'Way too early' to know full damage done to Iran nuclear sites: Joint Chiefs chairman
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday morning echoed President Donald Trump in stating how much damage U.S. air strikes had done to Iran's nuclear program, saying it had been "obliterated," but Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine appeared not willing to go as far.
"It was clear we devastated the Iranian nuclear program," Hegseth said at an early morning briefing with reporters, while praising President Trump's role in the operation.
"Thanks to President Trump's bold and visionary leadership and his commitment to peace through strength, Iran's nuclear ambitions have been obliterated," he said.
MORE: Israel-Iran live updates: Hegseth says Iran nuclear ambitions have been 'obliterated' in US attacks
"Many presidents have dreamed of delivering the final blow to Iran's nuclear program, and none could until President Trump," he said.
In his speech to the nation Saturday night, just after the strikes, Trump said Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities had been "completely and totally obliterated," calling the attack a "spectacular military success."
MORE: Vance: 'We're not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program'
On Sunday morning, Caine was more measure, saying it will "take some time" to assess how much damage has been done.
MORE: Trump said he was giving Iran a window to come to the table. He struck 2 days later.
"I know that battle damage is of great interest. Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction," Caine said.
"I think BDA is still pending and way too early to comment on what may or may not be there," he said.
Later, Hegseth added that "The battle damage assessment is ongoing, but our initial assessment, as the chairman said, is that all of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and had the desired effect, which means especially the primary target here, we believe we achieved destruction of capabilities there."
MORE: Congressional leaders react to Trump ordering attack on Iran
Satellite images appeared to show bomb craters on top of the mountain where the Fordo plant is buried deep inside.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
13 minutes ago
- CNBC
NATO allies agree to higher 5% defense spending target
NATO allies on Thursday agreed to more than double their defense spending target from 2% of gross domestic product to 5%, in the most decisive move from the alliance in over a decade. In a joint declaration, the alliance said it was "united in the face of profound security threats and challenges," in particular the long- term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the "persistent threat" of terrorism. "Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.," it continued. The historic move comes against a backdrop of tensions in the Middle East and ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia. Allies have been pushed to this point after years of pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, across both of his terms in office.
Forbes
14 minutes ago
- Forbes
Three Ideas To Boost Economic Growth And Reduce Government Deficits
NEW YORK - NEW YORK - JUNE 1: A man walks near the National Debt Clock in Midtown Manhattan on June ... More 1, 2023 in New York City. (Photo by Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/VIEWpress) The federal budget is a mess, with federal debt held by the public at $29 trillion and counting. States cannot print money and borrow the way the federal government can, but some of them still have deficit problems. Maine, California, Colorado, and New York are just a few of the states facing large deficits over the next few years. Fortunately, there are policy reforms both the federal government and state governments can implement to boost economic growth and reduce deficits. In a recent National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) paper, economists Douglas Elmendorf, Zachary Liscow, and R. Glenn Hubbard examine several policies with the potential to increase economic growth and reduce deficits. The general idea is that increasing total factor productivity (TFP)—the primary driver of economic growth—increases incomes and thus tax revenue. If this can be done in a way that does not involve too much government spending (or revenue losses) then the higher tax revenue would lower the deficit. Using estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the authors calculate that increasing TFP by 0.5 percentage points each year for the next decade would reduce the federal budget deficit by 1.2% of GDP and make debt held by the public around 12% of GDP lower than it otherwise would be. The authors discuss seven policies in their paper, but I am going to focus on the three that seem to have the most potential. And while the paper focuses on the policies' impacts on federal deficits, the same growth effects would also impact state budgets. The first policy idea is making it easier to build housing. Economists know land-use regulations that restrict the supply of housing—including minimum lot sizes, parking requirements, and prohibitions on apartments, duplexes, and other forms of multi-family housing—make housing more expensive. As the authors explain, reducing the cost of housing construction would lead to more housing being built, which has downstream impacts on the demand for appliances, furniture, carpet, decks, and all the other things that make a house a home. The increase in housing construction and the production of complementary products would directly increase GDP all else equal. In addition to this direct effect, more housing in the most productive cities would make it easier for workers to move to take higher paying jobs. A few studies estimate that this mobility effect would increase U.S. GDP by roughly 8%. New residents also have a significant impact on state budgets. A recent report from the National Taxpayers Union Foundation shows that adding new residents can increase a state's revenue by billions of dollars. For all these reasons, it is a good idea for policymakers to reform regulations so we can build more housing in the places people want to live. State and local governments control most of the regulations that restrict the supply of housing. Over the last several years, many states have implemented reforms to make it easier to build, including Montana, Florida, California, and Arizona. This year, Texas passed several laws that will make housing more affordable in the Lone Star state. Other states should adopt and build on these reforms. A second and related idea discussed by Elmendorf, Liscow, and Hubbard is permitting reform for construction projects. In recent years, long permitting times have gotten more attention, and for good reason. Federal laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) can delay projects for years. A recent report from the Council on Environmental Quality, which oversees agency implementation of NEPA, found that 61% of environmental impact statements still take more than two years to review despite a law specifying a two-year deadline. Clearly, we need more changes at the federal level. States have permitting problems, too. Earlier this year, wildfires destroyed thousands of homes in Los Angeles County. California governor Gavin Newsome promised to fast-track permitting so families could rebuild and get on with their lives. Five months later, only 33 building permits have been issued and not one house has been rebuilt. This is unacceptable for a country as wealthy as the United States. Long permitting times increase project costs since money is tied up in resources—land, equipment, and buildings—that are not generating returns. As the authors note, shortening permitting times would accelerate projects already underway as well as increase the number and size of future projects by increasing the return on investment. And since reforming regulations and processes typically does not require a lot of government spending, the growth we create by shortening permitting times is likely to help bring down government deficits. A third idea to boost economic growth and help reduce government deficits is immigration reform. Allowing more foreign workers with advanced degrees in science, engineering, and math to live and work in America would increase U.S. innovation and productivity. The NBER study calculates that a one-time increase of 200,000 additional high-skill immigrants would reduce debt held by the public as a percent of GDP by 2% after thirty years. Adding more high-skilled immigrants every year instead of just a one-time increase would have a larger effect. In addition to increasing innovation and productivity, immigrants have a direct effect on government deficits. High-skill immigrants, like high-skill natives, have a positive effect on government budgets on average since they pay more in taxes than they consume in government services such as welfare benefits or Social Security. One study estimates that over a decade we could reduce federal deficits by $25 billion per 100,000 additional people who come to America to work. Another recent report from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity (CTUP) also makes the case for more immigration to increase growth. The basic formula for economic growth is to add workers and make workers more productive. The U.S. fertility rate is falling, and without a sudden rebound the best way to add workers will be through immigration. From 2013 to 2023 about half of the growth in the U.S. civilian labor force was due to immigrants, as shown in the figure below (red bar). Without immigration, U.S. labor force growth would slow and eventually turn negative. Labor force growth Immigrants also tend to be incredibly entrepreneurial. According to the CTUP report, nearly half of all Fortune 500 companies were founded by foreign-born or second-generation Americans. These immigrants and their children create jobs for native-born workers in addition to the valuable new goods and services their companies create for consumers. Federal policymakers should reform our immigration system so more high-skill immigrants can create and grow their companies in America. Government budgets throughout the United States are a mess. From cities such as Chicago to the Halls of Congress, policymakers struggle to keep spending in line with revenue. Economic growth cannot solve all these budget problems, but it can help. Policy changes that make it easier to build housing, reduce permitting times, and increase immigration would boost output, incomes, and tax revenue. If we could get government spending under control, too, we would have a real shot at fixing our debt problem.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump bombs Iranian nuclear facilities in major escalation. What happens next?
President Donald Trump has claimed to have 'completely, totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear program in a series of missile strikes and bombings, marking explicit U.S. intervention into Israel's war that risks a wider international crisis. The true extent of the damage is unclear. Retaliatory strikes are expected, as are efforts to revive already-fractured negotiations and diplomatic efforts to lower temperatures. But the United States is now embroiled in a war between two well-armed nations that could spill out far beyond their borders with untold casualties, experts have warned. 'Remember, there are many targets left,' Trump said in a brief address to the nation on June 21, roughly two hours after announcing a 'very successful' series of strikes on nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan. 'If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes.' The world is watching to see what will happen, as experts and analysts consider how current conditions, history and a volatile political environment could inform what's next. A 'dangerous escalation' Trump had campaigned on a promise to end all wars, including Israel's war in Gaza and Russia's invasion of Ukraine, yet the president has so far failed to negotiate an end to either. Israel sought American military support for its campaign against Iran after receiving virtual permission for its devastating war in Gaza in the wake of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks — 'undermining Trump's claim to be a peacemaker and his assertion that wars would never have started under his leadership,' according to Brookings Institution senior fellow Sharan Grewal at the Center for Middle East Policy. He now risks exploding a wider crisis across the Middle East that could endanger U.S. installations abroad and embolden Iran's allies to retaliate, following a legacy of U.S. intervention and destabilization in the Middle East dovetailing with U.S. support for Israel's ongoing devastation in Gaza and in occupied territories. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres said late Saturday that he was 'gravely alarmed' by Trump's decision to bomb Iran, calling it 'a dangerous escalation' 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. Iran could also retaliate by blocking the strategically important Strait of Hormuz or attacking the energy infrastructure of the Arab Gulf — dramatically driving up global oil prices. Within hours after Saturday's attacks, roughly 50 oil tankers were seen scrambling to leave the Strait of Hormuz. Iran-backed Houthis have warned that Trump 'must bear the consequences,' Houthi political bureau member Hizam al-Assad posted on X. The Houthi-controlled Yemeni Armed Forces also said the group was prepared to target U.S. Navy warships in the Red Sea 'in the event that the American enemy launches an aggression in support' of Israel. Houthi rebels had previously attacked ships linked to Israel's war in Gaza, and the United States retaliated with a series of airstrikes in Yemen earlier this year. Hardening Iran's resolve — or doing enough damage to force negotiations? Saturday's attack marks an 'unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, U.S. foreign policy, global non-proliferation, and potentially even the global order,' according to Karim Sadjadpour, an Iranian-American policy analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.' 'Its impact will be measured for decades to come,' he wrote. 'It could entrench the regime — or hasten its demise. It could prevent a nuclear Iran — or accelerate one. ' Iranian officials have stressed for years that its nuclear programs are for civilian and peaceful purposes only, but Israel has claimed that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, a claim central to the long and now accelerating conflict between the two nations. Following Saturday's bombings, Iran's atomic agency vowed 'never' to stop its nuclear program, according to Iranian media. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said the three targeted nuclear sites came under 'savage assault,' seen as 'blatant violation of international law, particularly the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.' The agency also accused the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog of 'complicity' in the effort as it urged the international community to condemn the strikes and 'never allow the progress of this national industry … to be halted.' Aerial bombardment alone would not be enough to conclusively stop any nuclear ambitions because 'neither Israel nor the U.S. can kill all the nuclear scientists,' former U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker told Politico. Targeted strikes that significantly damage operations could convince Iran to negotiate, according to former U.S. special envoy Dennis Ross. But a wider assault — fueled by demands from Israeli officials and Iran hawks in the United States — could be seen by Iran as seeing that 'they have little to lose and their best bet is to show they can make us pay a heavy price,' he told Politico. When Israel struck nuclear programs in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007, 'the long-term results were diametrically different,' according to Mara Karlin, former assistant secretary of defense for strategy, plans, and capabilities under Joe Biden. 'Tehran could conceivably choose either path,' she said. 'And, as long as the uranium enrichment complex at Fordow remains largely intact, it does not need to decide.' Blowback in Washington — and across America Trump's attacks risk deepening a growing divide between his allies and anti-interventionist Republicans now tenuously aligned with a wider anti-war movement and the majority of Americans who do not want the United States involved with Israel's campaign at all. Several members of Congress have questioned whether the president's actions are even legal, amounting to an unconstitutional attempt to escape congressional authorization. At least two congressional Republicans — Rep. Warren Davidson and Thomas Massie — joined Democrats to immediately condemn the bombings as unconstitutional. 'The only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress,' Sen. Bernie Sanders said in remarks in Oklahoma as the crowd learned about the bombings in real time. 'The president does not have the right.' 'The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers,' said Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. 'He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations.' The New York congresswoman said the attack is 'clearly grounds for impeachment.' Top Democrats on congressional intelligence committees were also not briefed in advance of the attacks. 'The American public is overwhelmingly opposed to the U.S. waging war on Iran,' said Democratic Senator Tim Kaine, who has urged Congress to pass legislation that would require Trump to go to Congress before attacking Iran. He noted that Israeli officials said its bombs have already set Iran's nuclear capability back by two to three years. 'So what made Trump recklessly decide to rush and bomb today?' he said. 'Horrible judgment. I will push for all Senators to vote on whether they are for this third idiotic Middle East war.' While Trump touts what he claims are unequivocal military successes, he has also spent his first few months in office developing plans to crush dissent domestically. The deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles to respond to protests against his anti-immigration agenda could be seen as a 'dress rehearsal' for far more expansive emergency powers to impose federal control of America's cities, according to The Atlantic's David Frum. More demonstrations against further military action in Iran are expected, adding to a steady rhythm of protests and unrest against the Trump administration that exploded across American streets in recent weeks.
