraft landed near Washington, DC, heightening speculation as President Donald Trump weighs joining the war between Iran and Israel. The 'Nightwatch' aircraft nicknamed the presidential 'Doomsday Plane' touched down at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on Tuesday night. It departed from Barksdale Air Force Base in Shreveport, Louisiana, and took a very unusual flight path to arrive close to DC, i24NEWS reported. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Metro on the Boeing E-4B's mission, if it was related to the Iran-Israel conflict and whether Trump was on board. Unlike Air Force One which is known as the 'flying Oval Office', the E-4B Nightwatch is essentially a 'flying war room'. It is referred to as the Doomsday Plane because it has thermal and nuclear shielding designed to withstand nuclear blasts, and an electrical system that is immune to electromagnetic pulses. The plane has the ability to fly for 12 hours without needing to refuel. It is deployed to protect the president and senior administration officials, and is also used to transport the Secretary of Defense internationally. Beside transporting the president and top officials, the E-4B is sometimes flown for training and readiness drills. But the aircraft's irregular flight path and presence near DC the same day that Trump met with his national security advisers in the White House Situation Room boosts theories that it could be linked to the escalating conflict in the Middle East. Equipped with a command and control center to deliver military orders, the Doomsday Plane is meant to be flown in dire scenarios including ahead of a nuclear attack. The world is watching as Trump on Wednesday was cryptic on whether the US will join the war, saying, 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The US Air Force has a fleet of four E-4Bs and they are all assigned to the 595th Command and Control Group at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska. More Trending E-4Bs have been in operation since the Cold War. One E-4B has been staffed nonstop since 1975. It 'is on alert at all times, often traveling with the president or secretary of defense in case of emergency', according to Senator Deb Fischer of Nebraska. 'Nebraska is proud to house this remarkable fleet,' she said in a 2024 column. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Brain dead woman Adriana Smith gives birth after being kept alive due to law MORE: Bunker buster bomb that can penetrate to 200ft is reason Israel wants the US to join war with Iran MORE: 'Dark fleet' tanker caught on fire after being struck in Persian Gulf
ITV News
32 minutes ago
- ITV News
Kim Leadbeater expects a majority of MPs to back ‘the most robust assisted dying bill in the world'
Kim Leadbeater told ITV News' Talking Politics podcast she was confident the bill would pass Kim Leadbeater has told ITV News' Talking Politics podcast she is 'positive and optimistic' that a majority of MPs will support 'the most robust assisted dying bill in the world' in this week's critical vote. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will get its crucial third reading and vote in the House of Commons on Friday, with MPs choosing to either pass it onto the House of Lords or kill it off. Despite a growing number of MPs declaring they will vote against the legislation in recent months, the Labour MP and architect of the bill said she expected 'some movement in both directions' in the next 48 hours but anticipated 'it will be relatively minor'. Speaking exclusively to the podcast, Leadbeater said: 'If that proves to be the case, it means we've still got a good majority and the bill will go forward." MPs have fiercely argued for and against a bill which will allow adults who are terminally ill, subject to safeguards and protections, to request and be provided with assistance to end their own life. ITV News understands - as of Wednesday evening - 152 MPs are planning to vote in favour, 141 plan to vote against it, 21 remain undecided, and 21 are due to abstain. The bill passed its first reading in the House of Commons with a majority of 55 votes (330 to 275) back in November, paving the way for months of scrutiny of the life-defining legislation. Leadbeater told podcast host Paul Brand: 'It's been a long journey, a tiring journey, but I'm feeling positive and optimistic, and hopefully we can get the bill over the line on Friday. 'Obviously lots of people are very clear about their positions, lots of people are very supportive of the bill, and there are people who are fundamentally against the bill, and I think in the middle there's potentially a small number of people who might change their mind either way, but if that proves to be the case, it means we've still got a good majority and the bill will go forward. 'So that's how I feel at the moment, but, you know, it's up to every MP to do what they feel is the right thing to do on Friday, and the debate will continue as it should.' Asked by Brand if she thought the vote would be tighter than November, Leadbeater replied: 'It's impossible to say, to be honest… I'm not keeping that close an eye on it, to be honest. 'But I think there'll be some movement in both directions. Certainly, a few colleagues have come out saying that they are going to support, having either abstained or voted against last time, and then other colleagues have done the same the other way. So, I think if there is any movement, it will be relatively minor.' She also defended the debate process, which saw significant changes to the original proposed legislation. 'Look, this is how we make laws. Are there things that I would change about the entire parliamentary process? Yes, there probably are,' she said. 'But if we start on pulling that thread at this stage, we've got a long way to go. So I think the bill has gone through a very robust process. 'If you think we started this back in November, so it's been a long period of time, the hours of scrutiny that it has had has been more than most government bills, lots of detailed exploration of the content, amendments looked at and tabled and taken and changes made, and that's quite right too. 'I've tried to engage with colleagues, whatever their views are, including on the bill committee, some very strong opponents of a change in the law, and I've tried to do that as collaboratively and as collegiately as I possibly can, and I think as a result of that, what Parliament will be presented with on Friday will be an even stronger piece of legislation and certainly the most robust assisted dying bill in the world." It has lost some support from the medical profession since it was first put to Parliament, with the Royal College of Psychiatrists saying in May that they could not back it.
